Revenge of the Radical Right

Buštíková, Lenka

doi:10.1177/0010414013516069

Cited by 180 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The existence of polarization in the electorate has been suggested as a factor contributing to radical parties' success (Merrill and Adams, 2002;Ezrow et al, 2014b): in a nutshell, the idea is that where the public is polarized, politicians have an incentive to push more extreme views in order to appeal to the larger number of voters ideologically distant from the center. This has been supported by cross-national evidence that such parties do fare better when the public is more polarized (Bustikova, 2014;Ezrow et al, 2014a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Populist radical right parties and mass polarization in the Netherlands

Silva¹

2017

Eur. Pol. Sci. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radical parties have been found to succeed under conditions of mass polarization. It is argued that their message resonates better with voters at the extremes of an ideological spectrum. This paper investigates if the reverse also holds, meaning that radical parties may contribute to the polarization of the public. I test this claim in the Netherlands, a country that has experienced the rise of populist radical right parties since 2002, using a synthetic control model built with a pool of comparable countries and Eurobarometer survey data. Results show that, after the rise of Pim Fortuyn and Geert Wilders, the level of polarization among the Dutch public increased more than it otherwise would have. These findings contribute to understanding the connection between elite-and mass-level polarization, and the consequences of populist radical right parties' emergence in Western Europe.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Populist radical right parties and mass polarization in the Netherlands

Silva¹

2017

Eur. Pol. Sci. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The emphasis on a loss of an idealized past also calls into question the role of incumbent elites and their failure to protect the interests of the people ( ibid .). Framing their appeal in opposition to the establishment enables supporters to claim that support ‘does not originate in hatred against minorities but rather in opposition to policies that accommodate their demands and the political advancement of minorities’ (Bustikova, : 1741). Such an approach further distances these radical right groups from extremist actors and strengthens appeals to ‘common sense’.…”

Section: Positioning Far Right Movements and Strategies Of Roma Stigmmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Get out of Traian Square!’: Roma Stigmatization as a Mobilizing Tool for the Far Right in Timişoara, Romania

Creţan¹,

O’Brien²

2019

Int J Urban Regional Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Post‐communist Central and Eastern Europe has seen far right movements and parties gain considerable ground by drawing on nativist and ethnic claims to call for a return to an imagined past. In Romania, far right groups have been able to capitalize on a sense of injustice while also playing on historically negative feelings towards the Roma community. These patterns have been observed in Timişoara, where the group Noua Dreaptă (New Right) has established a foothold over the past decade by emphasizing claims that blame the Roma for loss of built heritage and corruption in the administration of property restitution. The aims of this article are to examine the emergence of Noua Dreaptă and its use of Roma stigmatization, and to consider the ways in which extreme views are normalized by appealing to beliefs and perceptions. The findings of the article show that pre‐existing prejudices can be a powerful force that not only targets marginalized communities, but also challenges administrative practices and builds organizational support. At the level of the city, it is possible to identify the way in which these claims can be more precisely calibrated to draw on concerns that circulate within the community.

show abstract

“…Autonomy is unlikely to satisfy a group's demands for selfrule, in this view, and is much more likely to reinforce ethnic particularism and prejudices by providing group leaders with the symbolic and material resources needed to mobilize co-ethnics against the state (Ghai, 2000). This form of minority concession may also engender a strong political backlash (Bustikova, 2014). In short, scholars have argued that autonomy serves as the basis for secessionism by sharpening borders, "constructing" nations, and fostering centrifugal incentives among regional elites (Cornell, 2002;Slezkine, 1994;Streat-Bartlett, 2009).…”

Section: A Theory Of Lost Autonomymentioning

confidence: 99%

Lost Autonomy, Nationalism and Separatism

Siroky

Cuffe

2014

Comparative Political Studies

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Case studies suggest that ethnic groups with autonomous institutional arrangements are more prone to secede, but other evidence indicates that autonomy reduces the likelihood of secession. To address this debate, we disaggregate their autonomy status into three categoriescurrently autonomous, never autonomous, and lost autonomy-and then unpack how each shapes the logic of collective action. We argue groups that were never autonomous are unlikely to mobilize due to a lack of collective action capacity, whereas currently autonomous groups may have the capacity but often lack the motivation. Most important, groups that have lost autonomy often possess both strong incentives and the capacity to pursue secession, which facilitates collective action. Moreover, autonomy retraction weakens the government's ability to make future credible commitments to redress grievances. We test these conjectures with data on the autonomous status and separatist behavior of 324 groups in more than 100 countries from 1960 to 2000. Our analysis shows clear empirical results regarding the relationship between autonomy status and separatism. Most notably, we find that formerly autonomous groups are the most likely to secede, and that both currently autonomous and never autonomous groups are much less likely. Keywords nationalism, separatism, decentralization, autonomy Does autonomy satisfy the demand for more self-determination, or instead foster the capacity and whet the appetite for independence? Is political 2 Comparative Political Studies XX(X) decentralization a viable solution for multiethnic states, or a slippery slope? Some scholars and policymakers see autonomy as the main mechanism to resolve tensions and redistributive issues between the central government and spatially concentrated, culturally distinct groups (Bermeo, 2002;Bermeo & Amoretti, 2003;L. Diamond, 1999;Stepan, 1999). Others studies, however, show that autonomy can actually exacerbate relations between the state and ethnic groups, for it cultivates the capacity for collective action and self-rule without significantly reducing desire for more of it (Brancati, 2009;Bunce, 1999;Coppieters, 2001;Cornell, 2002;Roeder, 1991).This article posits that the theoretical and empirical disagreement over the effect of autonomy is partly due to conflating two distinct situations in the implicit reference category-groups that are not autonomous. This binary classification compares groups that are currently autonomous to a baseline that is comprised of both groups that have never been autonomous, and those that once had autonomy, but lost it. Groups that have never been autonomous and those that have lost autonomy are distinct in their motivation and their capacity for collective action. Whereas never autonomous groups may be unlikely to mobilize due to a lack of collective action capacity, currently autonomous groups may have such capacity, but should find the cost of attempting to alter the status quo too high compared with the benefits they currently enjoy from being auton...

show abstract

Revenge of the Radical Right

Cited by 180 publications

References 63 publications

Populist radical right parties and mass polarization in the Netherlands

Populist radical right parties and mass polarization in the Netherlands

‘Get out of Traian Square!’: Roma Stigmatization as a Mobilizing Tool for the Far Right in Timişoara, Romania

Lost Autonomy, Nationalism and Separatism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About