PEGIDA: Fearful Patriots Or Right- Wing Radicals?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Master’s Thesis 2016 60 ECTS Department of International Environment and Development Studies PEGIDA: Fearful patriots or right- wing radicals? Ruth Katharina Glasmeier International Relations The Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Noragric, is the international gateway for the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU). Eight departments, associated research institutions and the Norwegian College of Veterinary Medicine in Oslo. Established in 1986, Noragric’s contribution to international development lies in the interface between research, education (Bachelor, Master and PhD programmes) and assignments. The Noragric Master thesis are the final theses submitted by students in order to fulfil the requirements under the Noragric Master programme “International Environmental Studies”, “International Development Studies” and “International Relations”. The findings in this thesis do not necessarily reflect the views of Noragric. Extracts from this publication may only be reproduced after prior consultation with the author and on condition that the source is indicated. For rights of reproduction or translation contact Noragric. © Ruth Katharina Glasmeier, May 2016 [email protected] Noragric Department of International Environment and Development Studies P.O. Box 5003 N-1432 Ås Norway Tel.: +47 67 23 00 00 Internet: https://www.nmbu.no/om/fakulteter/samvit/institutter/noragric II Declaration I, Ruth Katharina Glasmeier, declare that this thesis is a result of my research investigations and findings. Sources of information other than my own have been acknowledged and a reference list has been appended. This work has not been previously submitted to any other university for award of any type of academic degree. Signature……………………………….. Date………………………………………… III The comments made by the PEGIDA leadership, followers and speakers, Wilders, Wagensveld, and Robinson do not represent the opinions of the author. IV “We are standing here because the government does not offer any solutions. We are standing here because the representative democracy is failing and is developing into a political party proportional representation machinery. We are standing here because we want to keep our Germany the way we know and love it. We are standing here because we do not want to be educated by arrogant know-it-alls. We are standing here because we are opposing the foreign infiltration and extinction of our culture. And we are standing here because our homeland is dear to us. And we want to preserve it for our children and grandchildren. And we are standing here because we have a vision. ”(Festerling in: Pegida in Dresden- Die Dokumentation, 2015) 1 PEGIDA protest March 23, 2015 in Dresden (photo: Ruth Katharina Glasmeier) “If you love Germany, then raise the alarm. If you love your husband or wife, then raise the alarm. If you love your children, then raise the alarm. Warn your neighbours, your colleagues, warn your friends of the danger of an Islamisation, a danger for your country, your freedom, your children.” (Wilders, 2015d) 1 All translations from German, Dutch, and Latin are, if not otherwise specified, made by the author. This includes translations from official German governmental sources, PEGIDA, Wagensveld, Wilders, and German and Dutch studies V VI Acknowledgements First and foremost, my utmost thanks go out to my supervisor Dag Einar Thorsen for his constant support. His feedback and the discussions with him, helped me a lot in understanding this topic. I would also like to thank Stig Jarle Hansen for making this thesis possible and Øystein Sørensen for being on my panel. I am also grateful to Ingunn Bohmann, the NMBU Writing Centre, and the Norwegian University of Life Sciences. Besides these, I would also like to thank Sindre Bangstad for providing me with valuable information on right-wing movements and Steven Schäller for meeting me and helping me understand PEGIDA in the initial phase of this thesis. I would also like to thank Tommy Robinson and Edwin Wagensveld who agreed, despite their busy schedules, to answer my questions. I would also like to thank those PEGIDA followers that were willing to answer me, despite their prejudice towards the public and researchers. My gratitude also goes out to Tara Bartnik for lending me her Dictaphone and Vera Laing and Natalia Priladoseva for giving me a place to sleep when I conducted the interviews in the Netherlands and in England. Finally, I am grateful for the constant support I received from Michael Glasmeier, Christiane Seiffert, Annelie Lütgens, Ernst-Otto Glasmeier, and Lars Wandel during the writing process. It would have not been possible without them. VII VIII Abstract Right-wing movements have become more popular in recent years. This shows in the increase of right-wing populist or right-wing radical parties in different European governments. Despite this European wide trend, Germany did not have a successful right- wing movement. This changed with the creation of PEGIDA and the AfD. Since this type of movement is relatively new in Germany, this thesis aims to understand PEGIDA. The thesis aims to answer the question of Who are PEGIDA? To do so, it will focus on the reasons for people to join PEGIDA, PEGIDA’s norms and identity, their ideology and how this is comparable to other European right-wing movements, as well as the role of other European right-wing movements in the success of PEGIDA. This thesis will answer these questions through fieldwork, qualitative interviews with Edwin Wagensveld and Tommy Robinson, as well as an ideological frame analysis. To understand the concept of right-wing movements, this thesis will look at different theories. To understand norms, identity and culture, this thesis will look at the social construction of these as well as European integration. A definition of ideology will be offered. Moreover, it aims to understand right-wing movements in general, with a special focus on right-wing populism, right-wing radicalism, and right-wing extremism. Finally, it will explain important terms when talking about protest movements in Germany. The results show, that in its base PEGIDA appear as an anti-Islamic right-wing populist movement. The people at PEGIDA Dresden have a strong national identity and fear losing it. While these followers as well as Wagensveld and Robinson can be defined as fearful patriots, the German leadership are right-wing radicals. Interestingly, although other movements support PEGIDA, they did not play an active role in the success and development of PEGIDA. Only the Monday demonstrations of 1989 played a role in PEGIDA’s success. IX Besides that, while other movements focus on the dangers of Islam, PEGIDA mainly argue about the perceived failures of the government, the press, the EU, and others. This thesis will conclude that the members of PEGIDA are a mix of fearful patriots and right-wing radicals who fight to retain their national identity against the influences of Islam and the political elites. X Table of Contents 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Research questions ..................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Outline ........................................................................................................................ 4 2 Background and literature .............................................................................................. 6 2.1 Literature on PEGIDA ................................................................................................ 6 2.2 The European context ................................................................................................. 9 3 Methodology ................................................................................................................... 16 3.1 Fieldwork .................................................................................................................. 16 3.1.1 Process ................................................................................................................ 16 3.1.2 Questionnaire ..................................................................................................... 17 3.1.3 Sampling ............................................................................................................. 17 3.1.1 Limitations and ethical constraints ..................................................................... 18 3.2 Qualitative interviews ............................................................................................... 19 3.2.1 Process ................................................................................................................ 20 3.2.2 Questionnaire ..................................................................................................... 20 3.2.3 Limitation and ethical constraints ...................................................................... 21 3.3 Ideological analysis .................................................................................................. 21 3.3.1 Morphological approach .................................................................................... 21 3.3.2 Process ................................................................................................................ 22 3.3.3 Sampling ............................................................................................................