Explaining Variation In The Success Of Extreme Right Parties In Western Europe

Abstract

Methodological problems associated with selection bias and interaction effects have hindered the accumulation of systematic knowledge about the factors that explain cross-national variation in the success of extreme right parties. The author uses a statistical analysis that takes account of these problems to examine the effect of electoral institutions, unemployment, and immigration on the support for these parties. The data set used in this analysis is new and spans 19 countries and 165 national elections. There are four substantive conclusions. The first is that it is important to distinguish between neofascist and populist parties on the extreme right because their fortunes depend on different factors. The second is that populist parties do better in countries where the district magnitude is larger and more seats are allocated in upper tiers. The third is that although immigration has a positive effect on populist parties irrespective of the unemployment level, unemployment only matters when immigration is high. Finally, there is evidence that the permissiveness of the electoral system mediates the effect of immigration on populist parties.

Identity and redistribution

“…However, in contrast to our model, this does not explain why these parties often advocate a low level of redistribution (see for example Betz 1993, Poglia Mileti et al 2002and McGann and Kitschelt 2005. 30 In addition, the empirical evidence on the relationship between support for anti-immigration parties and the level of unemployment is ambiguous (see Knigge 1998 andGolder 2003). 31 …”

“…The in ‡ow of relatively poor immigrants may therefore be part of the explanation for why class voting has declined in Europe during the last decades, as well as why European anti-immigration political parties seem to have gained in popularity. 29 The latter is supported by empirical studies by Knigge (1998) and Golder (2003) showing that the support for anti-immigration parties is indeed increasing in the level of immigration. A competing explanation for the relatively strong support that anti-immigration parties get from the working class is a fear for increased competition in the labor market.…”

“…However, given the identity choices of the other agents, no agent has an incentive to change identity or vote di¤erently. 25 For example, we might have one high tax equilibrium where poor whites identify as poor and one low tax equilibrium where they identify as white. Based on Marxist thinking it might be tempting to conclude that the poor are better o¤ in a high tax equilibrium, and that the poor should be made "class conscious" if the low tax equilibrium prevails.…”

Welfare Chauvinism? Refugee Flows and Electoral Support for Populist-Right Parties in Industrial Democracies

“…In fact, previous studies on this topic have long assumed migration as one of the main causes, but empirical evidence remains mixed. While, Halla et al (2012), Arzheimer (2009), Arzheimer and Carter (2006), Golder (2003) and Knigge (1998) find a positive association between migration and support for populist-right parties, Norris (2005) and Lubbers et al (2002) do not confirm the earlier findings. While a lot of these studies focus on immigrants, what is indeed missing in the current scientific debate is the role of refugees and the causal understanding of the mechanisms through which refugees flows would increase support 1 This controversial advertisement welcoming refugees by Sweden Democrats, a populist-right party is widely cited in the press, see: https://www.rt.com/news/323236-sweden-democrats-refugees-video/ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3317978/Torn-apart-open-door-migrants-Sweden-seen-Europe-s-liberalnation-violent-crime-soaring-Far-Right-march-reports-SUE-REID.html 2 See: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/01/denmark-refugees-immigration-law/431520/ 3 We identify 'populist-right' parties as those which according to the literature are protest, nativist, openly racist, or extremist parties which are anti-immigrant, islamophobic and anti-establishment in their platform.…”

“…In selecting our control variables, we follow Arzheimer (2009), Golder (2003) and Knigge (1998) and other comprehensive studies on the determinants of support for far-right parties (e.g., Swank and Betz 2003). Accordingly, we control for macroeconomic conditions, which determine voting behavioral patterns.…”