Monthly Archives: May 2017

Continuity and change in Russia’s occidentalist and fundamentalist vote in electoral geography 1917-1995

Alexander Perepechko. Continuity…

They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” 2 Peter 2:4

By Alexander Perepechko

Craig ZumBrunnen

Vladimir A. Kolossov

Ellen S. O’Meara

Published on May 12, 2017

Abstract: This research empirically supports the hypothesis that in post-Soviet Russia, Soviet modernization engendered support for occidentalist parties, while pre-Revolutionary political regionalism engendered support for fundamentalist parties. Soviet development predicts “successful” modernization and change in occidentalist voting in (1) the continental Russian core, (2) early-modernized territories and (3) commercial export centers in the maritime European North and maritime European South, but does not predict continuity in occidentalist voting in newly industrialized regions. The political space of failed modernization and continuity in traditionalist voting includes the countryside and many towns, especially in the more recently urbanized territories and western border regions.

Keywords: Russia; Modernization; Political Culture; Election; Constituent Assembly; Sixth Duma; GIS; Probit.

We acknowledge support for portions of this article provided by U.S. Department of Education Title VI Program for Technological Innovation and Cooperation for Foreign Information Access (TICFIA) Award Number P337A990006-01, the Suzzallo Libraries at the University of Washington, and the IFS Family Foundation. We would like to thank Nicholas Chrisman, Richard Morrill, and Timothy Nyerges for valuable comments on the early drafts of this article.  We acknowledge Béatrice von Hirschhausen and Ellen O’Meara for conversations and encouragement. Our special thanks to Violette Rey for important comments on a later draft.
Continue reading Continuity and change in Russia’s occidentalist and fundamentalist vote in electoral geography 1917-1995

The enigma of Donald Trump (part 3)

Alexander Perepechko. De-GLOBolshevization?

By Alexander Perepechko

Published on April 30, 2017

The geography of risks. The votes for Donald Trump

Risks, identified, measured, and analyzed in parts 1 and 2 of this research, can be associated with a few maps from the 2016 presidential election.

A. The social risks defined by “group grievance” and “refugees and IDPs” are – at least to some degree – real in the United States. These risks are perceived as acute ontological insecurity by the majority of whites: most whites, even the majority of college graduated whites (49%), voted for Donald Trump (Figure 34). During his emotional – postmodernist! – campaign, the charismatic Trump raised the fear level, played up humiliation, and articulated a need for the great leader. Trump’s nativist (some incorrectly use the term “nationalist”) (see Leahy, 2015) perspective and rhetoric awakened dormant features of universal human nature in Middle America. Machiavellian intelligence (in a time of resource scarcity or crisis a “lion” can terrify the “wolves”) became a powerful factor in the electoral behavior of these voters.
Continue reading The enigma of Donald Trump (part 3)