Tolerance for Unity: A Deceptive Call

Öz

Many triumphant executive politicians in the history of democratic politics proposed tolerance as a cure for detrimental effects of fractionalization. Moreover, tolerance level in the society and its level of fractionalization are suggested to have counter implications for a series of macro-political and macro-economic features, including level of democracy, quality of institutions and economic growth. Nevertheless, up to now far too little attention has been paid to understand the relationship between the two. This research aims to solve this puzzle and asks the question whether tolerance level of the society decreases the fractionalization of the voters and the legislative body. This research used quantitative modes of inquiry to gain insights into this relationship. A final dataset, which consists of system-level data derived from Comparative Political Data Set and aggregated individual-level data extracted from World Values Survey for 12 Western democratic countries, was used for the analyses of this research. Counter to expectations, findings revealed that out-group tolerance and fractionalization of the political party system on both votes and seats levels are statistically significantly and positively associated.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Votes-level fractionalization
• Seats-level fractionalization
• Out-group tolerance
• Unity
• Democracy

Birlik İçin Hoşgörü: Yanıltıcı Bir Çağrı

Öz

Demokratik siyaset tarihinde muzaffer politikacıların çoğu, ayrışmanın zararlı etkilerine bir çare olarak hoşgörüyü önermiştir. Dahası, toplumdaki hoşgörü düzeyi ve bunun ayrışma düzeyinin, demokrasi seviyesi, kurumların kalitesi ve ekonomik büyüme dahil olmak üzere bir dizi makro-politik ve makro-ekonomik özellik için olumsuz etkileri olduğu ileri sürülmektedir. Bununla birlikte, şimdiye kadar ikisi arasındaki ilişkiyi anlamak için yeterince çaba harcanmamıştır. Bu araştırma, bu alaşılmazlığı çözmeyi amaçlamakta ve toplumun hoşgörü düzeyinin, seçmenin ve yasama organının ayrışmasını azaltıp azaltmadığı sorusunu sormaktadır. Bu araştırma, bu ilişki hakkında fikir edinmek için icel araştırma yöntemlerini kullanmıştır. Bu araştırmanın analizleri için Karşılaştırmalı Politik Veri Kümesi’nden elde edilen sistem düzeyindeki verilerden ve 12 Batılı demokratik ülke için Dünya Değerler Araştırması’ndan çıkarılan toplu bireysel düzeydeki verilerden oluşan nihai bir veriseti kullanılmıştır. Beklentilerin aksine, bulgular, grup dışı hoşgörü ve siyasi parti sisteminin hem oy hem de sandalye düzeylerinde ayrışmasının istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ve olumlu bir şekilde ilişkili olduğunu ortaya koymuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Oy seviyesinde ayrışma
• Sandalye sevitesinde ayrışma
• Dış grup hoşgörüsü
• Birlik
• Demokrasi

Kaynakça

1. Alesina, A., Ardagna, S., Nicoletti, G., & Schiantarelli, F. (2005). Regulation and investment. Journal of the European Economic Association, 3(4), 791-825.
2. Alesina, A., Baqir, R., & Easterly, W. (1999). Public goods and ethnic divisions. The Quarterly journal of economics, 114(4), 1243-1284.
3. Alesina, A., Devleeschauwer, A., Easterly, W., Kurlat, S., & Wacziarg, R. (2003). Fractionalization. Journal of Economic growth, 8(2), 155-194.
4. Alesina, A., & La Ferrara, E. (2000). Participation in heterogeneous communities. The quarterly journal of economics, 115(3), 847-904.
5. Alesina, A., & Ferrara, E. L. (2005). Ethnic diversity and economic performance. Journal of economic literature, 43(3), 762-800.
6. Anderson, C. J., & Guillory, C. A. (1997). Political institutions and satisfaction with democracy: A cross-national analysis of consensus and majoritarian systems. American Political Science Review, 66-81.
7. Armingeon, Klaus, Sarah Engler, Lucas Leemann et al. 2020. Supplement to the Comparative Political Data Set – Government Composition 1960-2018. Zurich: Institute of Political Science, University of Zurich.
8. Berggren, N., & Elinder, M. (2012). Is tolerance good or bad for growth?. Public Choice, 150(1), 283-308.

