dimensions of elites‘ political identity formation in central and eastern europe
DESCRIPTION
Dimensions of elites‘ political identity formation in Central and Eastern Europe. Heinrich Best University of Jena Presentation prepared for the conference “Elites and the formation of political identity in post soviet space; global influences” King’s College, Cambridge, 27 November 2009. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Dimensions of elites‘ political identity
formation in Central and Eastern Europe
Heinrich BestUniversity of JenaPresentation prepared for the conference
“Elites and the formation of political identity in post soviet space; global influences”
King’s College, Cambridge, 27 November 2009
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 2
collective political identityfeeling of
sameness belongingness and common destiny or purpose
directed to a political entity (party, political movement,
state or federation) andshared by
a large collective.
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 3
mass identity formation essentialist understanding:
unique core or essence of mass identities (ethnic origins, “authentic” cultural traditions)
constructivist understanding:constructed or invented character of mass identities (first “composed” than “imposed”)
“historical constructivism”: ‘”invention” or “construction” of mass identities is … constrained and directed by specific historical givens and experiences shaping the collective memories and conditions of living of the same population” (Best 2009)‘… the adjustment of the idea of the nation to the situational constraints of the relevant agents involves its conceptualization in terms of indigenous traditions.’ (Greenfield 1992 )
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 4
national identity, concept of nation ‘[…] concept of “nation” […] cannot be stated
in terms of empirical qualities common to those who count as members of the nation. […] means above all, that it is proper to expect from certain groups a specific sentiment of solidarity in the face of other groups’. (M. Weber, EAS 922)
‘[…] concept “nation” directs us to political power. […] refers us to a specific kind of pathos which is linked to the idea of a powerful political community [which] may already exist or may be desired’. (M. Weber, EAS 398)
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 5
the role of elites Elites are the creators and creations of
mass political identities. “Creative” role of intellectuals and politicians in composing and imposing mass political identities, …
… but they are sorcerer apprentices … … and cannot manipulate mass political
identities at will. Identity implies sameness and continuity.
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 6
History matters!
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 7
dimensions of mass identity formation
dimension
concept mode time horizon
essence
idea sameness cognitive past Who am I? identificatio
n belongingnes
s normative present To whom do I belong?
agency destiny and purpose conative future What is my
commitment?
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 8
hypothesis
The challenges encountered in the process of mass political identity formation will lead to a sharper definition of collective identities, a stronger identification with and commitment to one’s own community.
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 9
distinctive features of mass political identity formation in Central and Eastern Europe
Imposition of foreign rule by multinational empires (Osman, Russian, Austro-Hungarian). Delayed formation of independent nation states in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Enforced inclusion in the informal Soviet Empire or loss of independence through annexation by the Soviet Union.
Challenged mass political identity formation in Central and Eastern Europe.
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 10
research question
Is there a distinct pattern of mass political identity in Central and Eastern European post communist countries?
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 11
sample configuration 80 Political Elites
National MPs incl. 5-15 MEPs Proportional Quota according:
Age (under 50 vs. 50+), Sex, Tenure (Newcomer vs. Senior MPs) Top Politicians (former or present Ministers, Junior ministers, Presidents and Vice
Presidents of the House / Parliamentary Groups / Standing Committees, EU Commissioners)
Territorial Distribution (constituency/region of residence) if applicable 40 Economic Elites
Leaders (CEO or Board Members) of main business associations, major bank groups and companies selected from a list of `Top 100´, ranked according to balance sheet total and number of employees.
