Workers, farmers, and catholicism: a history of political class coalitions and the south-european welfare state regime
| Autor | Philip Manow |
| Páginas | 8-36 |
8
WORKERS, FARMERS, AND CATHOLICISM: A HISTORY OF POLITICAL
CLASS COALITIONS AND THE SOUTH-EUROPEAN WELFARE STATE
REGIME
1 2
TRABALHADORES, FAZENDEIROS E CATOLICISMO: UMA HISTÓRIA DAS
COALIZÕES DE CLASSES POLÍTICAS E O REGIME DO ESTADO DE BEM-
ESTAR SOCIAL DA EUROPA MERIDIONAL
Philip Manow3
ABSTRACT: The explanatory model behind Esping-Andersen’s ‘three regime’-typology
points to the variance in ‘political coalition building in the transition from a rural economy to a
middle-class society’, particularly to whether or not farmers and workers were able to form
coalitions during this transition. The article reconsiders the relation between party systems and
welfare state regimes. It highlights the systematic variation among European party systems with
respect to the electoral success of communist parties. The electoral strength of communist
parties is argued to be related to the intensity of past conflicts between the nation state and the
Catholic Church in the mono-denominational countries of Europe’s South. These conflicts
rendered a coalition between pious farmers and the anticlerical worker’s movement unthinkable
and furthered the radicalization of the left. The article argues that the split on the left explains
much of what is distinctive about southern Europe’s postwar Political Economies.
KEYWORDS: South European welfare state regime. Catholicism. Political class coalitions.
Communist parties.
Artigo recebido em 04 de maio de 2017
1 O presente artigo foi publicado em inglês no Journal of European Social Policy, 2015, vol. 25 (1) 32 –49.
2 Many thanks to Thomas Ertman, Karl Gabriel, Silja Häusermann, Joseph Hien, Michael König, Frank Nullmeier,
Ilona Ostner, Jan Rovny and Wolfgang S treeck for very helpful comments. Previous versions of this paper have
been presented at the Universities of Bielefeld, Göttingen an d Olso, as well as at Copenhagen’s Center for Social
Research and the Cologne Max-Planck Institute. I am very grateful for participants’ many helpful comments. Also,
comments by two anonymous reviewers and by this special issue’s editors are gratefully ackno wledged.
3 Philip Manow é Professor na Universidade de Bremen e Wissenschaftskolleg em Berlim, na Alemanha.
RDRST, Brasília, Volume 3, n. 1, 2017, p 8-36, jan-jun/2017
9
RESUMO: O modelo explicativo subjacente à tipologia dos “três regimes” de Esping-
Andersen aponta para a diferença na “coalizão política construída na transição de uma
economia rural para uma sociedade de classe média”, especialmente quanto aos trabalhadores
e fazendeiros terem ou não sido capazes de formar coalizões durante essa transição. O presente
artigo reconsidera a relação entre sistemas de partidos políticos e regimes de Estado de Bem-
Estar Social. O texto ressalta a variação sistemática entre os sistemas de partidos políticos
europeus com relação ao sucesso eleitoral dos partidos comunistas. Sustenta que a força
eleitoral dos partidos comunistas está relacionada à intensidade dos conflitos do passado entre
o Estado-nação e a Igreja Católica nos países mono-religiosos da Europa meridional. Esses
conflitos geraram uma coalizão entre fazendeiros religiosos e o movimento dos trabalhadores
anticlericais inimaginável e potencializaram a radicalização da esquerda. Este artigo sustenta
que a divisão na esquerda explica muito do que é peculiar nas políticas econômicas do pós-
guerra na Europa meridional.
PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Regime de Estado de Bem-Estar Social da Europa meridional.
Catolicismo. Coalizões de classes políticas. Partidos comunistas.
1. VARIANTS OF A CLEAVAGE
Esping-Andersen’s ‘Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism’ became an instant classic
when it was published in 1990. Together with Peter Hall’s and David Soskice’s ‘Varieties of
Capitalism’ (2001) one cannot think of any book that had a greater impact on the field of
comparative welfare state research and on comparative political economy more generally, in
the last four decades. In fact, it defined an enormously ambitious research agenda that most of
us as researchers in this field – explicitly or implicitly, whether we admit it or not – share and
still pursue, since its intellectual potential is far from being exhausted.
As everybody knows, Esping-Andersen proposes to distinguish three welfare state
regimes, a social-democratic Scandinavian, a liberal Anglo-saxon and a conservative
continental one (Esping-Andersen 1990). Elsewhere, I have tried to show that this three-regime
typology closely corresponds to distinct patterns of party-political interest representation in the
postwar era (Kersbergen and Manow 2009; Manow 2009) – very much in line with Michael
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃO