Social capital and polarization: The case of Polish think tanks

References

• Abelson, D. (2002). Do think tank matter: Assessing the impact of public policy institutes. McGill-Queen’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Abelson, D. (2020). An uphill battle: Think tanks, donald trump, and the war of ideas. Mulroney Papers in Public Policy Governance, 1, 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Abramowitz, A. I., & Saunders, K. L. (2008). Is polarization a myth? The Journal of Politics, 70(2), 542–555. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022381608080493
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aldrich, D. P., & Meyer, M. A. (2015). Social capital and community resilience. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(2), 254–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214550299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alexander, J. C. (1992). Citizens and enemy as symbolic classification: On the polarizing discourse of civil society. In M. Lamont & M. Fournier (Eds.), Cultivating differences: Symbolic boundaries and the making of inequality (pp. 289–308). University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Awuzie, B., & McDermott, P. (2017). An abductive approach to qualitative built environment research: A viable system methodological exposé. Qualitative Research Journal, 17(4), 356–372. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-08-2016-0048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aydın-Düzgit, S., & Balta, E. (2017). Turkey after the July 15th coup attempt: When elites polarize over polarization. Istanbul Policy Center.
   Google Scholar
• Berman, S. (1997). Civil society and the collapse of the Weimar Republic. World Politics, 49(3), 401–429. https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.1997.0008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernhard, M. (2020). What do we know about civil society and regime change thirty years after 1989? East European Politics, 36(3), 341–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2020.1787160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bill, S. (2022). Counter-elite populism and civil society in Poland: PiS’s strategies of elite replacement. East European Politics and Societies, 36(1), 118–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325420950800
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bill, S., & Stanley, B. (2020). Whose Poland is it to be? PiS and the struggle between monism and pluralism. East European Politics, 36(3), 378–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2020.1787161
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boeri, T., Mishra, P., Papageorgiou, C., & Spilimbergo, A. (2021). Populism and civil society. Economica, 88(352), 863–895. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecca.12374
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonura, C. (2015). Political polarization, transition, and civil society in Thailand and Malaysia. Middle East Institute, September 22. https://www.mei.edu/publications/political-polarization-transition-and-civil-society-thailand-and-malaysia
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P. (1985). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood.
   Google Scholar
• Buzogány, A., & Varga, M. (2019). The ideational foundations of the illiberal backlash in Central and Eastern Europe: The case of Hungary. Review of International Political Economy, 25(6), 811–828. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2018.1543718
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chambers, S., & Kopstein, J. (2001). Bad civil society. Political Theory, 29(6), 838–866. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591701029006008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ekiert, G. (2021). Civil society as a threat to democracy. In N. Stoltzfus & C. Osmar (Eds.), The power of populism and people: Resistance and protest in the modern world (pp. 1–16). Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.
   Google Scholar
• Ekiert, G., & Kubik, J. (1998). Contentious politics in new democracies: East Germany, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia, 1989–93. World Politics, 50(4), 547–581. https://doi.org/10.1017/S004388710000736X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Encarnación, O. (2003). The myth of civil society: Social capital and democratic consolidation in Spain and Brazil. Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Esmer, Y. (2019). Identity politics: Extreme polarization and the loss of capacity to compromise in Turkey. In U. van Beek (Ed.), Democracy under threat. A crisis of legitimacy? (pp. 121–146). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Fiorina, M. P. (1999). Extreme voice: A dark side of civic engagement. In T. Skocpol & M. P. Fiorina (Eds.), Civic engagement in American democracy (pp. 395–426). Brookings Institution.
   Google Scholar
• Foley, M., & Edwards, B. (1996). The paradox of civil society. Journal of Democracy, 7(3), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1996.0048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fukuyama, F. (2000). Social capital and civil society (IMF Working Paper, WP/00/74).
