scholarly journals Economic Populist Sovereignism and Electoral Support for Radical Right-Wing Populism

2020 ◽  
pp. 003232172095856
Author(s):  
Oscar Mazzoleni ◽  
Gilles Ivaldi
Keyword(s):  
Well Being ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
People's Party ◽  
Electoral Support ◽  
The People ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
Original Survey ◽  
Do So ◽  
Economic Well Being

Sovereignism is at the crux of the current wave of radical right-wing populism. Populist parties advocate ‘taking back control’ and generally do so in the name of the ‘people’, pledging to restore economic well-being. This article argues that populism and sovereignism are inherently connected in radical right-wing populism politics through a set of values that emphasize popular and national sovereignty. To test the empirical validity of our proposition, we focus on two established European radical right-wing populist parties, namely the Rassemblement National in France and the Swiss People’s Party and use data from an original survey. We find that while Rassemblement National and Swiss People’s Party voters diverge in general economic orientations, they share similar economic populist sovereignist values that significantly shape electoral support for those parties. These findings suggest that economic populist sovereignism may represent an important driver of support for the radical right-wing populism, alongside other correlates of radical right-wing populism voting, such as perceived immigration threat.

scholarly journals ”Danmark er danskernes land”: Højrepopulistisk diskurs i Danmark

Politik ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Silas L. Marker
Keyword(s):  
Discourse Analysis ◽  
New Right ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
People's Party ◽  
The People ◽  
Muslim Immigrants ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
The Right ◽  
Power Position

This paper examines the phenomenon of right-wing populism in Denmark in the year of 2019 by applying qualitative discourse analysis to a sample of central public texts from the right-wing populist parties New Right and The Danish People’s Party. Both parties utilize populist discourse by constructing a popular bloc (“the people”) stabilized by its constitutive outside: The elite and the Muslim immigrants. However, the discourses of the two parties differ from each other insofar as New Right articulates the strongest antagonism between the people and the elite, while The Danish People’s Party downplays this antagonism, most likely because the party has a central power position in Danish politics. 

scholarly journals Liberal Illiberalism? The Reshaping of the Contemporary Populist Radical Right in Northern Europe

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 112-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Moffitt
Keyword(s):  
Free Speech ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
Northern Europe ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Populist Radical Right ◽  
The People ◽  
Radical Right Parties ◽  
Do So

Populism, particularly in its radical right-wing variants, is often posited as antithetical to the principles of liberalism. Yet a number of contemporary cases of populist radical right parties from Northern Europe complicate this characterisation of populism: rather than being directly opposed to liberalism, these parties selectively reconfigure traditionally liberal defences of discriminated-against groups—such as homosexuals or women—in their own image, positing these groups as part of ‘the people’ who must be protected, and presenting themselves as defenders of liberty, free speech and ‘Enlightenment values’. This article examines this situation, and argues that that while populist radical right parties in Northern Europe may only invoke such liberal values to opportunistically attack their enemies—in many of these cases, Muslims and ‘the elite’ who allegedly are abetting the ‘Islamisation’ of Europe’—this discursive shift represents a move towards a ‘liberal illiberalism’. Drawing on party manifestoes and press materials, it outlines the ways in which these actors articulate liberal illiberalism, the reasons they do so, and the ramifications of this shift.

scholarly journals The Breakthrough of Another West European Populist Radical Right Party? The Case of the True Finns

2010 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 484-504 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Arter
Keyword(s):  
National Identity ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
Careful Study ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
European Perspective ◽  
Left Wing ◽  
People's Party ◽  
Populist Radical Right ◽  
Right Wing Populism

AbstractThe True Finn Party (PS), which gained virtually 10 per cent of the national vote at the 2009 European Parliament election, lacks a place in the comparative party literature and also defies ready classification. It has been perceived by its supporters as the most left-wing of the non-socialist parties; by Finnish media commentators as a case of right-wing populism; and by researchers as a distinctive centred-based populist party when viewed in a wider European perspective. Based on a careful study of its programmatic output since its inception in 1995, this article seeks to characterize the PS by reference to its core ideological features. It argues that it is in fact a populist radical right party – with national identity or Finnishness as its pivotal concept – albeit without the xenophobic extremism of such continental counterparts as the Danish People's Party or Austrian Freedom Party.

scholarly journals The People’s Champ: Doug Ford and Neoliberal Right-Wing Populism in the 2018 Ontario Provincial Election

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 171-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Budd
Keyword(s):  
Western Europe ◽  
Conservative Party ◽  
The United States ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Special Interests ◽  
Liberal Party ◽  
The People ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
Ideological Commitment