1000 General Population Proportional Quota according: Sex, Age, Region, Ethnicity
Total: 18 Countries 1411 Political Elites 730 Economic Elites 17138 General Population
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 12
territorial coverage 1st IntUne survey
Only Elite Surveys• Czech Republic• Lithuania
Only Mass Survey• Slovenia
Elite + Mass Surveys• Austria• Belgium• Bulgaria• Denmark• Estonia• France• Germany• Great Britain• Greece• Hungary• Italy• Poland• Portugal• Serbia• Slovakia• Spain
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 13
sameness national: to have national parents – very important
24
32
28
28
50
28
42
23
51
39
49
57
50
54
66
48
12
37
3
16
10
5
20
28
28
18
17
29
29
41
39
43
32
37
0
4
9
10
16
17
18
20
24
27
29
33
37
41
45
49
51
53
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
GermanyUnited Kingdom
AustriaBelgium
SerbiaDenmark
SpainFrance
PortugalSlovakia
Czech RepublicItaly
GreeceLithuaniaHungary
PolandBulgariaEstonia
Political Elites Economic Elites Masses
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 14
sameness national: to be born in [country] – very important
24
36
30
37
31
35
27
47
50
40
56
41
53
49
52
67
9
0
5
8
11
6
8
12
20
13
13
27
30
17
26
26
26
27
1
4
10
10
11
13
15
18
20
24
29
32
34
35
36
36
40
41
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
GermanyGreat Britain
DenmarkSerbia
BelgiumAustriaFrance
Czech RepublicSpain
GreeceSlovakia
LithuaniaPortugalHungary
ItalyEstoniaPoland
Bulgaria
Political Elites Economic Elites Masses
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 15
samenessnational: to share cultural traditions – very important
37
35
60
44
47
44
71
38
62
65
59
35
68
62
70
59
25
33
38
31
47
33
16
60
69
44
57
50
21
63
31
64
66
67
14
21
21
22
24
34
39
54
57
57
58
60
62
67
69
71
78
83
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
BelgiumGermany
AustriaSpain
United KingdomDenmarkLithuaniaPortugal
FranceSerbia
GreeceItaly
SlovakiaEstonia
Czech RepublicHungaryBulgariaPoland
Political Elites Economic Elites Masses
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 16
sameness national: to be a christian – very important
10
19
24
12
31
24
26
26
12
14
52
18
39
46
52
46
0
13
2
21
0
13
10
3
3
3
3
8
5
16
5
20
28
22
1
2
3
4
5
5
5
7
9
10
12
14
16
19
25
33
34
45
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
FranceSpain
Czech RepublicUnited Kingdom
BelgiumPortugal
GermanyAustria
SlovakiaDenmark
EstoniaSerbia
HungaryLithuania
ItalyBulgariaGreecePoland
Political Elites Economic Elites Masses
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 17
sameness national: to master [language of country] – very important
54
59
83
69
76
66
68
74
80
73
78
73
82
82
68
85
43
18
44
43
55
47
73
52
86
93
51
74
79
65
73
84
84
98
30
31
49
50
52
52
68
68
71
71
72
74
78
78
80
81
87
91
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
SpainSerbiaAustria
ItalyPolandGreeceFrance
Czech RepublicBelgiumPortugalSlovakiaHungary
LithuaniaDenmarkBulgaria
GermanyUnited Kingdom
Estonia
Political Elites Economic Elites Masses
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 18
samenessnational: to respect [national] laws / institutions – very important
66
82
79
67
79
56
65
63
56
80
81
78
72
81
82
74
40
20
47
59
48
70
51
46
69
85
79
83
80
77
75
74
85
90
38
48
58
61
64
64
65
70
73
75
75
81
87
88
89
93
95
95
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
GermanyHungary
AustriaBelgium
Czech RepublicPortugal
LithuaniaPoland
SpainSerbia
SlovakiaItaly
EstoniaBulgariaGreece
United KingdomFrance
Denmark
Political Elites Economic Elites Masses
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 19
samenessnational: to be a country citizen – very important
19
35
15
13
21
45
31
29
34
24
28
41
62
38
72
57
65
63
14
21
26
29
33
41
43
44
48
51
51
53
54
55
60
68
73
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
HungaryGermany
AustriaSerbia
Czech RepublicBelgium
SpainSlovakiaGreecePoland
DenmarkPortugal
LithuaniaItaly
United KingdomBulgariaEstoniaFrance
Political Elites Economic Elites
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 20
