Cas Mudde Research Articles

Right-Wing Populist Parties - A Pathological Normalcy? A Study of Right-Wing Populist Parties in Germany

This chapter challenges the common explanation for the success or failure of right-wing populism, conducting a theory-testing analysis. Right-wing populist parties are often viewed as a temporary phenomenon, caused by some form of a crisis that weakened society. Cas Mudde offered an alternative explanation, claiming that the core sentiments of right-wing populism are rooted in society. Three concepts – authoritarianism, nativism and populism – are assumed to form the basis of right-wing populism. Examining party programs, public statements and secondary literature on the German parties Die Republikaner, Schill-Partei and Alternative fur Deutschland, this chapter identifies to what extent the three notions are reflected in the parties’ ideologies. Next, the chapter looks at public opinion surveys in order to detect those sentiments within the German society. The analysis reveals that the three notions are not only part of the parties’ ideologies, but are also consistently present in the German public opinion. The findings furthermore indicate that the success or failure of right-wing populist parties depends on their ability to deal with organisational struggles, to broaden their agenda and to provide a charismatic leader. As a consequence, this study of right-wing populism shows that explaining the surge of such parties based on the occurrence of crisis might be a convenient argument by those who neglect that the problem goes deeper.

A Critical Review of Recent Literature on Populism

This is a review article of the following five recent studies on populism: 1) Ruth Wodak’s <em>The Politics of Fear: What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean</em> (Sage, 2015); 2) Benjamin Moffitt’s <em>The Global Rise of Populism: Performance, Political Style and Representation</em> (Stanford University Press, 2016); 3) Cas Mudde and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser’s <em>Populism: A Very Short Introduction</em> (Oxford University Press, 2017); 4) Jan-Werner Müller’s <em>What is Populism?</em> (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2016); and 5) John B. Judis’ <em>The Populist Explosion: How the Great Recession Transformed American and European Politics</em> (Columbia Global Reports, 2016). The review argues for a return to early Frankfurt School Critical Theory to address some of the shortcomings of these studies.

Accomplishments and limitations of the ‘new’ mainstream in contemporary populism studies

Two recent books on populism represent more than any other the new mainstream in populism studies. Through a reconstruction of the main arguments advanced by Jan-Werner Müller, on the one hand, and Cas Mudde and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser, on the other, this article aims to highlight both the significant accomplishments as well as the main limitations of this orientation. Special attention is given to the way in which the two projects deal with the relationship between populism and democracy. In this respect, substantial differences emerge between them, largely due to the different scope of each intervention: Müller articulates a polemical argument, while Mudde and Kaltwasser seem to encompass a more nuanced research agenda. And yet, despite all their differences, the two books share a common definitional basis when they identify moralization and moralism as the kernel of populist ideology. It is here, however, that the shaky basis of the new mainstream is revealed. Apart from betraying substantive continuities with a discredited Cold War pluralism, this moralistic stress seems ultimately inadequate to function as the central criterion for the differential identification of populism.

Mladi u Hrvatskoj i populizam: analiza »plodnog tla« za razvoj populizma među mladima u gradu Zagrebu primjenom mješovite metode

A number of recent international studies have reported the growing electoral success of populist parties among younger age groups. In this study, authors analysed the “breeding ground” for populism among the youth in Zagreb using the results of the Memory, Youth, Political Legacy and Civic Engagement (MYPLACE) project in Croatia. A mixed methods approach was employed with thematic analysis of 61 semi- structured interviews and regression analysis on a survey sample data of 1, 216 young people aged 16–25. Qualitative analysis indicated analogies to Cas Mudde’s three core concepts of populism (the “good people”, the “bad elite” and the “general will”) among interviewees’ opinions. In addition, common ideological features of populism (nationalism and radical egalitarianism) were to a degree present among the interviewees’ attitudes. In the quantitative part of this paper, the authors narrowed the analysis of populism to the radical right variant of populism, and – given the lack of prominent populist actors in Croatia – to support of ideas rather than political parties. The attitude towards a political system with a strong leader not constrained by parliament was chosen as the outcome since it holds significant populist potential in contemporary democracies. Analyses showed the connection of the anti-elite, anti- systemic attitudes – as well as authoritarianism and a few right-wing political attitudes – with the strong leader preference. Both qualitative and quantitative results of this study indicated that the “breeding ground” for populism exists among the youth in Zagreb. Additional research is required to further examine that complex and previously unexplored topic.

Ein betrunkener Gast?

