DOCSLIB.ORG

State of Populism in Europe 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
State of Populism in Europe 2020 2020 STATE OF POPULISM IN EUROPE – 2020 STATE Tamás BOROS STATE OF Maria FREITAS POPULISM Gábor GYŐRI IN EUROPE Gergely LAKI 2020 STATE OF POPULISM IN EUROPE 2020 Published by: Table of Contents FEPS – Foundation for European Progressive Studies Rue Montoyer 40, 4th floor – 1000 Brussels, Belgium T: +32 2 234 69 00 Foreword .........................................................................................................................................6 Email: [email protected] Austria ............................................................................................................................................10 Website: www.feps-europe.eu Belgium ..........................................................................................................................................14 Bulgaria ..........................................................................................................................................18 Croatia ............................................................................................................................................22 Policy Solutions Cyprus .............................................................................................................................................26 Révay utca 10 – 1065 Budapest, Hungary Czechia ...........................................................................................................................................30 T: +36 1 4 748 748 Email: [email protected] Denmark .......................................................................................................................................36 Website: www.policysolutions.eu Estonia ...........................................................................................................................................40 Finland ............................................................................................................................................44 France .............................................................................................................................................48 Copyright: FEPS and Policy Solutions, March 2020 ISBN: 978-2-930769-39-4 9782930769394 Germany .......................................................................................................................................52 Greece .............................................................................................................................................58 Hungary .........................................................................................................................................64 Responsible editors: Ireland .............................................................................................................................................70 Tamas BOROS, Co-Director of Policy Solutions Maria FREITAS, FEPS Senior Policy Advisor Italy ...................................................................................................................................................74 Ania SKRZYPEK, FEPS Director of Research and Training Latvia ...............................................................................................................................................80 Lithuania ........................................................................................................................................84 Luxembourg ................................................................................................................................88 Authors: Tamás BOROS, Gergely LAKI, Gábor GYŐRI Malta ...............................................................................................................................................92 The Netherlands.......................................................................................................................96 Page layout and printing: Ferling Ltd. – Hungary Poland ..........................................................................................................................................102 Portugal ......................................................................................................................................106 Romania .....................................................................................................................................110 This study does not represent the collective views of FEPS and Policy Solutions. The responsibility of FEPS and Policy Solutions is limited to approving its publication as worthy of consideration of the European progressive Slovakia .......................................................................................................................................114 movement. Slovenia ......................................................................................................................................118 Spain .............................................................................................................................................122 Sweden .......................................................................................................................................126 Conclusion: The State of Populism in the European Union .........................130 Index: List of Populist Parties in the European Union .....................................136 With the financial support of the European Parliament. This report does not represent the European Parliament’s views but only of the respective authors. Foreword net; and the increasing convergence in the policies Just as in the case with the previous volumes in this advocated by the centre-left and the centre-right. series, our goal is not merely to present figures and At the same time, voters realised that the era of political events but also to highlight the emerging Foreword grand economic visions has come to an end, and trends and to help prepare our readers for the globalisation, market economy and multinational changes on the horizon. Over the past five years, corporations are apparently gobbling up everything. we have highlighted numerous such developments. As a result, the political fault lines are increasingly Allow us to emphasise five important trends and less likely to be organised around economic insights from these five years: policies, and they are more likely to