Philosophical and Historical Perspective of the Development of Electoral Technologies

Authors

Anastasiia NEKRIACH Poltava State Agrarian University https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5058-4145
Larysa KOCHUBEI Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8113-9068
Tetiana PANFILOVA European Integration and Law LRIDA NAPA under the President of Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7924-8716
Vasyl MARCHUK Trnava University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3992-8530
Nadiia HERBUT Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9776-3386

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24234/wisdom.v20i4.572

Keywords:

philosophy, philosophical perspective, historical perspective, electoral technologies, technologies

Abstract

The main purpose of the article is to characterise the philosophical and historical perspective of the de- velopment of electoral technologies. The methodological basis of the research is conditioned by the pecu- liarities of the research subject, its interdisciplinary nature and expediency of a combination of sociologi- cal, historical-philosophical, political science and other approaches. Philosophical and historical analysis showed that electoral technologies should be understood as a kind of political communication used to ma- nipulate public opinion. In turn, this makes it possible for politicians to have a monopoly on the manage- ment of the electorate in order to obtain its support in the elections. Considering electoral technologies, we must consider their connection and combination with the totality of electoral technologies. That is, it should be noted that the actual electoral process involves the passage of two mega stages: 1) the preparato- ry (pre-election) stage, at which pre-election technologies are applied, and 2) the official election cam- paign itself (purely electoral stage), in the process of which the actual electoral technologies are used.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Anastasiia NEKRIACH, Poltava State Agrarian University

PhD, Doctor of Political Science, Professor, Academician at the Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Accounting and Finance, Poltava State Agrarian University, Poltava, Ukraine. Her areas of interest include philosophy, philosophical perspective, historical perspective, electoral technologies, technologies. Nekriach Anastasiia is the author of 200 scientific articles.

Larysa KOCHUBEI, Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts

PhD, Doctor in Political Science, Professor at Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts, Kyiv, Ukraine. Her areas of interest include philosophy, philosophical perspective, historical perspective, electoral technologies, technologies. Larysa Kochubei is the author of 100 scientific articles.

Tetiana PANFILOVA, European Integration and Law LRIDA NAPA under the President of Ukraine

PhD, Doctor of Science in History, Associate Professor of European Integration and Law at LRIDA NAPA under the President of Ukraine. Her areas of interest include philosophy, philosophical perspective, historical perspective, electoral technologies, technologies. Panfilova Tetiana is the author of 70 scientific articles.

Vasyl MARCHUK, Trnava University

PhD, Doctor of Political Science, Professor at Political Science Department, Philosophy Faculty, Trnava University (Slovak Republic). His areas of interest include philosophy, philosophical perspective, historical perspective, electoral technologies, technologies. Vasyl Marchuk is the author of 60 scientific articles.

Nadiia HERBUT, Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture

PhD in Political Science, Associate Professor at the Department of Political Science and Law, Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture, Kyiv, Ukraine. Her areas of interest include philosophy, philosophical perspective, historical perspective, electoral technologies, technologies. Nadiia Herbut is the author of 50 scientific articles.

References

Abou-Chadi, T., & Orlowski, M. (2016). Moderate as necessary: The role of electoral competitiveness and party size in explaining partiesí policy Shi. The Journal of Politics 78(3), 868-881.

Aidt, T., Veiga, F., & Veiga, L. (2011). Election results and opportunistic policies: A new test of the rational political business cycle model. Public Choice, 148(1-2), 21-44.

Schakel, A. H., & Romanova, V. (2021). Horizontal and vertical spill-over in multilevel electoral systems. Regional & Federal Studies, 31(3), 299-311 https://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2021.1934455

Birch, S. (2003). Electoral systems and political transformation in Post-Communist Europe: One Europe or several? New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Cronert, A., & Nyman, P. (2020). A general approach to measuring electoral competitiveness for parties and governments. Political Analysis, 29, 337-355.

Moser, R, & Scheiner, E. (2009). Strategic voting in established and new democracies: Ticket split-ting in mixed-member electoral systems. Electoral Studies, 28, 51-61.

Neto, A., & Cox, G. (1997). Electoral institutions, cleavage structures, and the number of parties. American Journal of Political Science 41, 149-174.

Roussias, A. (2021). The evolution of new party systems: Voter learning and electoral systems. Po-litical Studies Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/14789299211014394

Selb, P. (2012). Strategic adaptation to new electoral systems. European Journal of Political Re-search, 51, 583-606.

Shugart, M., & Wattenberg M. (2001). Mixed-member electoral systems: The best of both worlds? Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Shugart, S., & Carey, J. (1992). Presidents and assemblies: Constitutional design and electoral dy-namics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shvetsova, O. (2002). Institutions and coalition-building in post-communist transitions. In A. Reynolds (Ed.), The architecture of democracy: Constitutional design, conflict manage-ment, and democracy (pp. 55-78). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Singer, M. (2013). Was Duverger correct? Single-member district election outcomes in fifty-three countriesÃ®. British Journal of Political Science, 43, 201-220

Taagepera, R. (2002). Designing electoral rules and waiting for an electoral system to evolve. In A. Reynolds (Ed.), The architecture of democracy: Constitutional design, conflict manage-ment, and democracy (pp 248-264). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Tavits, M. (2005). The development of stable party support: Electoral dynamics in post-communist Europe. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 283-298.

Downloads

Published

2021-12-24

How to Cite

NEKRIACH, A., KOCHUBEI, L., PANFILOVA, T., MARCHUK, V., & HERBUT, N. (2021). Philosophical and Historical Perspective of the Development of Electoral Technologies. WISDOM, 20(4), 86–94. https://doi.org/10.24234/wisdom.v20i4.572

Download Citation

Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)

Issue

Vol. 20 No. 4 (2021): 4-2021

Section

Articles

License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial (CC BY-NC). CC BY-NC allows users to copy and distribute the article, provided this is not done for commercial purposes. The users may adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material giving appropriate credit, and providing a link to the license. The full details of the license are available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.