Endre Borbáth

Wie sind Konflikte um die Themen Klimawandel und Covid-19 in den politischen Raum eingebettet? Verstärken sie die Polarisierung entlang der kulturellen Konfliktdimension oder liegen sie quer zu den herkömmlichen Konfliktdimensionen? Im Buchkapitel werden die beiden Themen als Risikokonflikte konzeptualisiert und im Kontext der langfristigen Restrukturierung des Parteienwettbewerbs analysiert. Die politische Angebots- und Nachfrageseite wird anhand des Politbarometers, der Nachwahlbefragungen der GLES und Daten zu Wahlkämpfen von 1976 und von 1994 bis 2021 untersucht. Die Ergebnisse bestätigen die Bedeutung des Klimawandels und der Covid-19-Pandemie für die Bundestagswahl 2021. Die langfristige Restrukturierung des politischen Raums in Deutschland folgt Trends in anderen westeuropäischen Ländern. Zudem sind Klimawandel und Covid-19 als Risikokonflikte zumindest bis 2021 im zweidimensionalen Raum verankert und verstärken die Polarisierung entlang der kulturellen Dimension

Polarisation over cultural issues and the emergence of radical, often populist, challenger parties indicate a fundamental restructuring of political conflict in Western Europe. The emerging divide crosscuts and, in part, reshapes older cleavages. This special issue introduction highlights how the transformation of cleavage structures relates to the dynamics of polarisation and political participation. The contributions to the special issue innovate in two ways. First, they adapt concepts and measures of ideological and affective polarisation to the context of Europe’s multi-party and multi-dimensional party competition. Second, they emphasise electoral and protest politics, examining how ideological and affective polarisation shape electoral and non-electoral participation. Apart from introducing the contributions, the introduction combines different datasets – the Chapel Hill Expert Survey, Comparative Study of Electoral Systems and the European Social Survey – to sketch an empirical picture of differentiated polarisation with types of polarisation only weakly associated cross-arena, cross-nationally and over time.

The political participation literature has documented a long-term trend of the normalization of noninstitutional participation that is often equated with the conventionalization of engagement in protest politics. Less is known on the extent to which noninstitutional forms are differentiated by their mobilization context. Population surveys find it difficult to contextualize individual engagement, and on-site surveys point to effects that are hard to generalize. This study fills this gap by emphasizing differentiation and distinguishing participation according to the issue of engagement. It introduces a conceptual distinction between political insiders and outsiders, defined based on the extent to which they are embedded in the organizational landscape of the dominant cleavage dimension. Using an original survey conducted in Germany during the Covid-19 crisis, the analysis demonstrates that general-population surveys are fit to examine issue-specific participation patterns. The results expose an insider and outsider divide, captured by the effect of attitudinal and behavioral indicators, and demonstrates that the two groups are equally likely to participate in noninstitutional forms. However, insiders engage on the established issues of climate and anti-racism, whereas outsiders engage on the new issues of Covid-19 related economic assistance and civil liberties restrictions. In addition, dynamic models reveal that noninstitutional participation is rooted in volatile issue preferences. Overall, the paper argues that participation during the Covid-19 crisis has furthered the trend towards a differentiated protest arena.