centre on social or cultural concerns. In other words, people and Back in 2015, we saw both left-wing populist parties Populism in Europe 2020 public discourse do not tend to be mainly divided – that is parties which are opposed to multinational along the lines of their respective ideas about the corporations and are critical of globalisation and future of the economy but based on what they think capitalism – as well as right-wing populists – that about social values, lifestyles, migration, the nation is xenophobic, anti-EU and nationalist parties – – Ending half a decade and supranational entities, such as multinational increase their respective levels of public support. corporations or the European Union. But while the latter were surging only in Western and Central and Eastern Europe, the former were These changes do not imply, of course, that the almost exclusively limited to Southern Europe. dilemmas that previously defined politics are gone These days, this once conspicuous regional fault for good, that old political parties have been rendered line has vanished, and in all but a few countries completely obsolete. In fact, some countries have left-wing populism has declined massively, and not changed at all in this respect over the past so they are anywhere near a position of winning decade. All we claim here is that, to varying degrees elections. Right-wing populists, by contrast, have If we had to name a single concept from the last democracies. in each country, the trends mentioned above have increased their support even in countries where decade that has spilled over from political science manifested themselves and now decisively shape such formations did not even exist a year or two jargon into public discourse, spreading through The alternation in government of centre-left and politics – jointly with the earlier trends. ago, and they have ascended to government either the latter like wildfire, then populism would most centre-right political forces that had dominated on their own or as part of coalition governments in likely be the word to spring to everyone’s mind. In the post-World War II era disappeared and When the Foundation for European Progressive numerous countries of the EU. We can conclude, political science, populism has been a major topic has been replaced by a tripartite or even more Studies (FEPS) launched the Populism Tracker therefore, that all sorts of previous constraints that for decades now, and over time it has occasionally fragmented political scene, with all the concomitant project jointly with the Budapest-based Policy once served to put a ceiling on the popularity of also cropped up in public discourse – often unpredictability and tensions. The traditional Solutions in 2015, they set out to gauge the impact right-wing populists have recently crumbled. This erroneously used to refer to demagogy. But during parties of the centre-right and the centre-left have of these changing trends, to present their insights shift has turned them into potentially major players the past decade, it has emerged as the top issue experienced unprecedented declines in their levels about this phenomenon
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Case of Slovenia
    “A Short History of Quotas in Slovenia” Sonja Lokar Chair, Gender Task Force of the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe A paper presented at the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA)/CEE Network for Gender Issues Conference The Implementation of Quotas: European Experiences Budapest, Hungary, 22–23 October 2004 The Communist-dominated Federal People’s Republic of Yugoslavia was formed after the Second World War. Slovenia became the most developed of its six federal republics, gaining independence in the early 1990s. This case study looks at the participation of women in Slovenia before and after the break-up of the Former Yugoslavia, and examines the evolution of quota provisions that have been implemented to secure women’s participation in decision-making. Background Women in Slovenia were granted the universal right to vote for the first time in 1945, along with equality with men. At the beginning of the 1970s, some of Yugoslavia’s strongest Communist women leaders were deeply involved in the preparations for the first United Nations (UN) World Conference on Women in Mexico. They were clever enough to persuade old Communist Party leaders, Josip Broz Tito and his right-hand man Edvard Kardelj, that the introduction of the quota for women—with respect to the decision-making bodies of all political organizations and delegate lists—had implications for Yugoslavia’s international reputation.1 Communist women leaders worked hard to make Socialist Yugoslavia a role model (in terms of the emancipation of
    [Show full text]
  • Third Evaluation Round Evaluation Report on Slovenia On
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND LEGAL AFFAIRS DIRECTORATE OF MONITORING Strasbourg, 7 December 2007 Public Greco Eval III Rep (2007) 1E Theme II Third Evaluation Round Evaluation Report on Slovenia on Transparency of Party Funding (Theme II) Adopted by GRECO at its 35 th Plenary Meeting (Strasbourg, 3-7 December 2007) Secrétariat du GRECO GRECO Secretariat www.coe.int/greco Conseil de l’Europe Council of Europe F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex +33 3 88 41 20 00 Fax +33 3 88 41 39 55 I. INTRODUCTION 1. Slovenia joined GRECO in 1999. GRECO adopted the First Round Evaluation Report (Greco Eval I Rep (2000) 3E) in respect of Slovenia at its 4 th Plenary Meeting (12-15 December 2000) and the Second Round Evaluation Report (Greco Eval II Rep (2003) 1E) at its 16 th Plenary Meeting (Strasbourg, 8-12 December 2003). The aforementioned Evaluation Reports, as well as their corresponding Compliance Reports, are available on GRECO’s homepage (http://www.coe.int/greco ). 2. GRECO’s current Third Evaluation Round (launched on 1 January 2007) deals with the following themes: - Theme I – Incriminations: Articles 1a and 1b, 2-12, 15-17, 19 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (ETS 173) 1, Articles 1-6 of its Additional Protocol 2 (ETS 191) and Guiding Principle 2 (criminalisation of corruption). - Theme II – Transparency of party funding: Articles 11, 12, 13b, 14 and 16 of Recommendation Rec(2003)4 on Common Rules against Corruption in the Funding of Political Parties and Electoral Campaigns, and - more generally - Guiding Principle 15 (financing of political parties and election campaigns) .
