The Far Right Challenge Comment on "The Rise of Post-truth Populism in Pluralist Liberal Democracies: Challenges for Health Policy".

Daphne Halikiopoulou

doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2017.82

Abstract

Speed and Mannion make a good case that the rise of populism poses significant challenges for health policy. This commentary suggests that the link between populism and health policy should be further nuanced in four ways. First, a deconstruction of the term populism itself and a focus on the far right dimension of populist politics; second, a focus on the supply side and more specifically the question of nationalism and the ‘national preference’; third, the dynamics of party competition during economic crisis; and fourth the question of policy, and more specifically the extent to which certain labour market policies are able to mediate demand for the far right.

Highlights

Populism: The Far Right Dimension European elections are increasingly dominated by a particular style of politics: a focus on the ‘people’ against established elites, a ‘post-truth’ communication style and an emphasis on national sovereignty
This is the type of politics that a large body of literature describes as ‘populism’[1]: either a thin ideology which can cut across ideological cleavages[2]; or a discursive style, a strategic choice adopted by political actors in order to increase their appeal.[3]
The far right may be understood as an umbrella term that encompasses both ‘old’ and ‘new,’[9] ie, both extreme and radical variants: while all far right parties focus on one form of nationalism or another, they differ in their relationship with democracy, the extent to which they endorse and adopt violence, and the extent to which they distance themselves from fascism and racism.[8]

Summary

Introduction

A key aspect relevant for health policy - and welfare policies more broadly - is that most of the parties that have been electorally successful on a ‘populist’ platform share their emphasis on ‘the national preference’: ie, they advocate policies that give native groups sole or priority access to welfare provisions and the collective goods of the state.

Results

Conclusion