民粹主义掌权之后:制度化还是激进化  

After Populists in Power:Institutionalization or Radicalization?

作　　者：肖伟林 Xiao Weilin(the School of International Relations and Public Affairs,Fudan University)

机构地区：[1]复旦大学国际关系与公共事务学院,上海200433

出　　处：《世界经济与政治》2024年第11期115-155,160,共42页World Economics and Politics

摘　　要：作为代议制民主永远的阴影,民粹主义的影响力与日俱增。然而,既有研究多关注民粹主义的起源而非后果,对于民粹主义掌权者如何影响民主质量和再分配的讨论仍不充分。民粹主义当局在政治上倾向于激进化而非制度化。只有当民粹主义掌权时,才会建立一种挑战民主的政治秩序。但是民粹主义掌权的经济再分配效应并不显著,后工业社会政党竞争模式的变迁抑制了其实施大规模再分配的意愿和能力。为检验上述理论,作者构建了一个涵盖1990—2019年27个欧洲国家的原创数据集,运用双向固定效应模型、合成控制法和反事实估计量识别民粹主义掌权的因果效应。研究发现,民粹主义掌权者不仅没有履行再分配承诺,而且在某种程度上削弱了公民自由、问责制和法治,加剧了政治腐败。民粹主义执政党的影响具有滞后性,民粹主义领导人带来的冲击更大。机制分析进一步表明,“民主倒退”的主要风险来自右翼民粹主义,而左翼民粹主义更可能纠偏西方的自由民主。民主经验能够缓解民粹主义掌权的负面效应,魅力型领袖则加剧其消极影响。这些发现展示了民粹主义掌权的短期和中长期后果,有助于澄清民粹主义与自由民主的关系,进而为“民主倒退”的学术辩论提供相关见解。As a perpetual shadow of representative democracy,the influence of populism is on the rise.However,the academic community knows relatively little about the political and economic consequences of populists in power.This paper argues that populist authorities tend to radicalize rather than institutionalize.Only when populists hold office can they establish a political order that challenges democracy.Populists do not significantly achieve redistributive effects,as the changes in the competitive dynamics of post-industrial party systems suppress their willingness and capacity to implement large-scale redistribution.To test this theory,this paper constructs an original dataset covering 27 European countries from 1990to 2019,employing a two-way fixed effects model,synthetic control method,and counterfactual estimator to identify the causal effects of populist governance.The findings reveal that populists in power not only fail to fulfill their redistribution commitments but also weaken civil liberties,accountability,and the rule of law to some extent,exacerbating political corruption.The effects of populist ruling parties exhibit a certain lag,with populist leaders causing greater impacts.Further mechanism analysis indicates that the primary risk of democratic backsliding arises from right-wing populism,while left-wing populism tends to correct deviations in liberal democracy.Democratic experience can mitigate the negative effects of populist governance,whereas charismatic leaders intensify their adverse impact.This paper highlights the macro consequences of populist rule,contributing to the clarification of the relationship between populism and liberal democracy,thereby enhancing our understanding of the causes of democratic backsliding globally.

关 键 词：民粹主义掌权 民主质量 再分配 自由民主 “民主倒退” 

分 类 号：D815[政治法律—国际关系]