This paper examines the influence of populist radical-right parties (PRRPs) on the democratic quality in Europe. We build on both, theoretical work and qualitative evaluations on the influence of populism on democratic quality. We follow Cas Mudde and Cristobal Rovira Kaltwasser’s (2012) distinction between populism in government and populism in opposition. We expect populism in opposition to function as a corrective. That is to say, it acts as a “drunken guest” who blurts out painful truths (e. g. issues which are ignored by other parties or shortcomings of policy outputs). In government, however, it is likely to harm democratic quality since it does not respect the rules of public contestation (e. g. undermining the legitimacy of democratic institutions). Furthermore, we contend that the effect’s size is moderated by the level of consolidation, and in the case of PRRPs in government, by the specific type of government. Our empirical tests reveal evidence for the effects of PRRPs in government. We further demonstrate the moderating influence of the cabinet type, adding to the existing literature by offering a comparative, large-n study and testing qualitative derived theory in a cross country setting.

Does Canadian Multiculturalism Survive through State Repression?

Emma Ambrose and Cas Mudde argued in this journal that the absence of far-right parties in Canada can be attributed, among other factors, to “strong state repression of dissent” on multiculturalism policy. This article provides numerous examples of such dissent, to show that the state repression invoked by Ambrose and Mudde does not exist. The article also argues that certain “supply-side” explanations for the absence of a strong far-right apply to the Canadian case. It notes, in particular, how Steven Harper's Conservative government occupied much of the political space that might otherwise have been available for far-right challengers.

Populism or National-Populism? A Critical Approach to Cas Mudde's Perspective on SYRIZA's Populism

Cas Mudde's book on SYRIZA's “failure of populist promises,” which recently appeared in Greek, lends itself to multiple, successive readings of the current Greek populist experience in a comparative setting. One of the leading political scientists currently researching the populist phenomenon in both its radical-right and radical-left varieties, Mudde combines thorough knowledge of his subject matter's ideological premises with a thorough analysis of his factual material, namely, the empirical cases he sets out to investigate. Indeed, it is to Mudde that we owe the term “pathological normalcy,” denoting the current form of radical-right populism in Europe. Mudde has used this…

Three decades of populist radical right parties in Western Europe: So what?

[Three decades of populist radical right parties in Western Europe: So what?] The populist radical right constitutes the most successful party family in post-war Western Europe. Many accounts in both academia and the media warn of the growing influence of populist radical right parties, the so-called right turn of European politics, but few provide empirical evidence of it. This article by Cas Mudde provides a first comprehensive analysis of the alleged effects of the populist radical right on the people, parties, policies and polities of Western Europe. The conclusions are sobering. The effects are largely limited to the broader immigration issue, and even here populist radical right parties should be seen as catalysts rather than initiators. Despite their limited impact there is still reason to believe that the populist radical right parties might increase their influence in the near future. But even in the unlikely event that these parties will become major players in West European politics, it is unlikely that this will lead to a fundamental transformation of the political system. The populist radical right is, according to Mudde, not a normal pathology of European democracy, unrelated to its basic values, but a pathological normalcy , which strives for the radicalisation of mainstream values. Publication history: Translation of the article “Three decades of populist radical right parties in Western Europe: So what?” from European Journal of Political Research , volume 52, number 1 2013 (DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2012.02065.x ). (Published 18 April 2016) Citation: Mudde, Cas (2016) “Tre decennier av populistiska radikalhögerpartier i Västeuropa”, in Det vita fältet III. Samtida forskning om högerextremism , special issue of Arkiv. Tidskrift för samhällsanalys , issue 5, pp. 67–91. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.13068/2000-6217.5.3

Friend or Foe? Testing the Influence of Populism on Democratic Quality in Latin America

This article examines the influence of populism on democratic quality in Latin America. It draws on findings of qualitative work on this question as well as a theoretical framework by Cas Mudde and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser to test whether the assumptions and results of both are applicable in a comparative study. It is expected that populist actors have a negative impact on democratic quality when they are in government, but that they positively influence democratic quality when they are in opposition, where they can function as a corrective. Further, it is expected that these effects vary depending on the level of consolidation. A linear mixed-effects model and data from eighteen Latin American countries in the period 1995–2009 was used to evaluate the hypotheses. Generally, it was found that populist actors in opposition have a large positive influence on democratic quality and that populist actors in government have a negative influence.

Youth and the Extreme Right by Cas Mudde, ed., Idebate Press 2014. 249 pages.

Youth and the Extreme Right by Cas Mudde, ed., Idebate Press 2014. 249 pages.