    [Show full text]
  • Codebook Indiveu – Party Preferences
    Codebook InDivEU – party preferences European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies December 2020 Introduction The “InDivEU – party preferences” dataset provides data on the positions of more than 400 parties from 28 countries1 on questions of (differentiated) European integration. The dataset comprises a selection of party positions taken from two existing datasets: (1) The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File contains party positions for three rounds of European Parliament elections (2009, 2014, and 2019). Party positions were determined in an iterative process of party self-placement and expert judgement. For more information: https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/65944 (2) The Chapel Hill Expert Survey The Chapel Hill Expert Survey contains party positions for the national elections most closely corresponding the European Parliament elections of 2009, 2014, 2019. Party positions were determined by expert judgement. For more information: https://www.chesdata.eu/ Three additional party positions, related to DI-specific questions, are included in the dataset. These positions were determined by experts involved in the 2019 edition of euandi after the elections took place. The inclusion of party positions in the “InDivEU – party preferences” is limited to the following issues: - General questions about the EU - Questions about EU policy - Questions about differentiated integration - Questions about party ideology 1 This includes all 27 member states of the European Union in 2020, plus the United Kingdom. How to Cite When using the ‘InDivEU – Party Preferences’ dataset, please cite all of the following three articles: 1. Reiljan, Andres, Frederico Ferreira da Silva, Lorenzo Cicchi, Diego Garzia, Alexander H.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION in SLOVAKIA 30Th March 2019
    PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN SLOVAKIA 30th March 2019 European Zuzana Caputova becomes the first Elections monitor woman to be president of the Republic Corinne Deloy of Slovakia Results As expected, Zuzana Caputova (Progressive Slovakia, PS) was elected President of Slovakia 2nd round on 30th March. The accession of a woman to this post is a first in the country’s history. The candidate won 58.4% of the vote and therefore won easily against her rival, Vice- President of the Commission, responsible for Energy, Maros Sefcovic, who was supported by the party in office Direction-Social Democracy (SMER-SD), who won 41.6% of the vote. During the first round of the election organised on 16th March last Zuzana Caputova had already taken an comfortable lead over her adversary winning 40.57% of the vote (Maros Sefcovic won 18.66%). Turnout rose to 41.79% and was well below that registered in the second round of the previous election on 29th March 2014 (- 8.69 points). Results of the Presidential election on 16th and 30th March 2019 in Slovakia Turn out: 48.74% (1st round) and 41.79% (2nd round) No of votes won % of votes won No of votes won No of votes won Candidates (1st round) (1st round) (2nd round) (2nd round) Zuzana Caputova (Progressive Slovakia, PS) 870 415 40.57 1 056 582 58.40 Maros Sefcovic 400 379 18.66 752 403 41.60 Stefan Harabin 307 823 14.34 Marian Kotleba (Kotleba-People’s Party-New 222 935 10.39 Slovakia, L’SNS) Frantisek Miklosko, independent 122 916 5.72 Bela Bugar (Most-Hid) 66 667 3.10 Milan Krajniak (We are a family, AME R) 59
    [Show full text]
  • State of Populism in Europe
    2018 State of Populism in Europe The past few years have seen a surge in the public support of populist, Eurosceptical and radical parties throughout almost the entire European Union. In several countries, their popularity matches or even exceeds the level of public support of the centre-left. Even though the centre-left parties, think tanks and researchers are aware of this challenge, there is still more OF POPULISM IN EUROPE – 2018 STATE that could be done in this fi eld. There is occasional research on individual populist parties in some countries, but there is no regular overview – updated every year – how the popularity of populist parties changes in the EU Member States, where new parties appear and old ones disappear. That is the reason why FEPS and Policy Solutions have launched this series of yearbooks, entitled “State of Populism in Europe”. *** FEPS is the fi rst progressive political foundation established at the European level. Created in 2007 and co-fi nanced by the European Parliament, it aims at establishing an intellectual crossroad between social democracy and the European project. Policy Solutions is a progressive political research institute based in Budapest. Among the pre-eminent areas of its research are the investigation of how the quality of democracy evolves, the analysis of factors driving populism, and election research. Contributors : Tamás BOROS, Maria FREITAS, Gergely LAKI, Ernst STETTER STATE OF POPULISM Tamás BOROS IN EUROPE Maria FREITAS • This book is edited by FEPS with the fi nancial support of the European
    [Show full text]
  • Ellada Ioannou Populism and the European Elections in Cyprus
