To Democratize or to Protect? How the Response to Anti‐System Parties Reshapes the EU's Transnational Party System

Abstract

This article studies how efforts to democratize the European Union's (EU) decision-making procedures are reshaped by the growing influence of anti-system parties in Europe. This new political landscape exacerbates a fundamental democratic dilemma for the EU: to either open up, and further democratize its institutions or to work to protect those institutions from the influence of anti-systemic actors. The article analyses how political elites engage with this dilemma by studying a process unfolding from 2010 to 2019 through which reforms to the EU's transnational party system were introduced. Building on extensive interview and debate data the analysis demonstrates that, while a democratizing logic informed early stages of the process, a protective logic gradually became dominant. The article goes on to discuss the possible implications of this shift for the continued democratization of the EU and identifies this dimension in EU politics as a pertinent field for further study.

The Conference on the Future of Europe as a chance for democratic catching up? Towards a citizen-centred perspective on constitutional renewal in the European Union

“…Moreover, even in the normal mode, intergovernmental policies in the Council suffer from a structural lack of transparency, shielding controversial issues from public debate, which counteracts the de facto depth of structural integration. As Peter Mair and others have argued, without the possibility for contestation within the European Union, dissatisfaction quickly translates into structural contestation of the European Union, and in turn provokes a retreat to a 'protective logic' to push back anti-democratic actors ( de Witte 2018;Mair 2013;Norman 2021). Furthermore, the European Union's institutional set-up fosters an 'authoritarian equilibrium': with its ingrained reluctance to interfere in domestic politics, the European Union has allowed some member governments to backslide towards competitive authoritarianism, while funding and investment from the European Union help to sustain these regimes (Keleman 2020).…”

(Disap)pointing in the Mirror: The European Parliament’s Obligations to Protect EU Basic Values in Member States and at EU Level

“…As concerns Europarties and European political foundations, protection of EU values was strengthened by amending long existing (but never enforced) rules that lay down the requirement that EU-funding to Europarties can only be issued on the condition that in their programme and actions basic EU values (Article 2 TEU) are complied with (Grasso & Perrone, 2019;Katsaitis, 2020;Morijn, 2019aMorijn, , 2019bNorman, 2021;Norman & Wolfs, 2022;Saitto, 2017;Wolfs & Smulders, 2018) Next to a check on whether establishment criteria to set up a Europarty or European Political Foundation are fulfilled, part of the requirement is a written pledge of allegiance to the basic EU values Article 2 TEU. Failure to register with the APPF means not receiving any EU-funding.…”

Is the Governance of Europe's Transnational Party System Contributing to EU Democracy?*

“…In some cases, this was even a real threat to the survival of the party (Respondents 1, 2, 3 and 4). It should be noted that the initial proposal from the Commission, defended by the main political groups, included an even sharper decrease of the flat‐rate share to 5 per cent, mainly aimed at keeping anti‐system actors, populists and the far‐right from gaining power within the European party system (Norman, 2017, 2021; Morijn, 2019). Assessed in the context of the already significant hurdles in place for receiving funding as a European political party these changes work to further reduce the contestability of the system.…”

“…The governance of the Europarty system power within the European party system (Norman, 2017(Norman, , 2021Morijn, 2019). Assessed in the context of the already significant hurdles in place for receiving funding as a European political party these changes work to further reduce the contestability of the system.…”