DOCSLIB.ORG

Finland | Freedom House Page 1 of 13

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Finland | Freedom House Page 1 of 13 FinlandFREEDOM IN THE WORLD 2020 100 FREE /100 Political Rights 40 Civil Liberties 60 100 Free Global freedom statuses are calculated on a weighted scale. See the methodology. TOP Overview https://freedomhouse.org/country/finland/freedom-world/2020 7/24/2020 Finland | Freedom House Page 2 of 13 Finland’s parliamentary system features free and fair elections and robust multiparty competition. Corruption is not a significant problem, and freedoms of speech, religion, and association are respected. The judiciary is independent under the constitution and in practice. Women and ethnic minority groups enjoy equal rights, though harassment and hate speech aimed at minority groups does occur. Key Developments in 2019 • In March, the right-leaning coalition government, headed by Juha Sipilä of the Center Party, resigned after failing to push through a reform of the health care system. • A general election was held in April, with the Social Democratic Party receiving the largest share of the vote. A new left-leaning coalition government was formed in June, comprising the Social Democratic Party, Center party, Green League, Left Alliance, and Swedish People’s Party of Finland. • Following criticism within the coalition about Prime Minister Antti Rinne’s handing of a strike by postal workers in November, he resigned in December. The Social Democratic Party chose Sanna Marin to replace him. • The parliament in March completed passage of a package of bills that empowered the intelligence service and defense forces to conduct communications surveillance on national security matters. Political Rights A. Electoral Process TOP A1 0-4 pts Was the current head of government or other chief national authority elected through free and fair elections? 4 https://freedomhouse.org/country/finland/freedom-world/2020 7/24/2020 Finland | Freedom House Page 3 of 13 The president, whose role is mainly ceremonial, is directly elected for up to two six-year terms. In 2018, former finance minister and incumbent president Sauli Niinistö, originally of the center-right National Coalition Party (KOK), won a second presidential term with 62.6 percent of the vote, defeating several challengers. The election was considered broadly free and fair. The prime minister, the head of government, is selected by Finland’s freely elected parliament. Following parliamentary elections in April 2019, Antti Rinne of the Social Democratic Party became prime minister in June. However, he resigned due to criticism within the governing coalition over his handling of a postal workers’ strike in November, and Sanna Marin was chosen by the party to replace him in December. A2 0-4 pts Were the current national legislative representatives elected through free and fair elections? 4 Representatives in the 200-seat, unicameral parliament, the Eduskunta, are elected to serve four-year terms. After a preliminary needs-assessment mission to Finland before the April 2019 parliamentary elections, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) expressed “a high level of confidence in all the aspects of the electoral process” and concluded that it was not necessary to send an election observation mission. The Social Democratic Party won the largest share of the vote, taking 40 seats. The right-wing Finns Party placed second with 39 seats. The new government formed in June comprised the Social Democratic Party, the Center Party (31 seats), the Green League (20 seats), the Left Alliance (16 seats), and the Swedish People’s Party of Finland (9 seats). The remainder of seats went to KOK (38), the Christian Democrats (5), the new MovementTOP Now (1), and the Åland Coalition (1). A3 0-4 pts https://freedomhouse.org/country/finland/freedom-world/2020 7/24/2020 Finland | Freedom House Page 4 of 13 Are the electoral laws and framework fair, and are they implemented 4 impartially by the relevant election management bodies? Finland’s electoral laws are robust and generally well implemented by the relevant authorities. The OSCE in 2019 found no new electoral problems to address since its previous review. B. Political Pluralism and Participation B1 0-4 pts Do the people have the right to organize in different political parties or other competitive political groupings of their choice, and is the system free of undue obstacles to the rise and fall of these 4 competing parties or groupings? There are no significant constraints on political parties’ ability to organize and operate, and they compete freely in practice. B2 0-4 pts Is there a realistic opportunity for the opposition to increase its support or gain power through elections? 4 Finland regularly experiences peaceful transfers of power between rival political parties through elections, with governments typically consisting of multiparty coalitions. The 2019 elections produced the country’s first Social Democratic prime minister since 2003. TOP B3 0-4 pts 4 https://freedomhouse.org/country/finland/freedom-world/2020 7/24/2020 Finland | Freedom House Page 5 of 13 Are the people’s political choices free from domination by forces that are external to the political sphere, or by political forces that employ extrapolitical means? People’s political choices are generally free from undue interference by forces that are not democratically accountable. B4 0-4 pts Do various segments of the population (including ethnic, religious, gender, LGBT, and other relevant groups) have full political rights 4 and electoral opportunities? Citizens from the Finnish majority and all ethnic minorities enjoy full political rights. The Åland Islands—an autonomous region located off the southwestern coast whose inhabitants speak Swedish—have their own 30- seat parliament, as well as one seat in the national legislature. The Sámi of northern Finland, an Indigenous people who number about 10,000, have a legislature with limited powers, but they do not have guaranteed representation in the parliament. Members of the Sámi community continue to call for greater inclusion in political decision-making processes. Women and women’s interests are reasonably well represented in politics, as are LGBT+ people and their respective interests. Prime Minister Marin was the third woman to serve as Finland’s head of government. Her installation also marked the first time that all parties in a Finnish governing coalition were headed by women. C. Functioning of Government C1 0-4 pts TOP Do the freely elected head of government and national legislative representatives determine the policies of the government? 4 https://freedomhouse.org/country/finland/freedom-world/2020 7/24/2020 Finland | Freedom House Page 6 of 13 Finland’s freely elected government and lawmakers are generally able to develop and implement policy without undue interference from unelected entities. In March 2019, the coalition government headed by Prime Minister Sipilä of the Center Party, which had been in power since 2015, resigned after failing to secure parliamentary support for a reform of the health care system, one of its key priorities. The move triggered the elections held in April. C2 0-4 pts Are safeguards against official corruption strong and effective? 4 Corruption is not a significant problem in Finland and is generally punished under relevant laws when discovered. However, in 2018 the Council of Europe’s anticorruption body urged Finland to bolster corruption prevention and detection policies within government and law enforcement agencies, including by increasing whistleblower protection. It further warned of possible conflicts of interest between the public and private sectors in the Sipilä government’s planned health care and social service reforms. C3 0-4 pts Does the government operate with openness and transparency? 4 Laws permitting access to public information are generally well enforced, though there are some limits on the disclosure of information related to national security, foreign affairs, trade secrets, and criminal investigations. All citizens, including government officials, are required by law to make public asset declarations, though there are no penalties for noncompliance. While companies perceive corruption risks and favoritism within public procurementTOP as low, informal networks and personal associations, notably at the local level, are still believed to hold influence over procurement decisions. https://freedomhouse.org/country/finland/freedom-world/2020 7/24/2020 Finland | Freedom House Page 7 of 13 Civil Liberties D. Freedom of Expression and Belief D1 0-4 pts Are there free and independent media? 4 Freedom of expression is protected by Article 12 of the constitution and the 2003 Act on the Exercise of Freedom of Expression in Mass Media. Media outlets in Finland are typically independent and free from political pressure or censorship. However, journalists sometimes face harassment for their work, notably those who cover topics related to immigrants and immigration. Journalists also face the risk of defamation charges. In April 2019, investigative reporter Johanna Vehkoo was convicted of defaming a far-right politician and order to pay more than $7,000 in fines and compensation. D2 0-4 pts Are individuals free to practice and express their religious faith or nonbelief in public and private? 4 Religious freedom is guaranteed in the constitution and generally respected in practice. However, far-right hate speech and incidents of vandalism directed at the Jewish and Muslim communities are ongoing concerns. TOP D3 0-4 pts Is there academic
Recommended publications
  • THE ALOOF ELECTION MANIFESTO Radical Political Right in Finland in the Borderlines of Neoliberalism and Cultural Nativism

    THE ALOOF ELECTION MANIFESTO Radical Political Right in Finland in the Borderlines of Neoliberalism and Cultural Nativism

    Article • DOI: 10.1515/njmr-2016-0012 NJMR • 6(2) • 2016 • 124-131 THE ALOOF ELECTION MANIFESTO Radical Political Right in Finland in the Borderlines of Neoliberalism and Cultural Nativism Abstract The rise of the populist radical political right is one of the significant phenomena Tapio Nykänen* in recent European party politics. In this article, I examine the ideology of the radical right in Finland by analysing the Aloof Election Manifesto, an election Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Lapland, Finland platform published by radical wing of the Finns Party for national parliament elections 2011. The analysis shows that the ideology challenges traditional notions of nationalism. It combines cultural nativism, secularism and economic neoliberalism to the fear of Islam and multiculturalism. Keywords Nationalism • immigration • radical right • multiculturalism • islamophobia Received 6 February 2015; Accepted 16 March 2016 In this article, I examine the ideology of the anti-immigrant wing of the indeed combines diverse ideas and beliefs from different ideological Finns Party, a populist and nationalist political party that represents traditions. The AM represents a particular case within neo-populism, one of the most visible changes on the Finnish political landscape in however, as it concentrates solely on opposing immigration from the recent years. For 16 years, the party was a small one, its support being Third World. Accordingly, one of the specific aims of my article is three to four percent1. This changed drastically in 2011, when the to show how different ideological features are used to support this party received 19.1 percent of the votes in the national parliamentary goal in the case of the AM.
  • Green Parties and Elections to the European Parliament, 1979–2019 Green Par Elections

    Green Parties and Elections to the European Parliament, 1979–2019 Green Par Elections

    Chapter 1 Green Parties and Elections, 1979–2019 Green parties and elections to the European Parliament, 1979–2019 Wolfgang Rüdig Introduction The history of green parties in Europe is closely intertwined with the history of elections to the European Parliament. When the first direct elections to the European Parliament took place in June 1979, the development of green parties in Europe was still in its infancy. Only in Belgium and the UK had green parties been formed that took part in these elections; but ecological lists, which were the pre- decessors of green parties, competed in other countries. Despite not winning representation, the German Greens were particularly influ- enced by the 1979 European elections. Five years later, most partic- ipating countries had seen the formation of national green parties, and the first Green MEPs from Belgium and Germany were elected. Green parties have been represented continuously in the European Parliament since 1984. Subsequent years saw Greens from many other countries joining their Belgian and German colleagues in the Euro- pean Parliament. European elections continued to be important for party formation in new EU member countries. In the 1980s it was the South European countries (Greece, Portugal and Spain), following 4 GREENS FOR A BETTER EUROPE their successful transition to democracies, that became members. Green parties did not have a strong role in their national party systems, and European elections became an important focus for party develop- ment. In the 1990s it was the turn of Austria, Finland and Sweden to join; green parties were already well established in all three nations and provided ongoing support for Greens in the European Parliament.
  • European Left Info Flyer

    European Left Info Flyer

    United for a left alternative in Europe United for a left alternative in Europe ”We refer to the values and traditions of socialism, com- munism and the labor move- ment, of feminism, the fem- inist movement and gender equality, of the environmental movement and sustainable development, of peace and international solidarity, of hu- man rights, humanism and an- tifascism, of progressive and liberal thinking, both national- ly and internationally”. Manifesto of the Party of the European Left, 2004 ABOUT THE PARTY OF THE EUROPEAN LEFT (EL) EXECUTIVE BOARD The Executive Board was elected at the 4th Congress of the Party of the European Left, which took place from 13 to 15 December 2013 in Madrid. The Executive Board consists of the President and the Vice-Presidents, the Treasurer and other Members elected by the Congress, on the basis of two persons of each member party, respecting the principle of gender balance. COUNCIL OF CHAIRPERSONS The Council of Chairpersons meets at least once a year. The members are the Presidents of all the member par- ties, the President of the EL and the Vice-Presidents. The Council of Chairpersons has, with regard to the Execu- tive Board, rights of initiative and objection on important political issues. The Council of Chairpersons adopts res- olutions and recommendations which are transmitted to the Executive Board, and it also decides on applications for EL membership. NETWORKS n Balkan Network n Trade Unionists n Culture Network Network WORKING GROUPS n Central and Eastern Europe n Africa n Youth n Agriculture n Migration n Latin America n Middle East n North America n Peace n Communication n Queer n Education n Public Services n Environment n Women Trafficking Member and Observer Parties The Party of the European Left (EL) is a political party at the Eu- ropean level that was formed in 2004.
  • Presidential Elections in Bulgaria of 23 and 30

    Presidential Elections in Bulgaria of 23 and 30

    March 2011 Volume 1, Issue 1 EuroMarch 2011 pean Times Volume 1, Issue th The Newsletter of Contemporary European Politics Nr.2, December 2011 Editor: José M. Magone Contents PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS IN BULGARIA Presidential OF 23 AND 30 0CTOBER 2011 elections in Bulgaria Presidential and Local Rossen Plevneliev was able The ruling minority in October 2011 1 Elections took place in two to prevail in the second government of party rd th General elections in rounds on 23 and 30 of round against main Citizens for the European Denmark 1 October in Bulgaria. challenger, the Socialist Development of candidate Ivailo Kalfin. Bulgaria(GERB) under The presidential elections Elections in Bulgaria Plevneviev got 52.58 prime minister Boyko were contested by 10 in October 2 percent, and Kalfin 47.42 Borissov can rely on a candidates and the local 2011(cont.) percent of the vote. president of the same elections by 85 political party. It seems that the parties. Already in the first round, presidential and local Plevneliev was able to gain Elections in Denmark In the presidential results were a confirmation 40.11 percent, while Kalfin on 16 September elections the candidate of the present government, 2011(cont.) was just a distant second supported by the in spite of the bad 3 with 28.96 percent. conservative government economic situation.(p.2). The Finnish Elections This means that until 2013, of 17 April 2011:The Strengthening of the GENERAL ELECTIONS IN DENMARK ON 16 SEPTEMBER 2011: True Finns 4 THE ELECTION OF THE FIRST DANISH FEMALE PRIME MINISTER HELLE THORNING-SCHMIDT The Legislative Elections in Poland After a decade of the vote was just 50.2 to achieve a doubling of on 9 October 2011 conservative governments , percent for a left centre their 2007 result.
  • Codebook Indiveu – Party Preferences

    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.
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed

    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.
  • Finland' Political Structure NCEE

    Finland' Political Structure NCEE

    2020-21 Legislative International Education Study Group OVERVIEW OF FINLAND’S POLITICAL STRUCTURE Political Structure:1,2 • Finland is a parliamentary representative republic with both a popularly elected president, whose role is mostly ceremonial, and a parliament with a cabinet and a prime minister. • Finland has a 200-member unicameral parliament (Eduskunta). Almost all members are directly elected in single- and multi-seat constituencies by proportional representation vote to four-year terms. The most recent parliamentary elections were held in April 2019 (see below). They will be held again in April 2023.3 • Finland’s president is directly elected by absolute majority popular vote for a six- year term and is eligible to serve a second term. The current president, Sauli Niinisto, was elected in 2012 and reelected in 2018. The next presidential election will be held in 2024.4 • Finland’s prime minister is appointed by the Eduskunta.5 The current prime minister, Sanna Marin, was appointed in December 2019 (see below).6 Political Context: Finland has a strong history of multi-party politics, with no one party having majority control for long. In 2015, the Center Party won the majority of parliamentary seats and formed a coalition with the National Coalition Party and the relatively new Finns Party. The Finns Party was formed in 1995 and is a nationalist, Euro-sceptic and anti-establishment party. The 2015 coalition was the first time the Finns Party had participated in government. However, in March 2019, just a month before parliamentary elections in April, the coalition government fell apart. The April 2019 national election was the first in Finland’s history in which no party came away with more than 20 percent of the vote.
  • The Growth of the Radical Right in Nordic Countries: Observations from the Past 20 Years

    The Growth of the Radical Right in Nordic Countries: Observations from the Past 20 Years

    THE GROWTH OF THE RADICAL RIGHT IN NORDIC COUNTRIES: OBSERVATIONS FROM THE PAST 20 YEARS By Anders Widfeldt TRANSATLANTIC COUNCIL ON MIGRATION THE GROWTH OF THE RADICAL RIGHT IN NORDIC COUNTRIES: Observations from the Past 20 Years By Anders Widfeldt June 2018 Acknowledgments This research was commissioned for the eighteenth plenary meeting of the Transatlantic Council on Migration, an initiative of the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), held in Stockholm in November 2017. The meeting’s theme was “The Future of Migration Policy in a Volatile Political Landscape,” and this report was one of several that informed the Council’s discussions. The Council is a unique deliberative body that examines vital policy issues and informs migration policymaking processes in North America and Europe. The Council’s work is generously supported by the following foundations and governments: the Open Society Foundations, Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Barrow Cadbury Trust, the Luso- American Development Foundation, the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, and the governments of Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden. For more on the Transatlantic Council on Migration, please visit: www.migrationpolicy.org/ transatlantic. © 2018 Migration Policy Institute. All Rights Reserved. Cover Design: April Siruno, MPI Layout: Sara Staedicke, MPI No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the Migration Policy Institute. A full-text PDF of this document is available for free download from www.migrationpolicy.org. Information for reproducing excerpts from this report can be found at www.migrationpolicy.org/about/copyright-policy.
  • The Mainstream Right, the Far Right, and Coalition Formation in Western Europe by Kimberly Ann Twist a Dissertation Submitted In

    The Mainstream Right, the Far Right, and Coalition Formation in Western Europe by Kimberly Ann Twist a Dissertation Submitted In

    The Mainstream Right, the Far Right, and Coalition Formation in Western Europe by Kimberly Ann Twist A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Jonah D. Levy, Chair Professor Jason Wittenberg Professor Jacob Citrin Professor Katerina Linos Spring 2015 The Mainstream Right, the Far Right, and Coalition Formation in Western Europe Copyright 2015 by Kimberly Ann Twist Abstract The Mainstream Right, the Far Right, and Coalition Formation in Western Europe by Kimberly Ann Twist Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science University of California, Berkeley Professor Jonah D. Levy, Chair As long as far-right parties { known chiefly for their vehement opposition to immigration { have competed in contemporary Western Europe, scholars and observers have been concerned about these parties' implications for liberal democracy. Many originally believed that far- right parties would fade away due to a lack of voter support and their isolation by mainstream parties. Since 1994, however, far-right parties have been included in 17 governing coalitions across Western Europe. What explains the switch from exclusion to inclusion in Europe, and what drives mainstream-right parties' decisions to include or exclude the far right from coalitions today? My argument is centered on the cost of far-right exclusion, in terms of both office and policy goals for the mainstream right. I argue, first, that the major mainstream parties of Western Europe initially maintained the exclusion of the far right because it was relatively costless: They could govern and achieve policy goals without the far right.
  • List of Participants Liste Des Participants

    List of Participants Liste Des Participants

    LIST OF PARTICIPANTS LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS 142nd IPU Assembly and Related Meetings (virtual) 24 to 27 May 2021 - 2 - Mr./M. Duarte Pacheco President of the Inter-Parliamentary Union Président de l'Union interparlementaire Mr./M. Martin Chungong Secretary General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union Secrétaire général de l'Union interparlementaire - 3 - I. MEMBERS - MEMBRES AFGHANISTAN RAHMANI, Mir Rahman (Mr.) Speaker of the House of the People Leader of the delegation EZEDYAR, Mohammad Alam (Mr.) Deputy Speaker of the House of Elders KAROKHAIL, Shinkai (Ms.) Member of the House of the People ATTIQ, Ramin (Mr.) Member of the House of the People REZAIE, Shahgul (Ms.) Member of the House of the People ISHCHY, Baktash (Mr.) Member of the House of the People BALOOCH, Mohammad Nadir (Mr.) Member of the House of Elders HASHIMI, S. Safiullah (Mr.) Member of the House of Elders ARYUBI, Abdul Qader (Mr.) Secretary General, House of the People Member of the ASGP NASARY, Abdul Muqtader (Mr.) Secretary General, House of Elders Member of the ASGP HASSAS, Pamir (Mr.) Acting Director of Relations to IPU Secretary to the delegation ALGERIA - ALGERIE GOUDJIL, Salah (M.) Président du Conseil de la Nation Président du Groupe, Chef de la délégation BOUZEKRI, Hamid (M.) Vice-Président du Conseil de la Nation (RND) BENBADIS, Fawzia (Mme) Membre du Conseil de la Nation Comité sur les questions relatives au Moyen-Orient KHARCHI, Ahmed (M.) Membre du Conseil de la Nation (FLN) DADA, Mohamed Drissi (M.) Secrétaire Général, Conseil de la Nation Secrétaire général
  • PROOF Contents

    PROOF Contents

    PROOF Contents Acknowledgements viii 1 Survival and Renewal: The 1990s 1 2 Regroupment: Establishing a European Movement 29 3 The Party of the European Left 46 4 Diverse Trends: An Overview 66 5 A Successful Model? Die Linke (the Left Party – Germany) 83 6 How Have the Mighty Fallen: Partito della Rifondazione Comunista (Party of Communist Refoundation – Italy) 99 7 Back from the Brink: French Communism (Parti Communiste Français) Re-orientates 116 8 Communism Renewed and Supported: The Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (the Czech Republic) 132 9 The Scandinavian Left 147 10 The European Left and the Global Left: 1999–2009 163 Notes 192 Index 204 vii PROOF 1 Survival and Renewal: The 1990s Almost two decades after the fall of the Berlin Wall, on the occasion of the German federal elections in September 2009, the International Herald Tribune marked the electoral victory of the German right with the headline, ‘Is socialism dying?’1 The German Social Democratic Party or the Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD) took 23% of the votes – its lowest poll since the Second World War – just months after the European elections registered a poor performance from left- wing candidates across the European Union (EU). As the article went on to observe, ‘Even in the midst of one of the greatest challenges to capitalism in 75 years, involving a breakdown of the financial sys- tem because of “irrational exuberance”, greed and the weakness of regulatory systems, European socialists and their leftist cousins have not found a compelling response, let alone taken advantage of the failures of the right.’ There is no doubt that across Europe the failure of the social demo- cratic parties to present a ‘compelling response’ to the economic crisis has led to a wave of electoral setbacks.
  • Challenger Party List

    Challenger Party List

    Appendix List of Challenger Parties Operationalization of Challenger Parties A party is considered a challenger party if in any given year it has not been a member of a central government after 1930. A party is considered a dominant party if in any given year it has been part of a central government after 1930. Only parties with ministers in cabinet are considered to be members of a central government. A party ceases to be a challenger party once it enters central government (in the election immediately preceding entry into office, it is classified as a challenger party). Participation in a national war/crisis cabinets and national unity governments (e.g., Communists in France’s provisional government) does not in itself qualify a party as a dominant party. A dominant party will continue to be considered a dominant party after merging with a challenger party, but a party will be considered a challenger party if it splits from a dominant party. Using this definition, the following parties were challenger parties in Western Europe in the period under investigation (1950–2017). The parties that became dominant parties during the period are indicated with an asterisk. Last election in dataset Country Party Party name (as abbreviation challenger party) Austria ALÖ Alternative List Austria 1983 DU The Independents—Lugner’s List 1999 FPÖ Freedom Party of Austria 1983 * Fritz The Citizens’ Forum Austria 2008 Grüne The Greens—The Green Alternative 2017 LiF Liberal Forum 2008 Martin Hans-Peter Martin’s List 2006 Nein No—Citizens’ Initiative against