    Spring 14 The Risks of growing Populism and the European elections: Populism and the European elections in Cyprus Author: Ellada Ioannou Populism and the European elections in Cyprus Ellada Ioannou1 The aim of this paper, is to examine the rise of Populism in Europe and its association with the increase in anti-European sentiments, using Cyprus as a case study. A questionnaire in the format of a survey, was completed by 1009 Cypriot participants. The findings, were that compared to other European Union member states, show that Populism and Euroscepticism in Cyprus seem, at present, not to be extensively prevalent. However, there seems to be a slight shift towards Euroscepticism and pre-conditions for the emergence and rise of radical right-wing Populism in Cyprus, are evident. Introduction While definitions of populism have varied over the years, making “populism” a rather vague and ill-defined concept, scholars and political analysts agree that its general ideology is that society is divided into two groups: the “pure people” and the “corrupt elitist” and that politics should be, above all, an expression of the general will of the people.2 With its positive connotation, it is argued, that populism can have a positive, corrective impact on democracy, by pointing out the need to integrate people’s ideas and interests into the political system and the political agenda.3 However, “populism” in general has acquired a negative connotation, as a potential threat to democracy, due to its historical association with authoritarian rule and due to some of its characteristics such as “illiberal democracy” and its exclusive nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of European and National Election Results 2014-2019 Mid-Term January 2017
    Review of European and National Election Results 2014-2019 Mid-term January 2017 STUDY Public Opinion Monitoring Series Directorate-General for Communication Published by EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Author: Jacques Nancy, Public Opinion Monitoring Unit PE 599.242 Directorate-General for Communication Public Opinion Monitoring Unit REVIEW EE2014 Edition Spéciale Mi-Législature Special Edition on Mid-term Legislature LES ÉLECTIONS EUROPÉENNES ET NATIONALES EN CHIFFRES EUROPEAN AND NATIONAL ELECTIONS RESULTS TABLES Mise à jour – 20 janvier 2017 Update – 20th January 2017 8éme Législature 8th Parliamentary Term DANS CETTE EDITION Page IN THIS EDITION Page EDITORIAL11 EDITORIAL I.COMPOSITION DU PARLEMENT EUROPÉEN 6 I. COMPOSITION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 6 A.REPARTITION DES SIEGES 7 A.DISTRIBUTION OF SEATS 7 B.COMPOSITION DU PARLEMENT 8 B.COMPOSITION OF THE PARLIAMENT 8 -9-9AU 01/07/2014 ON THE 01/07/2014 -10-10AU 20/01/2017 ON THE 20/01/2017 C.SESSIONS CONSTITUTIVES ET PARLEMENT 11 C.CONSTITUTIVE SESSIONS AND OUTGOING EP 11 SORTANT DEPUIS 1979 SINCE 1979 D.REPARTITION FEMMES - HOMMES 29 D.PROPORTION OF WOMEN AND MEN 29 AU 20/01/2017 ON 20/01/2017 -30-30PAR GROUPE POLITIQUE AU 20/01/2017 IN THE POLITICAL GROUPS ON 20/01/2017 ET DEPUIS 1979 AND SINCE 1979 E.PARLEMENTAIRES RÉÉLUS 33 E.RE-ELECTED MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT 33 II.NOMBRE DE PARTIS NATIONAUX AU PARLEMENT 35 II.NUMBER OF NATIONAL PARTIES IN THE EUROPEAN 35 EUROPEEN AU 20/01/2017 PARLIAMENT ON 20/01/2017 III.TAUX DE PARTICIPATION 37 III. TURNOUT 37 -38-38TAUX DE PARTICIPATION
    [Show full text]
  • Slovakia: Continuation of Electoral Earthquakes Peter Spácˇ
    Slovakia: Continuation of electoral earthquakes peter spácˇ The 2019 European Parliament (EP) election was held in Slovakia on May 25th, the fourth time since the country’s accession to the EU. Two points are worth mentio- ning at the outset. Firstly, turnout increased considerably since the previous election in 2014. However, with roughly one in four voters participating in the election, it was still the lowest turnout in the whole EU. Secondly, the results confirmed the substantial recent changes in Slovakia's political life, with critical implications for the coming years. In line with other EU countries, the elections are held under proportional re- presentation rules. Similar to national elections, there is only one constituency that comprises the whole country. The threshold is set at 5%, which effectively bans smal- ler parties from obtaining EP seats. Similar to several other member states, Slova- kia does not allow its citizens to vote from abroad in EP elections. The country elects fourteen members of the EP (MEPs), although it will only have thirteen until Bre- xit is finalised. background and campaign In the 2016 general election Slovakia experienced a huge shift of its party system. Although SMER-SD lost a considerable part of its support, it maintained its position as first party. As for past elections, populist and antisystem parties gained parliamentary representation, including the extreme right People’s Party-Our Slovakia (LSNS). This electoral success led the new coalition government formed by SMER-SD and its ju- nior partners to state that they serve as a ‘barrier against extremism’ (Rybáˇr and Spáˇc, 2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Slovenian Democratic Path After European Union Accession
