Tjitske Akkerman

Comparing Radical Right Parties in Government: Immigration and Integration Policies in Nine Countries (1996–2010)

This article investigates the direct influence of radical right parties on immigration and integration policies by comparing the output of 27 cabinets of varying composition in nine countries in the period between 1996 and 2010. A Nationalist Immigration and Integration Policy index has been developed to measure legislative changes with regard to citizenship and denizenship, asylum, illegal residence, family reunion and integration. The comparative analysis of immigration and integration legislation shows that the policy output of cabinets including radical right parties deviates significantly from centre-left and centre cabinets, but does not differ much from that of centre-right cabinets. The quantitative analysis makes clear that although parties matter, radical right parties do not matter in particular. A case by case analysis confirms that the direct impact of radical right parties on policy output has been severely limited by the difficulties these parties face in adapting to public office.

‘Women and children first!’ Anti-immigration parties and gender in Norway and the Netherlands

ABSTRACT Immigration, multiculturalism and citizenship policies have deeply divided political parties in Western Europe. In Norway and the Netherlands these divisions have been exploited successfully by radical-right populist parties. Akkerman and Hagelund compare the ideas and policies of the Norwegian Fremskrittspartiet (Progress Party) and the Dutch Lijst Pim Fortuyn (List Pim Fortuyn) with regard to cultural diversity, immigration and citizenship policies. What initially puzzled them was that issues that are normally left out of the radical-right agenda—such as gender equality, liberal family laws and womens participation in the labour market—seem to have been moved centre-stage in the policies and discourses of these parties. This is a development worthy of closer scrutiny. In Norway and the Netherlands, one can observe a general shift away from multiculturalism and a growing emphasis on citizenship and social cohesion. The issue of womens rights seems to provide a key to developing a renewed understanding of the boundaries of cultural diversity in these countries. To what extent have the radical-right parties provoked a rhetorical turn and policy shift towards cultural unity in Norway and the Netherlands, and to what extent are the programmes of these parties based on a defence of liberal values and gender equality?

Anti-immigrant parties and the defence of liberal values. The exceptional case of the List Pim Fortuyn

The radical right parties that have emerged in Western Europe during the past thirty years have sometimes been labelled as anti-liberal. This is a puzzling qualification, considering the fact that the Flemish Block, the Austrian Freedom Party, the Northern League in Italy, the Danish Peoples Party, the Norwegian Progress Party and, above all, the List Pim Fortuyn have promoted themselves as uncompromising defenders of liberal principles. The leaders of these parties have embraced freedom of expression, separation of church and state, and the equality of men and women to build a case against immigration. Is the defence of liberal values a core concern of these parties or are these parties actually anti-liberal? This paper investigates the relations between populist, nationalist and liberal ideas, focussing on the exceptional case of the LPF.

Friend or foe? Right-wing populism and the popular press in Britain and the Netherlands

The popular press is supposed to display more sympathy for populist parties. This article investigates whether popular newspapers have a stronger tendency than serious newspapers to share the anti-establishment position of populist parties. It also tests the assumption that populist parties and the popular press share a tendency to personalize politics. The popular press in Britain and in the Netherlands are compared. The focus is on the Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV) and the Dutch newspaper the Telegraaf, and the British National Party (BNP) and The Sun. The analysis shows that the popular newspapers do not have an anti-elite bias. The Telegraaf and The Sun are overall even more oriented towards elitist perspectives than the quality press. The personalization thesis is not confirmed either. The results throw into doubt whether there is a single tabloid-quality spectrum based on subject matter or political orientation: subject matter and political orientation should not be conflated with differences in style.

Immigration policy and electoral competition in Western Europe: A fine-grained analysis of party positions over the past two decades

This article estimates policy positions of mainstream parties and radical right parties in seven countries in Western Europe over the past two decades. The assumption that mainstream parties have moved rightwards under pressure from the electoral success of radical right parties is assessed in close-up. A fine-grained analysis has been used to measure party distances in this specific policy field. Moreover, the new dataset is sufficiently differentiated to enable the identification of specific programmatic strategies followed by mainstream parties. The article concludes that the impact of radical right parties on mainstream policy agendas tends to be overestimated.

