Скачать книгу

in highly urban areas, those with a powerful combination of density and diversity, such as the centers of large cities, and become weaker as the level of urbanity decreases. This new geographical situation reverses long-standing electoral traditions that were organized more on a regional scale. The shift became visible in the early 1990s, in specific issues, such as the referendums on European construction or the questions of immigration, sexual orientation or religion. It then deepened when the tribune parties that fed on these issues gained influence. Finally, from the early 2000s in the United States, and in the following decade in Europe, it became a generalist marker: the major elections that decide on the major political choices of societies fall within this geographical model. Here, some examples are discussed (see Figures 1.51.9).

Schematic illustration of US Presidential Election, November 3, 2020.

      Finally, what was observed was that these maps were not only representations of other spaces, but of the spaces themselves. In Switzerland, multiple electoral spaces correspond to the responses of voters to multiple referendum questions. These questions are often about openness/closure or identity/otherness, and each time they very clearly oppose the centers of the largest cities to the suburban areas. For a time, however, this reality was masked by the fact that, in Euclidean metrics, cities are not very visible. This allowed the public scene to limit its interpretations to the Röstigraben theme, that is, to the country’s linguistic divisions, which the Swiss constitutional system largely takes into account and which, unlike the gradients of urbanity, does not threaten sociopolitical or institutional balances.

Schematic illustration of the vote of November 29, 2009 on the ban on the construction of minarets in Switzerland Euclidean map.