9. Berggren, N., & Nilsson, T. (2013). Does economic freedom foster tolerance?. Kyklos, 66(2), 177-207.
10. Bobo, L., & Licari, F. C. (1989). Education and political tolerance: Testing the effects of cognitive sophistication and target group affect. Public Opinion Quarterly, 53(3), 285-308.
11. Buitrago, E. M., Caraballo, M., & Roldán, J. L. (2019). Do tolerant societies demand better institutions?. Social Indicators Research, 143(3), 1161-1184.
12. Dahl RA (1971) Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
13. Das, J., DiRienzo, C., & Tiemann, T. (2008). A global tolerance index. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal.
14. Duch, R. M., & Gibson, J. L. (1992). ‘Putting Up With’ Fascists in Western Europe: A Comparative, Cross-Level Analysis of Political Tolerance. Western Political Quarterly, 45(1), 237-273.
15. Dunn, K., Orellana, S., & Singh, S. (2009). Legislative diversity and social tolerance: How multiparty systems lead to tolerant citizens. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 19(3), 283-312.
16. Easterly, W., & Levine, R. (1997). Africa's growth tragedy: policies and ethnic divisions. The quarterly journal of economics, 1203-1250.
17. Easterly, W., Ritzen, J., & Woolcock, M. (2006). Social cohesion, institutions, and growth. Center for Global Development Working Paper, (94).
18. Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class: and how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York: Basic Books.

19. Florida, R. (2003). Cities and the creative class. City & Community, 2(1), 319.
20. Gallagher, M. (1991). Proportionality, disproportionality and electoral systems. Electoral studies, 10(1), 33-51.
21. Gani, A. (2015). Measures of tolerance and economic prosperity. International Journal of Social Economics.
22. Gibson, J. L. (1996). The paradoxes of political tolerance in processes of democratisation. Politikon: South African Journal of Political Studies, 23(2), 5-21.
23. Glaeser, E. L., Laibson, D. I., Scheinkman, J. A., & Soutter, C. L. (2000). Measuring trust. The quarterly journal of economics, 115(3), 811-846.
24. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. F. (1998). Democracy and disagreement. Harvard University Press.
25. Huntington, S. P. (1968). Political order in changing societies. Yale University Press.
26. Inglehart, R. (2018). Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton University Press.
27. Inglehart, R. et al. (eds.). 2020. World Values Survey: All Rounds – Country-Pooled Datafile.
28. Inglehart, R., & Welzel, C. (2005). Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: The human development sequence. Cambridge university press.
29. La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1999). The quality of government. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 15(1), 222-279.
30. Lawrence, D. G. (1976). Procedural norms and tolerance: A reassessment. American Political Science Review, 70(1), 80-100.
31. Lijphart, A. (1999). Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty- Six Countries. New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press.
32. Lipset, S. M. (1993). Reflections on capitalism, socialism & democracy. Journal of Democracy, 4(2), 43-55.
33. Mellander, C., & Florida, R. (2007). The creative class or human capital?-explaining regional development in Sweden (No. 79). Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS-Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
34. McClosky, H. (1964). Consensus and ideology in American politics. American Political Science Review, 58(2), 361-382.
35. McClosky, H., & Brill, A. (1983). The dimensions of tolerance: What Americans believe about civil liberties. Russell Sage Foundation.
36. Montalvo, J. G., & Reynal-Querol, M. (2021). Ethnic diversity and growth: Revisiting the evidence. Review of Economics and Statistics, 103(3), 521-532.
37. Ottaviano, G. I., & Peri, G. (2005). Cities and cultures. Journal of Urban Economics, 58(2), 304-337.
38. Prothro, J. W., & Grigg, C. M. (1960). Fundamental principles of democracy: Bases of agreement and disagreement. The Journal of Politics, 22(2), 276-294.
39. Rae, D. (1968). The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws (New Haven, 1967). Apropos of the long life of British Liberalism, 83.
40. Ratna, N. N., Grafton, R. Q., & Kompas, T. (2009). Is diversity bad for economic growth?: Evidence from state-level data in the US. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 38(6), 859-870.
41. Robert A. Dahl, Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition, New Haven 1971.
42. Stouffer, S. A. (1955). Communism, conformity, and civil liberties: A cross-section of the nation speaks its mind. Transaction Publishers.
43. Wilson, T. C. (1991). Urbanism, migration, and tolerance: A reassessment. American Sociological Review, 117-123.
44. Weesner, D., & Ashraf, Q. (2011). Value Fractionalization: A New Measure of Diversity.