Moderation of Radical Right‐wing Populist Parties in Western European Governments – A Comparative Analysis

Abstract

More and more Western European radical right‐wing populist parties participate in the governments of their respective countries. At least some of these parties moderate—that is, become less radical—once they join the government; others, however, do not. Although the literature has addressed such moderation, the conditions that lead to it have not been analyzed comprehensively. In this paper, we use a fuzzy‐set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA, N = 14) to determine what conditions are consistently associated with moderation across cases. We find that the degree of governmental responsibility a party takes over is as important as its internal dynamic. In a ruling coalition, compromises must be found, which can create high internal tensions within the radical right‐wing populist party. Joining government can thus have its price: a crisis of party identity and a strong compulsion to moderate.

From ‘Anomaly’ to ‘Laboratory’? Fratelli d’Italia, Illiberalism and the Study of Right-Wing Parties in Western Europe

“…But the comparison between the two situations, rather than a mainstreaming of authoritarianism, can probably be better understood in the context of a very different political scenario. While populist parties in general have indeed mainstreamed, in Western Europe, this has meant that all PRRP – with the notable exception of the Swiss Schweizerische Volkspartei (SVP), operating in a very peculiar institutional system – have moderated in government (Capaul and Ewert, 2021).…”

Going Local, Going Mainstream? Ethnographic Study of Two French Cities Governed by the Rassemblement National

“…While 'inclusion-moderation' theories (Tepe 2019) suggest a moderating effect, other empirical findings present a more nuanced picture (Akkerman et al 2016;Caiani and Graziano 2022;Zulianello 2019). They demonstrate that de-radicalization is not an automatic process but depends on multiple factors, such as the party's political tradition and strategies (Albertazzi and McDonnell 2010;Bartha et al 2020), internal organization and leadership (Bernhard 2020;Zaslove 2012) and the power balance between radical and mainstream forces in coalitions (Askim et al 2022;Capaul and Ewert 2021).…”

Walking the Tightrope: Populist Radical Right Parties’ Framing of ‘Good’ and ‘Bad’ Migrants in Belgium and Switzerland

“…The 'inclusion-moderation' thesis might suggest that electoral success and inclusion in political systems might trigger processes of moderation and mainstreaming (a term that underlines the relative nature of 'moderation' within a wider political system) (Akkerman et al, 2016). However, studies have shown that moderation does not or only partially occurs (Akkerman & Rooduijn, 2015;Capaul & Ewert, 2021). Mainstreaming does not occur on parties' radical ideological positions but is visible in the tempering of anti-establishment attitudes and extreme right reputations (Akkerman et al, 2016: 276-278).…”

“…The party's framing of Muslims as a cultural out-group was further illustrated by campaigns for the ban on minarets in 2009, against facilitated naturalization in 2017, and for a ban on concealment in 2020. In this context, the SVP's front stage performance (Wodak, 2015) conveys both the impression of a euphemistic care about the Swiss economy and Swiss identity without being moderate in its demands (Capaul & Ewert, 2021).…”

“…Radical statements, the launch of controversial initiatives on migration, emphasizing Swiss values, and its opposition to government actions allow them to stay in power, as the constantly high voter share since the mid-1990s demonstrates -quite the opposite to the dynamics of the VB. Owing to low voter volatility and efficient use of direct democratic instruments, the party is able to play a dual role of being both in government and in opposition without moderation (Albertazzi & Mueller, 2013, Capaul & Ewert, 2021. Despite possible tensions with regional branches, the national party's radical immigration agenda and anti-EU rhetoric were important reasons for its electoral appeal (Skenderovic, 2007).…”