Upload
sophia-wheeler
View
224
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Lecture 10
Classifications
○
Theoretical
approaches
Party families
• Michael Gallagher, Michael Laver and Peter Mair (Representative Governments in Western Europe, 3rd ed., 2001) suggest three ways of dividing parties into families:– 1) Genetic origin. Parties formed in historical
circumstances, or with the intention to represent similar interests
– 2) Affiliation to transnational party federations, e.g. Socialist International and the Liberal International, party groups in the European Parliament
– 3) Policies
Extreme right parties in European Parliament until 2006:
• Independence and Democracy group:– UKIP, Lega Nord (Together with June Movement DK;
June List Swe; Mouvement pour la France, Dutch, Polish, Czech, Greek parties; 1 ind. from Ireland)
• Union for a Europe of Nations Group UEN– AN; Danish People's Party (Together with: Fianna
Fail, Latvian, Lithuanian and Polish parties)
• Non-attached members– FPÖ, FN, Vlaams Belang, MSI-Flame, Alternativa
Sociale (Mussolini) (Together with DUP, 2 UKIP defectors, Austrian, Italian, Czech, Slovak & 6 Polish parties
Extreme right parties in European Parliament from January 2007:
• Extreme Right parties form Identity, Tradition and Sovereignty group, with 20 members:
Front National 7 FPÖ 1 Vlaams Belang 3 Alternativa Sociale 1 (Alessandra Mussolini) MSI-Fiamma Tricolore 1 UKIP defector (Ashley Mote) 1 (Sep 07 nine months in jail for benefit fraud) Partidul Romania Mare (Romania) 5 (plus one indep. from Romania, who joins
in March) Attack Coalition (Bulgaria) 1 (plus two following EU election in May)
• In November 2007 five Romanian members resigned in protest against derogatory statements by Alessandra Mussolini. This meant that the group fell below the minimum membership level of 20, and was dissolved
Extreme right parties in European Parliament from November 2007:
• AN, Lega Nord, Danish People's Party:– Union for a Europe of Nations Group (UEN)
• FPÖ, FN, Vlaams Belang, MSI-Fiamma Tricolore, Alternativa Sociale (Mussolini), Attack Coalition (Bulgaria), Partidul Romania Mare: – Non-attached members
So…• …as you can see, some extreme right parties are not
members of any international grouping; others are members of different groups, indeed some have shifted back and forth
• Historical circumstances and the representation of social groups may be useful when classifying old parties, but newer parties do not have a very easily identifiable social base…
• …and the historical circumstances that led to the formation of extreme right parties were similar to those that led to the formation of green parties
• Policies are also difficult, because it is very problematic to compare policies in different countries
• Mudde (2000) argues that ideologies are better suited to comparison. More general, and more stable over time, than policies
Thus…
• …ideology is the best criterion when classifying parties
• Following Mudde (1995/2000), an extreme right party is nationalist, xenophobic, welfare chauvinist and in favour of law and order
• The exact content of the core ideology may not be unanimously agreed, and there may be different ways of “weighting” the ideological ingredients, but Mudde’s work has moved the discussion forward
But what to call them…?
• Mudde (2000) argues that, despite many diffculties, the label “extreme right” is the preferred option
• In 2007, however, Mudde retracts this statement, preferring “Populist Radical Right” (although he also changes the ideological core, hence the definition)
• There are many other suggested labels:– Far right– Populist right– Radical right– etc., often in various combinations, e.g. Rydgren:
Radical Right(-wing) Populist (RRP)
Sub-groups• Mudde (2000):• Extreme right
– Ethnic nationalist– State (civic) nationalist
• Ignazi (1992):• Extreme right
– Old– New
• Betz (1994):• Radical Right-Wing Populism
– Neo-liberal/libertarian– Authoritarian/national
• Kitschelt (1995):• Extreme Right
– Fascist– Welfare chauvinist– Populist anti-statist– Right-authoritarian = New
Radical Right
• Taggart (1995):• Right-Wing Extremism
– New populist– Neo-fascist
Ten Theories (Eatwell 2002)
Demand-side 1:Single issue (immigration)
Extreme right parties’ success depends one single factor – reactions against immigration
Ten Theories (Eatwell 2002)
Demand-side 2:
Protest
Extreme right parties’ success is not dependent on any issue or attitudes – just resentment against the political establishment
Ten Theories (Eatwell 2002)
Demand-side 3:Social breakdown
Traditional social structures, especially class and religion, are breaking down. As a result, individuals lose a sense of belonging and turn to ethnic nationalism, which gives a renewed sense of self-esteem.