Flank Attacks: Populism and Left-Right Radicalism in Western Europe

How is populism distributed over the political spectrum? Are right-wing parties more populist than left-wing parties? Based on the analysis of 32 parties in five Western European countries between 1989 and 2008, we show that radical parties on both the left and the right are inclined to employ a populist discourse. This is a striking finding, because populism in Western Europe has typically been associated with the radical right; only some particular radical left parties have been labeled populist as well. This article suggests that the contemporary radical left in Western Europe is generally populist. Our explanation is that many contemporary radical left parties are not traditionally communist or socialist (anymore). They do not focus on the ‘proletariat’, but glorify a more general category: the ‘good people’. Moreover, they do not reject the system of liberal democracy as such, but only criticize the political and/or economic elites within that system.

Gender and the radical right in Western Europe: a comparative analysis of policy agendas

ABSTRACT Systematic research comparing the views of populist radical-right parties with respect to gender issues is still scarce. Akkerman’s article aims to fill this gap by comparing the positions of the six most successful populist radical-right parties in Western Europe. Her focus is on gender issues in the policy domain of family relations, on the one hand, and in that of immigration and integration, on the other. A combination of quantitative and qualitative analyses of external and internal party documents has been used to assess the positions of the main populist radical-right parties with regard to these two policy domains. Akkermans analysis shows that, in the domain of family relations, the parties are traditionally conservative or adopt a more flexible modern conservative position. Compared to mainstream right-wing parties, which are consistently more liberal than their radical-right counterparts, conservatism on issues relating to the family sets the radical parties clearly apart. Yet, as this particular profile tends to become less salient over time, it is doubtful that gender issues in this traditional policy domain will continue to be a defining characteristic of these parties. Gender issues have gained importance for populist radical-right parties in the domain of immigration and integration policies but, in this context, the parties do not display a conservative profile. They tend to emphasize the principles of gender equality and sometimes also gay rights, although these commitments are mainly rhetorical and instrumental to anti-immigration and anti-Islam agendas. Conservative views of gender remain the defining, albeit less salient, characteristic of these parties.

The role of the evaluator in an interactive evaluation of cochlear implantation.: shaping power, trust and deliberation.

Interactive evaluation involves a deliberative procedure that has been designed to address poorly structured policy problems in the context of power differences between stakeholders. Basically, it consists of an iterative cycle of interviews with these stakeholders. Power differences are dealt with by anonymising the procedure, the researcher acting as a counsellor exchanging claims, concerns and issues between the stakeholders. However, now the researcher himself or herself becomes a powerful figure. This article describes how a researcher, in an interactive evaluation of pediatric Cochlear Implantation (CI), maintained a balance between constructively using his power to help tackle the policy problem and leaving the ownership of the deliberative process with the stakeholders. To some extent, the procedure was designed to this aim. However, success also critically depends on the researchers skills in building trust and prudence in applying rules of argumentation.

Pariahs or Partners? Inclusion and Exclusion of Radical Right Parties and the Effects on Their Policy Positions

This article investigates the effects of inclusion and exclusion on the policy agendas of radical right parties. Radical right parties face diverging political opportunity structures in Western Europe. In some countries, the prospect of office has become a realistic option since the beginning of this century; in other countries radical right parties remain ostracised by mainstream parties. Research has focused mainly on the electoral effects of inclusion and exclusion strategies. Systematic analyses of the effects on policy agendas are scarce. This article focuses on the policy positions of radical right parties with respect to the key issues of immigration and integration. The finding is that ostracised parties have not changed much over time, but there is no evidence that cordons sanitaires have a freezing effect. Contrary to expectations, non-ostracised parties have not become more moderate over time. After the turn of the millennium, non-ostracised radical right parties have become just as radical as their ostracised cousins.