    The Difficult Look Back: Slovenian Democratic Path after European Union Accession MIRO HAČEK Politics in Central Europe (ISSN: 1801-3422) Vol. 15, No. 3 DOI: 10.2478/pce-2019-0023 Abstract: In the third wave of democratic changes in the early 1990s when the Central and Eastern European (CEE) political landscape changed radically and the democrati‑ sation processes started in the eastern part of the continent, Slovenia was one of the most prominent countries with the best prospects for rapid democratic growth. Slove‑ nia somewhat luckily escaped the Yugoslav civil wars and towards the end of the 20th century was already on the path towards a stable and consolidated democracy with the most successful economy in the entire CEE area. After the dissolution of Yugoslavia, Slovenia had a simple and straight ‑forward political goals, i.e. to join the European union as soon as possible, thus consolidating its place among the most developed countries within the region. After some setbacks, this goal was accomplished in (so far) the biggest enlargement to the Union in May 2004. But what happened after Slovenia managed to successfully achieve its pair of major political goals? In this chapter, we search for an answer to this question and find out why Slovenian voters are increas‑ ingly distrustful not only of political institutions, but why so ‑called new political faces and instant political parties are so successful and why Slovenian democracy has lost a leading place among consolidated democracies in CEE. Keywords: Slovenia; European Union; membership; distrust; democracy. Introduction After declaring its independence from former Yugoslavia in 1991, the Republic of Slovenia expressed its willingness and objective, both in its strategic develop‑ ment documents and at the highest political levels, to become a full member of POLITICS IN CENTRAL EUROPE 15 (2019) 3 419 the European Union (EU).1 As the crucial developmental documents2 indicate, the optimum long ‑term development of the Slovenian economy is inextricably tied to Slovenia’s full membership in the EU.
    [Show full text]
  • Priority Dossiers Under the Slovenian EU Council Presidency
    BRIEFING Outlook for upcoming Presidency Priority dossiers under the Slovenian EU Council Presidency INTRODUCTION Slovenia will, in the second half of 2021, hold its second Presidency of the Council of the EU since joining the EU in 2004. It will conclude the work of the Trio Presidency composed of Germany, Portugal and Slovenia. Slovenia is a democratic parliamentary republic with a proportional electoral system. The Slovenian parliament is bicameral, made up of the National Assembly (composed of 90 members) and the National Council (composed of 40 members). In the National Assembly, there are 88 representatives of political parties and two representatives of the Italian and Hungarian national communities, the latter two elected to represent their interests. The National Assembly elects the Prime Minister and the government. The current government is a four-party coalition, made up of the Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS); the Modern Centre Party (SMC), the Democratic Party of Slovenian Pensioners (DeSUS) and New Slovenia—Christian Democrats (NSi). The Prime Minister, Mr Janez Janša from the Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS), was elected to office on 3 March 2020. The next general elections in Slovenia will take place no later than 5 June 2022. Other political parties represented in parliament are the List of Marjan Šarec (LMS), Social Democrats (SD), Party of Alenka Bratušek (SAB), The Left, and the Slovenian National Party (SNS). Published by EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Author: Lucienne Attard Interinstitutional Relations Unit, Directorate-General for the Presidency PE 690.680 – June 2021 EN EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service PART A: POLITICAL PRIORITIES OF THE SLOVENIAN PRESIDENCY This note looks at the draft Slovenian Presidency priorities.
    [Show full text]
  • Success of the Far Right in the 2020 Slovak Parliamentary Election Within the European Context
    Izzivi prihodnosti / Challenges of the Future, Članek / Article Avgust / August 2020, leto / year 5, številka / number 3, str. / pp. 185-197. DOI: 10.37886/ip.2020.011 Success of the Far Right in the 2020 Slovak Parliamentary Election within the European Context Marián Bušša* Alexander Dubček University of Trenčín, 91150, Trenčín, Slovakia [email protected] Abstract: Purpose and Originality: The paper analyzes the results of the 2020 parliamentary election in Slovakia using the theoretical framework of Norris and Inglehart (2019). The general trend of increasing support for the strongly authoritarian populist parties in the EU and in Visegrad 4 countries in particular suggest that the far right parties should be successful. Is this the case or are the wining parties defined in some other way? Method: The position of each party on the libertarian – authoritarian axis is evaluated on the basis of secondary analysis of CHES 2014, CHES 2017 and 2019 EES studies. Ideological blocks of parties are subsequently compared in terms of their electoral success. Results: Libertarian parties suffered a crushing defeat and did not manage to challenge the ideological dominance of authoritarianism in Slovakia, established after the 2016 election. But this did not automatically translate into victory of the far right. Slovakia did not join its neighbors to the south and north in the Visegrad 4. Instead, parties, which were defined mainly by their strong populist appeal were the real winners. Society: The paper is trying to add to the research on the far right and of the authoritarian populism by noticing similarities between Slovak political trends and development in the advanced World.
    [Show full text]