The 2018 Ontario provincial election marked a decisive shift in the political direction of Canada’s most populous province. The election brought an end to the long reign of the Ontario Liberal Party (2003–2018), whose government devolved into a series of scandals that resulted in a third-place finish. The Liberal’s defeat came at the hands of the Progressive Conservative Party led by former Toronto city councillor, Doug Ford. The Progressive Conservative’s victory was propelled on the back of Ford’s deeply populist campaign where he promised to reassert the interests of ‘the people,’ expel the influence of elites and special interests, and clean up government corruption. This campaign discourse led many political opponents and media pundits to accuse Ford of importing the nativist, xenophobic, and divisive rhetoric of other radical right-wing populist leaders. This article advances the argument that rather than representing the importation of ‘Trumpism’ or other types of radical right-wing populism, Ford’s campaign is better understood within the tradition of Canadian populism defined by an overarching ideological commitment to neoliberalism. In appealing to voters, Ford avoided the nativist and xenophobic rhetoric of populist leaders in the United States and Western Europe, offering a conception of ‘the people’ using an economic and anti-cosmopolitan discourse centred upon middle class taxpayers. This article makes a contribution to both the literatures on Canadian elections and populism, demonstrating the lineage of Ford’s ideological commitment to populism within recent Canadian electoral history, as well as Ford’s place within the international genealogy of right-wing populism.

scholarly journals Social Integration and Right-Wing Populist Voting in Germany

2020 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 369-398
Author(s):  
Patrick Sachweh
Keyword(s):  
Middle Class ◽  
Social Integration ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Downward Mobility ◽  
Social Marginalization ◽  
Electoral Support ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
Party Support ◽  
Original Survey ◽  
Socially Excluded

Abstract Electoral support for right-wing populist parties is typically explained either by economic deprivation or cultural grievances. Attempting to bring economic and cultural explanations together, recent approaches have suggested to conceptualize right-wing populist support as a problem of social integration. Applying this perspective to the German case, this article investigates whether weak subjective social integration-or subjective social marginalization, respectively-is associated with the intention to vote for the AfD. Furthermore, it asks whether the strength of this association varies across income groups. Based on original survey data from 2017, the results show that indicators of weak subjective social integration-feeling socially excluded, being anxious about one’s status, and distrusting others-increase the likelihood of voting for the AfD. Moreover, weak subjective social integration increases right-wing party support particularly among the middle-class. Thus, next to fears of downward mobility, feelings of subjective social marginalization emerge as a pathway to right-wing populism for the middle-class.

Look up rather than down: Karl Polanyi’s fascism and radical right-wing ‘populism’

2021 ◽  
pp. 001139212110157
Author(s):  
Sang Hun Lim
Keyword(s):  
Market Economy ◽  
Social Protection ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
Close Reading ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Alternative Diagnosis ◽  
The People ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
The Right ◽  
Economic Globalisation

Radical right-wing politics is often regarded as a populist movement for social protection against economic globalisation. As a solution, contemporary Polanyian critics often suggest reforming left parties to reorient populist movements from the right to the left by building a broad non-capitalist coalition. Through a close reading of Polanyi’s works, this article offers an alternative diagnosis and prescription for preventing radical right-wing empowerment. Polanyi explains that fascists gained political power through support from capitalist elites. Political democratisation threatened the separation of the market from politics, and the war and depression resulted in the dysfunction of the market economy. In this situation, capitalist elites chose fascism – a radical measure to protect capitalism by destroying democracy. This article argues that, in order to prevent radical right-wing empowerment, we should look up, to the capitalist economy and the ruling classes, rather than only down, to welfare chauvinism and the ‘people’.

Roads to the Radical Right

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koen Damhuis
Keyword(s):  
Radical Right ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Political Forces ◽  
Unique Material ◽  
Marine Le Pen ◽  
To Come ◽  
National Perspective ◽  
Western Democracies ◽  
Do So ◽  
Cross National

Trump, Wilders, Salvini, Le Pen—during the last decades, radical right-wing leaders and their parties have become important political forces in most Western democracies. Their growing appeal raises an increasingly relevant question: who are the voters that support them and why do they do so? Numerous and variegated answers have been given to this question, inside as well as outside academia. Yet, curiously, despite their quantity and diversity, these existing explanations are often based on a similar assumption: that of homogeneous electorates. Consequently, the idea that different subgroups with different profiles and preferences might coexist within the constituencies of radical right-wing parties has thus far remained underdeveloped, both theoretically and empirically. This ground-breaking book is the first one that systematically investigates the heterogeneity of radical right-wing voters. Theoretically, it introduces the concept of electoral equifinality to come to grips with this diversity. Empirically, it relies on innovative statistical analyses and no less than 125 life-history interviews with voters in France and the Netherlands. Based on this unique material, the study identifies different roads to the radical right and compares them within a cross-national perspective. In addition, through an analysis of almost 1,400 tweets posted by Geert Wilders and Marine Le Pen, the book shows how the latter are able to appeal to different groups of voters. Taken together, the book thus provides a host of ground-breaking insights into the heterogeneous phenomenon of radical right support.

