The Political Consequences of the Great Recession: Electoral Punishment & Popular Protest by Professor Hanspeter Kriesi, LSE

Professor Kriesi produced a thought-provoking argument that analysed the effects and overall impact of the Great Recession of 2008 both economically and politically. He also used the information and evidence he presented and related it to two case studies, which strengthened his claims and made his theories more credible.

The main bulk of the lecture was filtering the events that follow an economic crisis and understanding the purpose and impact of these events. In addition, a recurring theme within the lecture was the power the people had, more so than the people actually know about. This was most evident in the actions of the general public in times of economic emergency.

Professor Kriesi expanded upon this spectacle and analysed it further. It was soon clear that the government would only act and adapt when there is overwhelming pressure from the people of the specific country. This is most apparent from the power people have in electing parties or individuals at elections to the power people impose during demonstrations and protests against the actions of the government.

Moreover, Professor Kriesi then expanded on the response from the government and the possible assistance a country may receive during times of economic distress, in particular financial aid from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). This then led to his two case studies.

The first of the case studies was Iceland and how it adapted and changed after the effects of the Great Recession. It was one of the first countries to be struck by the crisis, after the three biggest banks of Iceland collapsed. However, Iceland in Professor Kriesi’s words was a ‘victim of the intervention of the IMF’. Furthermore, Iceland experienced popular discontent among the people and this led to more demonstrations and protests. The other case study, which was discussed, was Latvia and how the Great Recession affected them. It was apparent that there were far more protests and demonstrations in Latvia and they were also a ‘victim of the intervention of the IMF’.

However, after analysing both these western and eastern European countries, it was evident that there was an important difference between western and eastern European countries. Firstly in Western Europe the unemployment rate is more important, but in Eastern Europe the growth rate is more important. This would definitely lead to very different approaches taken by the government in trying to revive their country after an economic crisis hits.

To conclude, this lecture provided important facts and figures that demonstrate the impact the Great Recession has had on countries. In addition, this lecture gave an interesting conflict in the aims and objectives of eastern and western European countries, which could therefore be used to analyse and justify the political and economical response of that countries’ people.