Ten Theories (Eatwell 2002)
Demand-side 4:Reverse post-materialism
Post-materialism (Inglehart). New values in post-war affluent generationExtreme right parties’ success is caused by a backlash against post-materialism – environmentalism, cosmopolitanism, new left politics, feminism et c.
Ten Theories (Eatwell 2002)
Demand-side 5:Economic self-interest
Extreme right support comes from the “losers” in a competition over scarce resources, or those who fear they may lose out
Ten Theories (Eatwell 2002)
Supply-side 1:Opportunity structures (Kitschelt)
Extreme right parties’ success depends on:Electoral systemsConvergence between mainstream left and right
Ten Theories (Eatwell 2002)
Supply-side 2:Medialisation
The media promote certain national stereotypes, which fit the extreme right agenda. Highlight “bogus” asylum seekers, et c.
Ten Theories (Eatwell 2002)
Supply-side 3:National traditions
Extreme right is successful when it can portray itself as part of a national tradition. Fascist or extremist links will limit their support
Ten Theories (Eatwell 2002)
Supply-side 4:Party programmes
a. Politics is becoming more issue-based, which suits the extreme right
b. Extreme right has adopted a “Winning formula” of anti-immigration and pro-capitalism (Kitschelt)
Ten Theories (Eatwell 2002)
Supply-side 5:Charismatic leadership
Many extreme right parties have charismatic leaders, who are believed to be key factors behind their success
To sum up:
• Demand-side: Single issue Protest Social breakdown Reverse post-
materialism Economic self-
interest
• Supply-side: Opportunity structures Medialisation National traditions Party programmes Charismatic
leadership
Herbert Kitschelt (1995)New conflict structures:• Economic:
libertarian/free market v socialist/redistributive
• Societal/political:authoritarian v libertarian/permissive
• Conceptions of citizenship:particularistvcosmopolitan
Kitschelt (cont.)
Contemporary postindustrial democracies have created a limited but distinctive demand for a combination of
• ethnocentric
• authoritarian
and
• free market politics
Kitschelt (cont.)
• Orientation to citizenship (universalistic/cosmopolitan v. particularistic/parochial)
and
• modes of collective decision-making (egalitarian/democratic v. hierarchical/authoritarian)
are shaped by communicative experiences and capabilities
Kitschelt (cont.)
• Symbol- and client-processing experiences lead to values conducive to New Left attitudes
• Experiences of manipulations of objects, documents or spreadsheets lead to values conducive to New Radical Right attitudes
Kitschelt (cont.)
Extreme right success depends on two main sets of factors:• Opportunity structures (electoral
system, convergence between mainstream left and right)
• ‘Winning formula’ (authoritarianism/anti-immigration and market liberalism/pro-capitalism)
Hans-Georg Betz (1994)
• The transformation from industrial to post-industrial capitalism has brought profound economic, social and societal changes
• Established subcultures, milieus and institutions, which traditionally provided and sustained collective identities, are getting eroded and/or destroyed
• This has given way to a “flux of contextualised identities”
Betz (cont.)
The breakdown of established subcultures, milieus and institutions has led to
• A break-up of traditional political loyaltiesand
• A sense of being left behind
Eatwell’s “LET” approach
• Legitimacy • Efficacy• Trust
Increasing L(egitimacy) of extreme right parties and E(fficacy) of voters, combined with declining T(rust) in the political system promotes extreme right support