Skizze einer vergleichenden Forschungsagenda zum Populismus

Both in public opinion and the realm of the social sciences a common definition of populism is absent. The concept of populism has been used to refer to such a variety of phenomena, that it is more than problematical for undertaking comparative analysis. In this paper I discuss different methodological approaches to define populism and I argue that a minimal concept of populism is the most fruitful approach to develop a comparative research agenda. To show this, I compare the minimal definitions developed by Kurt Weyland (populism as a political strategy) and Cas Mudde (populism as a thin-centered ideology). Moreover, I explain why Mudde's definition should be the starting point for a comparative research agenda on populism. To conclude, I show that this minimal definition is helpful for analyzing the ambivalent relationship between populism and democracy.

All the shades of red: examining the radical left's Euroscepticism

This paper seeks to apply the relevance of Euroscepticism literature to the study of radical left party outlooks on European integration and by doing so: (1) outlines general patterns of opposition to European integration, by 11 radical left parties that are housed in the European United Left/Nordic Green Left group of the European Parliament, in the 1990s and beyond; (2) assesses the congruence between the outlooks of these parties or the lack thereof; and (3) illuminates the factors conditioning these outlooks by addressing the ideology–strategy debate. To this end, the paper employs two, widely referenced and historically relevant, analytical frameworks of party-based Euroscepticism (by Paul Taggart and Aleks Szczerbiak, and by Petr Kopecký and Cas Mudde), and applies them to the radical left as a whole and its various sub-sets, as identified by the literature so far. The analysis leads to the following three findings. First, a moderating approach can be observed on average, thus leading to an increase in overall congruence. Second, congruence increases slightly, as we move towards a more specific typology but overall no systematic congruence is to be found in the radical left as a whole or most of its sub-sets, in the period examined. Third, while ideology carries causal weight, strategy appears more prominent as a conditioning factor of outlooks.

Review Symposium on Cas Mudde's Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe Preface

Review Symposium on Cas Mudde's <i>Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe</i> Preface

Developments in Central and East European politics

Defining Central and Eastern Europe Judy Batt From Communist to Postcommunist Politics Mark Pittaway The Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland Frances Millard The Other New Europeans Tim Haughton The Western Balkans Judy Batt The East Europeans: Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova Andrew Wilson Central and Eastern Europe and the EU Heather Grabbe Executive Leadership Ray Taras Structures of Representation Petr Kopecky Electoral Systems Sarah Birch Political Parties Paul G. Lewis Citizens and Politics Krzysztof Jasiewicz Civil Society Cas Mudde Constitutional Politics Krzysztof Jasiewicz Managing Transition Economics D. Mario Nuti The Quality of Postcommunist Democracy Dirk Berg-Schlosser

Nation, State, Europe and national revival in Hungarian party politics: the case of the millennial commemorations

POST-COMMUNIST TRANSFORMATION CONFRONTS all countries involved with questions of state redefinition. The strains that can be generated by these questions have been most evident, and most examined, in states newly emerged from the Czechoslovak, Soviet or Yugoslav federations and/or those with significant ethnic minorities. However, even in relatively old and ethnically homogeneous states, these issues cannot be tackled without engaging varying understandings of the national identity and the relationship between state and nation.! This article investigates the conceptions of the nature and purpose of the state presented by party political elites in one such state, Hungary. Hungary's relative ethnic homogeneity means that there has been no significant practical contestation about which national group the post-communist state is 'of and for', in Brubaker's terms.2 That is, questions have not arisen about public language use, for example (as between the language of the state's titular nationality and another, minority, national group), as has occurred in several other post-communist countries with larger and less assimilated minorities. Similarly, Hungary's well-established status has obviated any need to excavate a little-known national past to legitimate the state's existence. As then Prime Minister Viktor Orbtin commented in 1999, Hungarians could 'forget the word, invent Hungary. Hungary was invented quite well enough a thousand years ago, by St Stephen himself'.3 However, a 'national question' has consistently been identified as the single dominant dimension of the country's post-communist party competition.4 Partly, this dimension comprises familiar left-right differences over secularism and progressivism versus religiosity and cultural and social traditionalism. However, in the Hungarian context, as in many others, these differences also encompass divergent understandings of the national identity and of the nature and value of nationhood in general." In this respect, elite political competition since 1990 in part continues a central debate of modem Hungarian political and intellectual life, about what the Hungarian nation is and what its relationship to the Hungarian state should be.6 Prior to the 1920 Treaty of Trianon this debate indeed partly concerned the relationship between Hungarians, groups by then identified as being of other nationalities, and the Hungarian state. Since the