belongingnessattachment to [country] – very attached
37
43
61
53
39
73
62
69
41
65
78
72
55
70
76
68
33
35
28
51
65
63
69
90
45
24
67
64
55
89
81
90
64
90
30
33
58
65
68
72
77
77
78
79
82
86
87
87
88
93
94
96
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
BelgiumUnited Kingdom
SerbiaGermany
SpainAustria
ItalyEstonia
SlovakiaCzech Republic
GreeceBulgaria
DenmarkLithuania
FrancePortugalHungary
Poland
Political Elites Economic Elites Masses
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 21
belongingness attachment to Europe – very attached
10
19
15
14
34
20
19
19
19
28
30
26
47
23
19
24
10
21
22
18
27
23
37
28
30
45
36
50
30
38
54
28
79
55
11
15
19
23
24
26
28
29
38
40
44
44
45
45
49
53
53
66
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
United KingdomBulgaria
LithuaniaEstonia
Czech RepublicGreeceAustriaSerbia
SlovakiaBelgium
SpainItaly
GermanyPortugalHungary
DenmarkFrancePoland
Political Elites Economic Elites Masses
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 22
destiny and purpose member states to remain central actors of EU – agree strongly
18
38
19
28
30
34
49
33
34
38
42
33
42
43
55
43
73
38
21
22
24
29
33
37
37
40
41
46
49
49
51
52
58
61
70
70
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
SpainGermany
ItalyFrance
BelgiumHungaryEstoniaSerbiaAustria
PortugalBulgariaSlovakiaGreecePoland
LithuaniaDenmark
United KingdomCzech Republic
Political Elites Economic Elites
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 23
destiny and purpose European Commission to become the true EU-government– agree strongly
6
8
10
13
10
7
2
10
6
5
17
21
26
7
33
25
17
38
0
2
2
5
5
6
8
9
10
12
17
20
22
22
25
29
29
34
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
United KingdomEstonia
DenmarkCzech Republic
SlovakiaPoland
GermanyPortugal
AustriaLithuania
GreeceBulgaria
SpainFrance
HungaryBelgium
ItalySerbia
Political Elites Economic Elites
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 24
destiny and purpose immigratin from non EU countries – big threat
20
53
23
24
55
37
33
26
47
54
36
39
37
32
59
63
50
65
14
19
20
26
27
28
30
32
38
38
46
47
48
51
51
53
54
75
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
SpainPortugal
SerbiaGreece
United KingdomItaly
GermanyAustria
BelgiumDenmark
Czech RepublicFrance
HungaryPoland
BulgariaLithuaniaSlovakiaEstonia
Political Elites Economic Elites
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 25
destiny and purpose interference of Russia in European affairs – big threat
5
24
25
38
18
43
26
26
28
41
52
39
50
30
55
93
69
83
12
19
24
29
31
31
31
34
34
34
35
36
43
45
46
67
74
84
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
SerbiaGreece
PortugalDenmark
AustriaBulgaria
United KingdomItaly
GermanySpain
BelgiumFrance
SlovakiaHungary
Czech RepublicLithuania
PolandEstonia
Political Elites Economic Elites
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 26
destiny and purpose inclusion of Turkey – big threat
38
38
35
40
61
48
51
30
34
65
63
62
42
55
51
68
61
50
13
18
24
25
34
34
34
37
47
47
47
49
49
58
58
58
58
64
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
United KingdomItaly
SpainPortugalGreece
Czech RepublicGermany
SerbiaPoland
LithuaniaBulgaria
DenmarkAustria
SlovakiaEstonia
HungaryFrance
Belgium
Political Elites Economic Elites
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 27
destiny and purpose inclusion of countries other than Turkey – big threat
14
3
12
10
26
32
35
44
23
38
26
33
12
31
43
38
70
50
7
10
12
13
13
16
19
22
23
25
27
29
30
32
37
38
57
61
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
United KingdomSerbiaPoland
SlovakiaSpain
Czech RepublicPortugal
ItalyLithuania
GreeceBulgariaEstoniaAustria
HungaryGermanyDenmark
FranceBelgium
Political Elites Economic Elites
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 28
destiny and purpose make European economy more competitive
20
24
56
48
36
29
24
30
33
37
35
43
32
35
25
27
34
55
67
45
79
91
53
83
68
73
90
62
93
68
81
74
86
79
7
15
18
21
23
26
28
30
36
40
44
46
49
50
58
59
61
66
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
GreeceSpain
FranceSerbia
