Suchergebnisse

Die Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) ist nicht die einzige Rechtsaußen-Partei, die vor einem möglichen Wahlerfolg steht. In vielen europäischen Ländern erleben Parteien die sich vehement gegen Einwanderung, die vermeintliche "Elite" und die Europäische Union (EU) wenden einen Popularitätsschub. Meinungsumfragen deuten darauf hin, dass sie bei den kommenden Europawahlen im Juni 2024 bis zu einem Viertel der Sitze gewinnen könnten. Bei näherer Betrachtung wird jedoch deutlich, dass es trotz ihrer augenscheinlichen Kameradschaft und gemeinsamen Ideologie bemerkenswerte Unterschiede zwischen diesen Kräften in den 27 EU-Mitgliedstaaten gibt.

Across the European continent, far-right parties are soaring in opinion polls. As the far right continues establishing its presence on the mainstream political stage, the urgency to address its rise and normalisation cannot be overstated. But which strategies are effective when and why?

Cover -- Half Title -- Series Information -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Table of Contents -- List of Figures -- List of Tables -- Abbreviations -- Acknowledgements -- 1 Right-Wing Populism in Europe: A Story of Success and Failure -- The Research Puzzle -- Defining Right-Wing Populism -- What We Know (and What We Don't) -- The Argument in Brief -- Research Design -- The Netherlands -- Luxembourg -- Belgium -- Plan of this Book -- Notes -- Bibliography -- 2 Explaining Right-Wing Populist Trajectories: Towards a Framework for Analysis -- Ending the 'War of Words': Defining Right-Wing Populist Parties -- On the 'Right' Track? -- Populism: An Essentially Contested Concept -- Conceptualising Electoral Success and Failure -- The Rise of Right-Wing Populist Parties: Conventional Explanations -- The Demand Side: Creating a Breeding Ground -- Macro-level Explanations -- Micro-level Explanations -- The Supply Side: Exploiting Fertile Soil -- The External Supply Side -- The Internal Supply Side -- Contextual Explanations -- Mainstream Parties -- Disengagement Strategies -- Engagement Strategies -- The Media -- Disengagement Strategies -- Engagement Strategies -- Theoretical Expectations -- Notes -- Bibliography -- 3 History of the Populist Radical Right in the Benelux -- The Netherlands: Tracing the Dutch Swing to the Right -- Stable Public Demand -- Strong Party Supply -- The Curious Case of Belgium -- Ample Public Demand Across the Country -- Variation in Party Supply: Strong in Flanders, Weak in Wallonia -- Luxembourg: Immune to the Far Right? -- Moderate Public Demand -- Weak Party Supply -- Conclusion -- Notes -- Bibliography -- 4 Mainstream Parties: Catalysts or Buffers Against the Populist Radical Right? -- The Netherlands: Tilling the Field for the Populist Radical Right -- The Radicalisation of the Centre-Right.

Over the past decades, the Netherlands has witnessed the rise of several influential populist radical right parties, including the Pim Fortuyn List (Lijst Pim Fortuyn), Geert Wilders's Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid) and, more recently, the Forum for Democracy (Forum voor Democratie [FvD]). By analyzing the party's organizational structures, this article seeks to determine whether the FvD may be considered a new "mass party" and to what extent ordinary members can exert influence over the party's internal procedures. The party's efforts to establish a large membership base suggest that the FvD set out to build a relatively complex mass organization. Through targeted advertising campaigns, the party made strategic use of social media platforms to rally support. Thus, while the means may have changed with the advent of the internet, the FvD invested in creating some organizational features that are commonly associated with the "mass party" model. At the same time, however, the party did not really seek to foster a community of loyal partisan activists among its membership base but instead treated its members as donors. The party is clearly characterized by centralized leadership in the sense that the party's spearhead, Thierry Baudet, maintains full control over key decision-making areas such as ideological direction, campaigning, and internal procedures. At first sight, the party appears to have departed from Wilders's leader-centered party model. However, a closer look at the party apparatus demonstrates that the FvD is, in fact, very hierarchical, suggesting that the party's internal democracy is much weaker than the party's name might suggest.

Why are populist radical right parties (PRRPs) more successful in some countries than in others? This question is analysed here by focusing on Belgium. While Flanders (the northern, Dutch-speaking part of Belgium) was home to one of the strongest far-right movements in Europe, Wallonia (the southern, francophone part) has remained 'immune' to such tendencies. The article argues that different historical experiences have given rise to a hostile political environment for PRRPs in Wallonia, where mainstream parties and the media have created a successful cordon sanitaire. In Flanders, mainstream parties and the media have gradually become more accommodative towards PRRPs. By emphasizing the sociopolitical context in which parties operate, the findings suggest that the reactions of mainstream parties and the media are crucial to understanding the success of PRRPs. The conclusion reflects on potential lessons to be drawn from the Belgian case for mainstream parties and media practitioners elsewhere.

