Populism Around The World: Beyond The “Charismatic Leader”
This webinar took place in October 2020 and brought together Dr. Daniele Albertazzi of the University of Birmingham and Stijn van Kessel of Queen Mary University of London and Julien Mercille of University College Dublin. The discussion was moderated by Professor Scott Lucas from the University of Birmingham.
Dr. Albertazzi and Dr. van Kessel kicked off the discussion by presenting the preliminary findings of their ongoing Populism in Action Project. Dr. Van Kessel introduced the focus of the project, which is the creation of activist communities through the ‘mass party’ model, and the growing popularity of far-right populist parties. Dr. Albertazzi then addressed three issues that their research has identified: territorial presence, communication strategies, and concentration of power.
Julien Mercille then spoke about populism in Ireland, focusing on the failure of far-right populist parties to secure wide-scale support from the Irish public. After each of these presentations, the session was opened to a broader discussion through Q&A.
Populism in Action Project Overview
Populism in Action evaluates the activism of and participation in Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. It focuses on four parties which were chosen, as Dr. Albertazzi emphasises, for their “willingness to invest” in the ‘mass party’ model: the Italian League, the Flemish Interest, the Finn’s Party and the Swiss People’s Party. The project examines if these parties are reviving the seemingly fading ‘mass party’. The current stage of their research is focused on the adoption this model from the elite perspective. They intend in future to also conduct research on the perspective of the party members.
Territorial Presence and Communication Strategies
These parties have widespread, if nonuniform, territorial presence in their respective countries, due to their investment in local branches of the party. This is a costly and complex investment for these parties, and yet, as Dr. Albertazzi explains, “what is important is there is no talk of moving away from such a complex and costly and extensive organization”. Instead of relying primarily on social media, they treat these online platforms as only complementary to their more formal activity. The project has found that their hesitancy to move primarily online lies in the risk of losing their central content control, as they have limited control over online discourse. Early indications in the study have also shown that a combination of strong territorial presence with clever communication strategies is conducive to creating a strong relationship between the party leader(s) and their sympathisers.
Concentration of Power
The project research has confirmed that populist parties allow leaders, or executive figures, to control the parties. The leaders’ role is to centralise issues such as strategy, alliances, and administration. They also act as the image of the party; the brand that is projected to the public. These parties offer limited power to their ordinary members. They provide what Dr. Albertazzi terms as “participation without power”, in providing a community of like-minded people where policy can be discussed but few opportunities to influence the parties are granted to them.
Populist parties that do come into political power retain their control by pointing to foreign elites. They preserve their credibility through their discourse and framing of the ‘Other’.
The Irish Situation
Dr. Mercille talks about how a number of populist movements have emerged in Ireland, yet these movements have not gained significant traction. Populist parties like the Irish National Party and Irish Freedom Party have not garnered public support like they have done elsewhere in Europe. The reason for this is not readily apparent. Dr. Mercille suggests that “rather than trying to find the ultimate cause, it’s probably more productive to think of [it] as an amalgamation of contexts and initial conditions and causes that could or could not lead to [the level of support] like there is in other countries”. For instance, Ireland has not seen the emergence of a ‘Charismatic Leader’ figure, which has been pivotal to the success of populist groups, particularly in the United States.
Populism in Media
Dr. Van Kessel outlines the dichotomy between far-left and far-right populism as an interest in socio-economic issues for the former, versus cultural issues for the latter. Far-right populist parties have emerged not because of the dissemination of misinformation, but rather, as Dr. Van Kessel explains, because “the media has a large role in making issues more salient than they would otherwise be”. Dr. Mercille posits that in the case of the United States, their right-wing concentrates on cultural issues as a result of their non-substantive socio-economic policy. However, Dr. Van Kessel counter-argues that these cultural issues would have been raised by populist parties regardless, due to increased globalisation and media attention.
You can read more about Populism in Action Project here.
Michaela Plunkett is a MA student at UCD Clinton Institute.