ItalyAustria
BulgariaPortugalBelgium
DenmarkGermany
United KingdomLithuania
EstoniaCzech Republic
HungaryPoland
Slovakia
Political Elites Economic Elites Masses
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 29
destiny and purpose effects of globalization on welfare – big threat
28
8
20
22
15
21
28
38
28
15
53
30
36
40
32
26
34
11
19
21
24
33
34
35
37
38
39
43
44
45
45
48
49
53
58
68
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
DenmarkEstonia
United KingdomPoland
SpainGreece
LithuaniaBulgariaSlovakia
ItalyPortugalBelgiumHungary
GermanyCzech Republic
FranceSerbiaAustria
Political Elites Economic Elites
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 30
destiny and purpose common system of social security – strongly in favour
17
16
38
39
34
25
27
50
36
42
35
42
50
15
45
32
5
13
12
10
21
9
20
15
33
20
30
24
40
51
40
18
53
81
0
7
10
17
18
19
19
20
23
26
30
34
37
41
47
48
59
91
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
United KingdomDenmark
Czech RepublicEstoniaAustria
GermanyBelgiumSlovakiaPortugal
SpainLithuania
PolandSerbia
BulgariaHungary
FranceGreece
Italy
Political Elites Economic Elites Masses
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 31
destiny and purpose a unified tax system – strongly in favour
11
7
16
16
32
33
26
26
24
25
26
31
29
32
22
37
0
15
0
8
10
19
23
45
38
45
27
30
29
37
33
53
51
76
0
2
4
9
10
15
15
18
22
22
25
25
29
30
38
50
54
63
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
United KingdomDenmark
EstoniaSlovakia
Czech RepublicPoland
PortugalHungary
LithuaniaSerbiaSpain
BelgiumAustria
GermanyBulgariaGreeceFrance
Italy
Political Elites Economic Elites Masses
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 32
destiny and purpose representative of the citizens of your country (Political Elites)
13
24
31
32
32
38
38
41
46
46
53
54
58
61
63
65
72
81
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
United Kingdom
Austria
Poland
Hungary
Bulgaria
Belgium
Denmark
Czech Republic
Serbia
Spain
Germany
Italy
France
Greece
Slovakia
Lithuania
Estonia
Portugal
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 33
summary of results – part I In all dimensions of political identity (cognitive,
normative, conative) there are large differences between countries, sometimes spreading between 0% and 90% approval rates.
There is no pan-European consensus about the bases and consequences of mass political identities!
Within countries there are also marked differences between political elites, economic elites and the general population.
Elites tend to agree less to ascriptive criteria of national identity and they tend to be more attached to their countries than the general population!
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 34
summary of results – part II CEE countries do not form a coherent “block” in
the rankings of countries. At least there are outliers (mostly Serbia).
But there are large clusters of CEE-countries which stand out by their elites’ support for ascriptive criteria of nationality (born in
country, national parents, share of cultural traditions) hesitation to cede rights of national sovereignty to the EU concern about Russian interference in European affairs
(except for Bulgaria and Serbia!) concern about immigration to Europe from non-EU-
countries priority of economic competitiveness over the
development of the welfare state
Heinrich Best - Cambridge 2009 35
theoretical implications Mass political identities are “made to measure” for specific
polities and societies. There are very few elements of mass political identities common to all 18 countries included in our study.
Elites and masses diverge in their expressions of political identities.
Political identities do reflect historical experiences (even distant ones), leading to a clustering of CEE-countries (with some internal differentiation).
Communalities of challenged nation building in the CEE-states: historically late and challenged nation building forced inclusion in the Soviet empire late joining of the EU geographical situation at the periphery of “core” Europe