Over the past decades, the Netherlands has witnessed the rise of several influential populist radical right parties, including the Pim Fortuyn List (Lijst Pim Fortuyn), Geert Wilders's Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid) and, more recently, the Forum for Democracy (Forum voor Democratie [FvD]). By analyzing the party's organizational structures, this article seeks to determine whether the FvD may be considered a new "mass party" and to what extent ordinary members can exert influence over the party's internal procedures. The party's efforts to establish a large membership base suggest that the FvD set out to build a relatively complex mass organization. Through targeted advertising campaigns, the party made strategic use of social media platforms to rally support. Thus, while the means may have changed with the advent of the internet, the FvD invested in creating some organizational features that are commonly associated with the "mass party" model. At the same time, however, the party did not really seek to foster a community of loyal partisan activists among its membership base but instead treated its members as donors. The party is clearly characterized by centralized leadership in the sense that the party's spearhead, Thierry Baudet, maintains full control over key decision‐making areas such as ideological direction, campaigning, and internal procedures. At first sight, the party appears to have departed from Wilders's leader‐centered party model. However, a closer look at the party apparatus demonstrates that the FvD is, in fact, very hierarchical, suggesting that the party's internal democracy is much weaker than the party's name might suggest.

Over the past decades, the Netherlands has witnessed the rise of several influential populist radical right parties, including the Pim Fortuyn List (Lijst Pim Fortuyn), Geert Wilders's Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid) and, more recently, the Forum for Democracy (Forum voor Democratie [FvD]). By analyzing the party's organizational structures, this article seeks to determine whether the FvD may be considered a new "mass party" and to what extent ordinary members can exert influence over the party's internal procedures. The party's efforts to establish a large membership base suggest that the FvD set out to build a relatively complex mass organization. Through targeted advertising campaigns, the party made strategic use of social media platforms to rally support. Thus, while the means may have changed with the advent of the internet, the FvD invested in creating some organizational features that are commonly associated with the "mass party" model. At the same time, however, the party did not really seek to foster a community of loyal partisan activists among its membership base but instead treated its members as donors. The party is clearly characterized by centralized leadership in the sense that the party's spearhead, Thierry Baudet, maintains full control over key decision-making areas such as ideological direction, campaigning, and internal procedures. At first sight, the party appears to have departed from Wilders's leader-centered party model. However, a closer look at the party apparatus demonstrates that the FvD is, in fact, very hierarchical, suggesting that the party's internal democracy is much weaker than the party's name might suggest.

AbstractWhy are populist radical right parties (PRRPs) more successful in some countries than in others? This question is analysed here by focusing on Belgium. While Flanders (the northern, Dutch-speaking part of Belgium) was home to one of the strongest far-right movements in Europe, Wallonia (the southern, francophone part) has remained 'immune' to such tendencies. The article argues that different historical experiences have given rise to a hostile political environment for PRRPs in Wallonia, where mainstream parties and the media have created a successful cordon sanitaire. In Flanders, mainstream parties and the media have gradually become more accommodative towards PRRPs. By emphasizing the sociopolitical context in which parties operate, the findings suggest that the reactions of mainstream parties and the media are crucial to understanding the success of PRRPs. The conclusion reflects on potential lessons to be drawn from the Belgian case for mainstream parties and media practitioners elsewhere.

This thesis investigates the variation in the electoral performances of right-wing populist parties in the Benelux region (i.e. Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg). Despite numerous historical and political commonalities, right-wing populist parties have been more successful in the Netherlands and Flanders (i.e. the northern, Dutch-speaking part of Belgium) than in Luxembourg and Wallonia (i.e. the southern, French-speaking part of Belgium). The thesis sets out to explore 'conventional' explanations, including socio-economic indicators (i.e. demand-side factors), and institutional as well as party organisational features (i.e. supply-side explanations). The analysis suggests that demand for right-wing populist parties is relatively constant across the Benelux region, whereas the supply of such parties has been weaker in Wallonia and Luxembourg than in Flanders and the Netherlands. However, supply-side explanations cannot fully account for the variation in the electoral performances of right-wing populist parties. The research therefore focuses on the wider context in which party competition takes place by highlighting the role of mainstream parties and the media; taken together, they act as gatekeepers in the sense that they can facilitate or hinder access into the electoral market. By politicising issues that are traditionally 'owned' by the populist radical right (notably immigration), they can create favourable opportunity structures for right-wing populist parties to thrive. Empirical support is drawn from party manifestos as well as semi-structured interviews with media practitioners and politicians. In Flanders and the Netherlands, the decline of mainstream parties as well as changes in the media landscape have contributed to the radicalisation of the political discourse, which has created fertile ground for right-wing populist challengers. By contrast, Wallonia and Luxembourg have remained relatively immune to these tendencies: mainstream parties have (thus far) managed to hold on to their core electorates, while the media are generally hostile to the populist radical right. The thesis complements existing theoretical explanations by moving beyond the traditional demand- and supply-side framework. The findings suggest that the reactions of mainstream political parties and the media are crucial to understand the variation in the electoral performances of populist radical right parties in Europe.