   Google Scholar
• Gambetta, D. (1993). The sicilian mafia. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• García-Guadilla, M. P. (2007). Social movements in a polarized setting: Myths of Venezuelan civil society. In S. Ellner & M. Tinker Salas (Eds.), Venezuela: Hugo Chavez and the decline of an “Exceptional Democracy” (pp. 140–156). Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Garsten, C., & Sörbom, A. (2023). Discreet diplomacy: Practices of secrecy in transnational think tanks. Cambridge Journal of Anthropology, 42(1), 98–117. https://doi.org/10.3167/cja.2023.410108
   Google Scholar
• Greskovits, B. (2020). Rebuilding the Hungarian right through conquering civil society: The civic circles movement. East European Politics, 36(2), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/21599165.2020.1718657
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, M. (1976). History and significance of the emic/etic distinction. Annual Review of Anthropology, 5(1), 329–350. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.05.100176.001553
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jezierska, K. (2018). Performing independence. The apolitical image of Polish think tanks. Europe-Asia Studies, 70(3), 345–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2018.1447648
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jezierska, K. (2021). Dangling in a vacuum. A presentation of Polish think tanks in political life. East European Politics and Societies, 35(3), 812–836. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325420941104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jezierska, K. (2023). Coming out of the liberal closet. Think tanks and De-democratization in Poland. Democratization, 30(2), 259–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2022.2130259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jezierska, K., & Giusti, S. (2021). Introduction: Travelling from west to east. Think tank model adaptation to central and Eastern Europe. East European Politics and Societies, 35(3), 755–767. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325420946831
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jezierska, K., Krizsán, A., & Sörbom, A. (forthcoming). (De)polarization entrepreneurs. Think tanks in Central Europe as agents in pernicious polarization (Working Paper).
   Google Scholar
• Jezierska, K., & Sörbom, A. (2021). Proximity and distance: Think tanks handling the independence paradox. Governance, 34(2), 395–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12503
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kopecký, P., & Mudde, C. (2003). Rethinking civil society. Democratization, 10(3), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510340312331293907
   Google Scholar
• Korolczuk, E. (2022). Challenging civil society elites in Poland: The dynamics and strategies of civil society actors. East European Politics and Societies, 880–902.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kravchenko, Z., Kings, L., & Jezierska, K. (Eds.). (2022). Resourceful civil society? Navigating the changing landscapes of civil society organizations. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Le Van, C. (2011). Questioning Tocqueville in Africa: Continuity and change in civil society during Nigeria’s democratization. Democratization, 18(1), 135–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2011.532622
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levi, M. (1996). Social and unsocial capital: A review essay of Robert Putnam’s making democracy work. Politics & Society, 24(1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329296024001005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, N. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Linz, J. J., & Stepan, A. C. (1996). Problems of democratic transition and consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and post-communist Europe. Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lorch, J. (2021). Elite capture, civil society and democratic backsliding in Bangladesh, Thailand and the Philippines. Democratization, 28(1), 81–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2020.1842360
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marzec, W., & Neubacher, D. (2020). Civil society under pressure: Historical legacies and current responses in Central Eastern Europe. Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe, 28(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/25739638.2020.1812931
   Google Scholar
• McCoy, J., Rahman, T., & Somer, M. (2018). Polarization and the global crisis of democracy: Common patterns, dynamics, and pernicious consequences for democratic polities. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(1), 16–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218759576
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCoy, J., & Somer, M. (2019). Toward a theory of pernicious polarization and how it harms democracies: Comparative evidence and possible remedies. ANNALS, AAPSS, 68(1), 234–271. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716218818782
   Google Scholar
• McCoy, J., & Somer, M. (2021). Overcoming polarization. Journal of Democracy, 32(1), 6–21. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2021.0012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGann, J., & Lazarou, E. (2019). Think tanks and the foreign policy challenges facing the emerging powers. In J. McGann (Ed.), Think tanks and the emerging powers (pp. 3–16). Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• McGann, J., & Weaver, K. (Eds.). (2009). Think tanks and civil societies: Catalysts for ideas and action. Transaction Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Medvetz, T. (2012). Think tanks in America. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mietzner, M. (2021). Sources of resistance to democratic decline: Indonesian civil society and its trials. Democratization, 28(1), 161–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2020.1796649
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mostowlansky, T., & Rota, A. (2020). Emic and ethic. In F. Stein (Ed.), The Cambridge encyclopedia of anthropology (pp. 1–16). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ost, D. (2005). The defeat of solidarity: Anger and politics in postcommunist Europe. Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pautz, H. (2011). Revisiting the think-tank phenomenon. Public Policy and Administration, 26(4), 419–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952076710378328
   Google Scholar
• Pirro, A. L. P., & Stanley, B. (2022). Forging, bending, and breaking: Enacting the “illiberal playbook” in Hungary and Poland. Perspectives on Politics, 20(1), 86–101. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592721001924
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plehwe, D., Neujeffski, M., & Krämer, W. (2018). Saving the dangerous idea: Austerity think tank networks in the European Union. Policy and Society, 37(2), 188–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2018.1427602
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Portes, A. (2014). The downsides of social capital. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(52), 18407–18408. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1421888112
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pospieszna, P., & Vetulani-Cęgiel, A. (2021). Polish interest groups facing democratic backsliding. Interest Groups & Advocacy, 10(2), 158–180. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41309-021-00119-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, R. D., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. Y. (1992). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rahman, T. (2019). Party system institutionalization and pernicious polarization in Bangladesh. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 681(1), 173–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716218817280
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reichertz, J. (2010). Abduction. The logic of discovery of grounded theory. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 11(1), 214–229.
