IS POPULISM A THREAT FOR DEMOCRACY?

 

The attitude of populist parties toward energy and climate policies, why do these parties find support in less urban areas?

In the last two decades, the European Union has faced crises that have severely tested the legitimacy of the system developed over the last 80 years, the economic crisis, and the crisis of liberal democracy. The former is characterized by the rise of right-wing populist parties in Europe. Right-wing populism is often at odds with climate change policies, and its rise in popularity could have undermined public concern about climate change. Furthermore, Right-wing populism is closely linked to climate skepticism and climate policy.

According to a generally acknowledged theory, populism's fundamental divide in society is between “pure people” and a “corrupt elite” and it is believed that politics should be an expression of the will of the people.

                                                      

Populism can be identified as either left-wing or right-wing. The two types are differentiated by the fact that right-wing populism is most often socially authoritarian, nativist, and economically interventionist. In the context of climate change, a skeptical and hostile attitude towards climate policy is typical. On the other hand, the left-wing populist parties are characterized by the fact that they are liberal and universalist, while with regard to climate policies and climate skepticism, unlike the right-wing parties, they are more supportive and well-disposed.

How does the strategy of populist parties work?

Populist parties rely on an ideational strategy for their campaigns and plans of action. This strategy is based on a “thin-centered” ideology that has a limited number of core principles but can be combined with a variety of "host" (or “thick”) ideologies from various political perspectives. The host ideology has typically been used by typologies of populist parties to distinguish between right- and left-wing populist actors. Indeed, these ideologies of populist parties influenced their stance on the European energy and climate policy (ECP). The RWPP (right-wing populist parties) are typically more skeptical and resistant to the ECP agenda. In contrast, the LWPP (left-wing populist parties) tend to give the ECP agenda more prominence.

Regarding RWPPs, although they use the same type of populism, often it is possible to find divergence in positions regarding specific policy issues, this is because they are influenced by the path of a certain party, and the country in which a certain party develops. Divergence in positions is present in ECPs, depending on the social and political context, the concerns and importance given to climate and energy may change. Ambitious policies regarding energy and climate, are issued by the EU, which is often opposed by the more right-wing parties.

These skeptical attitudes, as shown by research, are reflected in the thinking and preferences of those who vote for these parties, especially regarding politically polarizing concepts, such as climate change in this case. The skepticism in economic reforms in favor of a change in today’s economic system stems from the nationalism on which RWPPs base their financial plan on economic protection, which hinders technological innovations and legislative reforms in favor of ECPs.

Why non-urban areas are more inclined to support populist parties?

Another factor that influences the size of the populist constituency, is the trend of urbanization in an area. Recent studies have shown how differences between urban, non-urban, and rural regions are crucial in shaping national referendum outcomes. For example, in the case of Brexit or in the case of Marie Le Pen, there was an over-representation of rural areas compared to urban areas. Additionally, three main factors characterizing non-urban areas influence the tendency to support the radical right. Unemployment rates are higher than in urban areas, as is the level of education, and lower income levels.

These factors have been shown to influence voting behavior, as they vary whether the area is urban or not, as does support for right-wing populist parties, which are more supported in non-urban and rural areas. In addition to these socio-economic factors, individual factors induce support for RWPPs, such as the conflict or competition created between lower-class natives and immigrants. This is very often one of the effects of xenophobia, climate skepticism, other types of skepticism, and conspiracy theories. However, these circumstances tend to vary a lot and it is not possible to determine how much influence this then has on the elective outcome.

To sum up, in most cases populist actors benefit from ideologies borrowed from other political contexts. European Governance is facing a phase in its history in which the political landscape is very polarized, in which populist parties are gaining a lot of support from the voters, which makes ECP policies and legislation very difficult to enact. Furthermore, the urban outlook influences people’s political thinking; in less urban areas, support for populist parties is higher than in more urban areas.

FILIPPO NEPI