How and Why the Populist Radical Right Persuades Citizens

2019 ◽  
pp. 813-837
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Ivarsflaten ◽  
Scott Blinder ◽  
Lise Bjånesøy
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Large Share ◽  
The Past ◽  
Populist Radical Right ◽  
Electoral Support ◽  
Party Family ◽  
Established Democracies

The “populist radical right” is a contested concept in scholarly work for good reason. This chapter begins by explaining that the political parties usually grouped together under this label are not a party family in a conventional sense and do not self-identify with this category. It goes on to show how political science scholarship has established that in Europe during the past thirty or so years we have seen the rise of a set of parties that share a common ideological feature—nativism. The nativist political parties experiencing most electoral support have combined their nativist agenda with some other legitimate ideological companion, which provides deniability—a shield against charges that the nativist agenda makes the parties and their supporters right-wing extremist and undemocratic. The chapter goes on to explain that in order to make progress on our understanding of how and why the populist radical right persuades citizens, we need to recognize: first, that nativism is the only necessary ingredient without which the populist radical right loses its force; and second, that nativism in contemporary established democracies has tended not to persuade a large share of voters without an ideological companion.

scholarly journals Welfare chauvinism across benefits and services

2021 ◽  
pp. 095892872110230
Author(s):  
Gianna Maria Eick ◽  
Christian Albrekt Larsen
Keyword(s):  
Social Protection ◽  
Public Attitudes ◽  
Individual Characteristics ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Left Wing ◽  
Social Risks ◽  
Cash Benefits ◽  
Original Survey ◽  
The Uk

The article theorises how covering social risks through cash transfers and in-kind services shapes public attitudes towards including/excluding immigrants from these programmes in Western European destination countries. The argument is that public attitudes are more restrictive of granting immigrants access to benefits than to services. This hypothesis is tested across ten social protection programmes using original survey data collected in Denmark, Germany and the UK in 2019. Across the three countries, representing respectively a social democratic, conservative and liberal welfare regime context, the article finds that the public does indeed have a preference for easier access for in-kind services than for cash benefits. The article also finds these results to be stable across programmes covering the same social risks; the examples are child benefits and childcare. The results are even stable across left-wing, mainstream and radical right-wing voters; with the partial exception of radical right-wing voters in the UK. Finally, the article finds only a moderate association between individual characteristics and attitudinal variation across cash benefits and in-kind services.

Volkswille: Reale Substanz oder notwendige Fiktion?

Der Staat ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 371-396
Author(s):  
Shu-Perng Hwang
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
The Real ◽  
The People ◽  
The Will ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
The Individual

Angesichts des markanten Aufstiegs des Rechtspopulismus in den vergangenen Jahren drängt sich die Frage immer wieder auf, ob oder inwiefern das Parlament den eigentlichen Volkswillen (noch) vertreten kann, und wie im Zeitalter der Globalisierung und Digitalisierung der eigentliche Volkswille überhaupt festzustellen und effektiv durchzusetzen ist. In dieser Hinsicht steht das Vertrauen in die Fähigkeit des Parlaments, den wahren Volkswillen herauszubilden und zu artikulieren, erneut vor großen Herausforderungen. Durch eine vergleichende Analyse zwischen den Demokratietheorien Böckenfördes und Kelsens zeigt der vorliegende Beitrag, weshalb und inwiefern das weitverbreitete Verständnis des Volkswillens und dessen Rolle in der parlamentarischen Demokratie gerade vor dem heutigen Hintergrund eine kritische Besinnung verdient. Es wird argumentiert, dass gerade in demokratischer Hinsicht nicht die Suche nach dem „wahren Volkswillen“, sondern nach wie vor die Gewährleistung der Menschen- bzw. Grundrechte der Einzelnen und insbesondere der Minderheiten von zentraler Bedeutung sein soll. In view of the spread of right-wing populism in recent years, the question as to how the will of the people is to be ascertained and expressed has attracted much attention in constitutional scholarship. In particular, the issue of whether or to what extent the parliament is (still) capable of representing and demonstrating the will of the people has been repeatedly discussed and debated. Through a comparative analysis of Böckenförde’s und Kelsen’s democratic theories, this article critically examines the problems of the widespread understanding of the will of the people as a real-empirical existence and its significance for the realization of democracy. Accordingly, it points out why and in what sense the reference to the so-called real will of the people would undermine rather than promote democracy. This article concludes by arguing that, precisely for the sake of democracy, what is crucial is not to determine what the “real will of the people” is, but rather to guarantee the freedom of the individual and especially of the minorities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document