Although most scholars acknowledge that the media play an instrumental role in furthering or limiting the spread of populism, the exact nature of the relationship between right-wing populist parties (RWPPs) and the media remains poorly understood. This article analyzes the various ways in which the media choose to deal with RWPPs in the Benelux region (i.e., Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg). Using evidence from interviews with media practitioners ( n = 46), the findings suggest that in the absence of a credible right-wing populist challenger, media practitioners in Luxembourg and Wallonia adhere to strict demarcation, whereas the Dutch and Flemish media have become gradually more accommodative to RWPPs. This study makes two contributions to the field. First, it systematically theorizes the different ways in which the media can approach the populist radical right. Second, it provides illustrative, comparative evidence about the rationale for why some media provide space for RWPPs while others deny it, thereby illuminating the under-researched topic of societal responses to the populist radical right.

AbstractThe Dutch political landscape is notoriously unpredictable; yet, 2023 was the most turbulent year in Dutch politics in at least two decades. The year featured two elections—provincial and national—within nine months, each dominated by two distinct issues: agriculture and migration. These elections saw two different populist parties triumph with significant margins: the FarmerCitizenMovement/BoerBurgerBeweging won the provincial elections, while the radical right‐wing populist Party for Freedom/Partij voor de Vrijheid secured a landslide victory in the parliamentary elections. Moreover, the year witnessed the collapse of the centre‐right cabinet and leadership changes in more than half of the parties represented in parliament.

AbstractThe
year 2022 was a period of contradictory developments in terms of political stability in the Netherlands. On the one hand, Mark Rutte became the longest‐serving Prime Minister in the country's history after celebrating his 12th year in office. On the other hand, the newly formed Rutte IV Cabinet was charged with steering the country through a tumultuous period, marked by soaring energy prices and inflation in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, large‐scale civil unrest in response to the government's plans to cut nitrogen emissions, and a political crisis over the housing of asylum seekers.

Interviewing different social groups comes with specific challenges. This article focuses on the question of how to interview people who vote or work for the radical right. Over the past decades, radical right-wing movements and parties have become important political forces. Their rise has led to a proliferation of academic publications that have sought to shed light on this renewed swing to the right. In this ever-growing field of research, studies employing qualitative interviews have proven to be of invaluable importance. To date, however, there is no comprehensive, practical guidebook on how to interview the radical right. This article seeks to redress this gap. Drawing on existing studies and personal insights acquired over the course of our own PhD research, during which we interviewed over one hundred radical right respondents ranging from voters and grassroots activists to party elites, this article provides a comprehensive guide for in-depth, interview-based research on the radical right. Specifically, the article discusses a range of practical considerations, including how to find respondents, how to gain access, how to prepare for the interview and how to build rapport during the interview. The insights are useful to early career researchers who rely on qualitative methods when collecting data, as well as scholars from different fields, including political science, public administration and sociology, who are interested in understanding the perspectives and lived realities of the radical right.

Interviewing different social groups comes with specific challenges. This article focuses on the question of how to interview people who vote or work for the radical right. Over the past decades, radical right-wing movements and parties have become important political forces. Their rise has led to a proliferation of academic publications that have sought to shed light on this renewed swing to the right. In this ever-growing field of research, studies employing qualitative interviews have proven to be of invaluable importance. To date, however, there is no comprehensive, practical guidebook on how to interview the radical right. This article seeks to redress this gap. Drawing on existing studies and personal insights acquired over the course of our own PhD research, during which we interviewed over one hundred radical right respondents ranging from voters and grassroots activists to party elites, this article provides a comprehensive guide for in-depth, interview-based research on the radical right. Specifically, the article discusses a range of practical considerations, including how to find respondents, how to gain access, how to prepare for the interview and how to build rapport during the interview. The insights are useful to early career researchers who rely on qualitative methods when collecting data, as well as scholars from different fields, including political science, public administration and sociology, who are interested in understanding the perspectives and lived realities of the radical right.