   Google Scholar
• Rivetti, P., & Cavatorta, F. (2017). Functions of political trust in authoritarian settings. In S. Zmerli & T. van der Meer (Eds.), Handbook on political trust (pp. 53–168). Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Roggeband, C., & Krizsán, A. (2021). The selective closure of civic space. Global Policy, 12(S5), 23–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12973
   Google Scholar
• Roßteutscher, S. (2010). Social capital world wide: Potential for democratization or stabilizer for authoritarian rule? American Behavioral Scientist, 53(5), 737–757. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764209350835
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rostila, M. (2008). Healthy Bridges. Studies of social capital, welfare and health. Doctoral dissertation. Health Equity Studies No 10, Stockholm: Department of Sociology.
   Google Scholar
• Rostila, M. (2011). The facets of social capital. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 41(3), 308–326. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.2010.00454.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarkissian, Ani, & Özler, Ş. İlgü. (2013). Democratization and the politicization of religious civil society in Turkey. Democratization, 20(6), 1014–1035. http://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2012.669895
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simsa, Ruth. (2019). Civil society capture by early stage autocrats in well-developed democracies – The Case of Austria. Nonprofit Policy Forum, 10(3), 78. http://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2019-0029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somer, M., McCoy, J. L., & Luke, R. E. (2021). Pernicious polarization, autocratization and opposition strategies. Democratization, 28(5), 929–948. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2020.1865316
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sommerfeldt, E. J. (2013). The civility of social capital: Public relations in the public sphere, civil society, and democracy. Public Relations Review, 39(4), 208–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolle, D. (2003). The sources of social capital. In M. Hooghe & D. Stolle (Eds.), Generating social capital (pp. 19–42). Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, D. (2007). Recycling bins, garbage cans or think tanks? Three myths regarding policy analysis institutes. Public Administration, 85(2), 259–278. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2007.00649.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, D., & Denhamn, A. (Eds.). (2004). Think tank traditions: Policy research and the politics of ideas. Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Svolik, M. (2019). Polarization versus democracy. Journal of Democracy, 30(3), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2019.0039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarrow, S. (2021). Progress outside of paradise: Old and new comparative approaches to contentious politics. Comparative Political Studies, 54(10), 1885–1901. https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140211024297
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, M. (2011). Building social capital through rhetoric and public relations. Management Communication Quarterly, 25(3), 436–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318911410286
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toepler, S., Zimmer, A., Fröhlich, C., & Obuch, K. (2020). The changing space for NGOs: Civil society in authoritarian and hybrid regimes. Voluntas, 31(4), 649–662. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00240-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trigilia, C. (2001). Social capital and local development. European Journal of Social Theory, 4(4), 427–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310122225244
   Google Scholar
• Vachudova, M. A. (2019). From competition to polarization in central Europe: How populists change party systems and the European Union. Polity, 51(4), 689–706. https://doi.org/10.1086/705704
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Deth, J. W., & Zmerli, S. (2010). Introduction: Civicness, equality, and democracy–A ‘dark side’ of social capital? American Behavioral Scientist, 53(5), 631–639. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764209350827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xue, M. (2021). Autocratic rule and social capital: Evidence from Imperial China. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2856803
   Google Scholar
• Zelizer, V. A. (2012). How I became a relational economics sociologist and what does that mean? Politics & Society, 40(2), 145–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329212441591
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zielonka, J., & Rupnik, J. (2020). From revolution to ‘counter-revolution’: Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe 30 years on. Europe-Asia Studies, 72(6), 1073–1099. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2020.1784394
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Özler, S. I., & Obach, B. (2018). Polarization and the environmental movement in Turkey. Journal of Civil Society, 14(4), 311–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/17448689.2018.1518773
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar