OPINION
Austrian
elections are a wake-up call to Europe
Voters
narrowly saved the country from a far-right presidency, but it’s
not much to celebrate.
By CAS MUDDE
5/24/16, 12:22 PM CET
The fact that we are
celebrating the outcome of an election in which a far-right candidate
got almost 50 percent of the vote shows how dramatically things have
changed in Europe. Green party candidate Alexander Van der Bellen won
50.3 percent of the vote to right-wing Norbert Hofer’s 49.7 percent
— hardly a comfortable margin.
In the 1980s tens of
thousands of people protested the entry of a single MP of the
far-right Center Party (CP) in the Netherlands. In 2000 European
countries boycotted the new Austrian government, because it included
the Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ).
And today, we
celebrate the fact that the Austrian far-right was defeated by the
narrowest of margins. Meanwhile, a neo-Nazi party enter has entered a
national parliament in Cyprus — a fact that has largely gone
unnoticed, let alone protested. Europe has come a long way — and
not in the way we had expected.
* * *
Although Hofer was
narrowly defeated at the eleventh hour, the results of these Austrian
elections should still serve as a wake-up call to all European
liberal democrats.
Many have relied on
the pseudo-science that radical parties and politicians have
so-called “glass ceilings” of support — a direct consequence of
the fact that they are both very popular and very unpopular. Donald
Trump is a perfect case in point in the United States.
The truth is that
these ceilings are relative and temporary. They depend heavily on
political context. When this context changes — as a result of the
refugee crisis, for example, or a corruption scandal — that
“ceiling” shifts.
Neither can voters
be relied on to bail out “democratic” candidates. At least since
the French presidential elections of 2002, when a very unpopular
Jacques Chirac had a decisive win in a run-off against National Front
(FN) founder Jean-Marie Le Pen, commentators convinced themselves
that far-right politicians could not win majorities.
Voters might save
France once more from a Le Pen presidency in 2017 — the way they
stepped up in regional elections last year — but this phenomenon
will increasingly become the exception rather than the rule. Note the
only marginally higher turnout in the second round in Austria —
72.7 percent, up from 68.5 in the first — and the slim margin by
which Hofer was defeated (31,026 votes).
Increasingly,
elections have become choices between unfavorable options. People
cast their vote for what they consider the better of two evils
There is no doubt
that far-right parties are profiting from a “perfect storm:”
Europe is “besieged” by immigrants and “threatened” by jihadi
terrorism. But to see their success as merely a consequence of recent
crises ignores the more structural causes that launched these parties
in the mid-1990s. Let’s not forget that parties like the Belgian
Vlaams Belang, the French National Front (FN), the Italian Northern
League (LN) as well as the FPÖ had similar results in the decades
before the latest recession.
What is new is not
simply the rapid growth in support for the far-right — it is the
explosion of broader political dissatisfaction. As the self-professed
“democratic parties” lose favor, more and more people no longer
see a fundamental difference between established parties and those of
the far-right. Both are equally (il)legitimate.
Increasingly,
elections have become choices between unfavorable options. People
cast their vote for what they consider the better of two evils. The
upcoming U.S. presidential elections, mostly likely between two
candidates with a majority unfavorable score among registered voters,
are an extreme example of this phenomenon.
As a result, many
voters do not deeply support a far-right political agenda and
election winners are almost destined to lose in the next election —
to someone considered a “less bad” alternative.
* * *
The Austrian case is
also a powerful reminder of the end of “big parties” in Europe.
Austria — alongside Greece and Spain — was known as a country
with two major parties. Together, the established parties would
attract between 80 and 90 percent of the national vote. These days
are over, probably forever, and reflect structural social changes.
In the first round
of the Austrian presidential elections, the center-left Social
Democratic Party (SPÖ) and the center-right Austrian People’s
Party (ÖVP) gained a mere 11 percent each. In current polls for the
parliamentary elections both hover around 20 percent.
The same phenomenon
can be seen across Europe. In many countries, no party attracts more
than one-third of the vote. In some, like Belgium and the
Netherlands, no party will get more than one-quarter of the vote.
Within this new political context, far-right parties have gained
unprecedented influence, not only because they have grown in size,
but because others have shrunk.
Most mainstream
parties have stated they will never govern with “non-democratic”
parties and spare little effort to lament the alleged “dangers”
of the far-right. Few parties have been as adamant on this point as
the SPÖ. But despite years of open opposition towards the FPÖ —
and pressure put on fellow social democratic parties to ostracize
far-right parties in their own countries and in the European
Parliament — the SPÖ was quiet when it really mattered.
In a run-off between
a far right and a Green candidate, the party refused to officially
endorse Alexander Van der Bellen, a professorial Green politician who
is so moderate he could almost be an Austrian social democrat.
There is only one
possible explanation for this opportunistic (and hypocritical)
silence: The SPÖ is (once again) eyeing a coalition with the FPÖ
after the next elections — as has already happened on a smaller
scale in the state of Burgenland.
So the far-right is
no longer “niche.” Academics still discuss them as “challenger
parties” or “niche parties,” outside of so-called “mainstream”
politics.
But parties like the
FPÖ, the Danish People’s Party, the National Front, the Italian
Northern League and the Swiss People’s Party have become just as
“established” and “mainstream” as the social democrats in
their respective countries.
They have been
around for decades and have well-developed party organizations.
Dismissing their place in the mainstream ignores fundamental changes
to the political context, in which issues like immigration and
security dominate the political agenda, and pluralities, if not
majorities, of the population are closer to the positions of the far
right than those of the mainstream. If we continue to ignore this new
reality, we could end up paying a very high price.
Cas Mudde is
associate professor in the School of Public and International Affairs
(SPIA) at the University of Georgia and researcher in the Center for
Research on Extremism (C-REX) at the University of Oslo. He is the
author of “On Extremism and Democracy in Europe” (Routledge,
2016). He tweets at @casmudde.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário