Riding the Fourth Wave Cas Mudde
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Georgia From the SelectedWorks of Cas Mudde Spring 2020 Riding the Fourth Wave Cas Mudde This work is licensed under a Creative Commons CC_BY International License. Available at: https://works.bepress.com/cas_mudde/157/ Riding the fourth wave Cas Mudde The role of business in far-right politics Spring 2020 | 297 n 8 October 2018, the editorial board of the US business newspaper, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ),officially endorsed Jair O Bolsonaro for the Brazilian presidential elections. Ignoring his long history of racist and sexist remarks, and dismissing concerns about his open flirts with military dictatorship –“he isn’t proposing to change the constitution, which constrains the military at home”–the editorial board declared the “Brazilian swamp drainer” the best option in the run-off. The WSJ’s endorsement was one of the most high-profile examples of the mainstreaming and normalisation of the far-right, which characterises what I have called the ‘fourth wave’ of far-right politics.1 While these processes extend far beyond the economic sphere (most notably into media and politics), big business plays an important role in this process – if only because it holds significant sway over both media and politics in many countries. After all, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, a global multi-billion media conglomerate, owns the Wall Street Journal. “big business is not so much a driver of the far- right, but rather a bandwagoner and enabler” The relationship between big business and far-right politics has long led to grandiose claims, despite relatively little systematic study into the matter. Many far-left activists and scholars see the contemporary far-right in a fairly similar way as the Communist International (‘Comintern’)2 saw fascism in the Interbellum, namely as “the open, terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinist and most imperialist elements of finance capital”.3 But the relationship of fascism and capitalism, as well as that of the far-right and big business, is much more complex than that. 1 Mudde C (2019) The Far-Right Today, Polity 2 An international organisation that advocated communism between 1919 and 1943. 3 In: Griffin R (1998) International Fascism: Theories, Causes and the New Consensus, Arnold (p59). © 2020 The Author/s. IPPR Progressive Review © 2020 IPPR 298 | IPPR Progressive Review | Volume 26(4) I will discuss the relationship between the contemporary far-right and big business based on some examples from Europe and the Americas, which show that big business is not so much a driver of the far-right, but rather a bandwagoner and enabler. Before I get into this particularly complex relationship, however, I will discuss some key characteristics of the fourth wave of far-right politics. The next section highlights the heterogeneity of the contemporary far-right, while the following section discusses its changed role in contemporary politics. THE EXTREME HETEROGENEITY OF THE FAR RIGHT The far-right has always been heterogeneous, even in the ‘fascist era’, when Italian fascism and German national socialism had very different interpretations of the character and importance of the nation, for example – not to speak of the various other proto-fascist movements, like the Romanian Iron Guard or the Spanish Falangists.4 The current heterogeneity is related to virtually every aspect of far-right politics, including ideology, mobilisation, and organisation. “some radical-right parties and politicians openly flirt with extreme-right ideas, like antisemitism, racism, and even military dictatorship” The far-right includes all right-wing ideologies that are either against democracy or liberal democracy, where ‘right-wing’ refers to the idea that inequalities within societies are considered to be ‘natural’ and the state is not supposed to help overcome them. The extreme-right is opposed to democracy per se – ie popular sovereignty and majority rule – whereas the radical right accepts democracy, but rejects fundamental aspects of liberal democracy; notably, minority rights, pluralism, rule of law, and separation of powers. In the real world these differences are not always so clear-cut, however – in part because extreme-right groups might tone down their statements so as not to run afoul of the law. Most successful contemporary far-right groups are part of the populist radical right, which combines authoritarianism, nativism, and populism – think of parties like the Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ), the French National Rally 4 For an overview, see: Griffin R (ed) (1995) Fascism, Oxford University Press. © 2020 The Author/s. IPPR Progressive Review © 2020 IPPR Spring 2020 | 299 (RN, previously National Front (NF)), or the Sweden Democrats (SD).5 However, some extreme-right parties are, or recently have been, represented in national parliaments too, such as the Greek Golden Dawn (CA) and Kotleba – People’s Party Our Slovakia (L’SNS). Moreover, some radical- right parties and politicians openly flirt with extreme-right ideas, like antisemitism, racism, and even military dictatorship – including Brazilian president Bolsonaro and US president Donald Trump. Diversity of opinion does not only extend to visions of democracy, however. There are many issues on which far-right groups don’t see eye to eye, including the economy, environment, and immigration. One particularly interesting issue is gender, which plays an increasingly prominent role in far-right politics.6 While almost all far-right groups oppose so-called ‘Feminazis’ and ‘gender ideology’, and consider women ‘the womb of the nation’, their views on gender roles differ significantly. Many see women exclusively as (future) mothers and do not want women to work outside of the household, while others actively support working women and mothers, although preferring women to take several years off to raise the children. These different views on gender are reflected in their leadership. Many far-right organisations still have male leaders who (try to) live up to traditional images of masculinity (like Bolsonaro and Trump), while other have male leaders who are breaking with the traditional masculine image (like Jimmie Âkesson, who took a break as SD leader to address “health issues”), or have female leaders (like Marine Le Pen). But this diversity is not just ideological. In terms the size and scope of organisations, we have far-right politicians without their own party (Bolsonaro, before he founded his own party in late 2019), with a non-far- right party (Trump), with a one-man party (Geert Wilders and the Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV)), or with a mass party (Narendra Modi of the Indian People’s Party (BJP) which claims 180 million members). And while some far-right organisations are decades old and have survived their founder-leader and several political ups and downs (such as BJP and FPÖ), others are only a few years old, untested by political upheaval (such as Vox in Spain). Finally, some organisations would fit in a small living room, and are at best involved in local activism, while others count tens of thousands of members and can stage mass demonstrations. More extreme organisations tend to be smaller, but this is not always the case. The Indian 5 See: Mudde C (2007) Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe, Cambridge University Press. 6 Mudde C (2019) The Far-Right Today, Polity © 2020 The Author/s. IPPR Progressive Review © 2020 IPPR 300 | IPPR Progressive Review | Volume 26(4) National Volunteer Organisation (RSS) is a Hindutva (Hindu nationalist) organisation claiming 5 to 6 million members, which has been banned several times in its almost 100-year history for terrorism. MAINSTREAMING AND NORMALISATION In a 1998 article, the German political scientist Klaus von Beyme distinguished between “three waves of right-wing extremism in post-war Europe”.7 The first wave, roughly between 1945 and 1955, was characterised by small ‘neo-fascist’ groups, which mostly argued for amnesty and support for wartime collaborators and their families. The Italian Social Movement (MSI) was the only successful political party of this wave, being represented in the Italian parliament from 1948 until 1995, when they transformed into the National Alliance (AN). The second wave, roughly from 1955 to 1980, was defined by ‘right-wing populist’ flash parties, like the French Poujadists, which gained significant electoral success in one or two elections, before disappearing rapidly into political oblivion. “Far-right parties scored on average just 1 per cent of the national vote in the 1980s, but they averaged 8 per cent in the 2010s” The third wave started in 1980 and saw the electoral breakthrough of radical-right parties like the FN and FPÖ, which focussed primarily on contemporary issues like immigration. These parties were (mostly) new organisations, with leaders untainted by the second world war, and challenged the political establishment from the outside. In most countries, the far-right was excluded from coalitions by so-called cordons sanitaires,8 and its leaders and members were treated as political pariahs. While some parties were able to establish some cracks in the cordon, only one far-right party entered a national coalition government in the late 20th century, the Northern League (LN) in Italy. Nevertheless, its far-right status was heavily debated – many saw it as a regionalist rather than nationalist party.9 7 Klaus von Beyme (1988) ‘Right-Wing Extremism in Postwar Europe’, West European Politics, 11(2):1–18. 8 Literally “sanitary cordon”–normally used to refer to a barrier to stop the spread of infectious diseases. Used here to mean (formal) agreements between political parties to exclude one or more parties from coalition governments. 9 See, for example: Giordano B (2000) ‘Italian Regionalism or ‘Padanian’ Nationalism – The Political Project of the Lega Nord in Italian Politics’, Political Geography, 19(4):445–471 © 2020 The Author/s. IPPR Progressive Review © 2020 IPPR Spring 2020 | 301 The third wave came to an end at the turn of the century, in the wake of the terrorist attacks of 9/11, when a fourth wave started that is both qualitatively and quantitatively different.