1. A Populist Zeitgeist in Western Europe? Matthijs Rooduijn University of Amsterdam

2. A Populist Zeitgeist

3. Main expectations

4. Conceptualizing populism People’s Party (US)

5. Conceptualizing populism Ross Perot (US)

6. Conceptualizing populism Juan Perón (Argentina)

7. Conceptualizing populism Hugo Chávez (Venezuela)

8. Conceptualizing populism Front National (France)

9. Conceptualizing populism Silvio Berlusconi (Italy)

10. Conceptualizing populism Lowest common denominator: – People-centrism – Homogeneity of the people – Anti-elitism – Proclamation of a crisis Mudde’s (2004) definition: – “ideology that considers society to be ultimately separated into two homogeneous and antagonistic groups, ‘the pure people’ versus ‘the corrupt elite’”

11. Conceptualizing populism = =

12. Research design Part 1 Case selection: FR, GE, IT, NL, UK Mainstream parties and populist parties Time frame: 1988-2008 Populisme as a scale Content analysis of election manifestos – 2 methods: classical & computerized Validity and reliability

13. Measuring populism Quantitative content analysis – Advantages Systematic Transparent Longitudinal research relatively easy – Disadvantages Coders always interpret Latent content (e.g. cynicism) Inflexible

14. Measuring populism Classical content analysis manifestos Paragraphs People-centrism – Do the authors of the manifesto refer to the people? Anti-elitism – Do the authors of the manifesto criticize elites? People-centrism + anti-elitism = populism Populism score = % populist paragraphs

15. Measuring populism People-centrism The authors can refer to ‘the people’ directly by means of terms such as ‘the people’, ‘the citizens’, ‘the British’, ‘Britain’, ‘the community’, ‘the society’, etc. They can also refer to ‘the people’ more indirectly. This is the case if they use terms such as ‘our nation’, ‘public opinion’, ‘the electorate’, ‘our culture’, ‘we’, etc. They also refer to the people if they propose to introduce a measure that implies that emphasize the importance of the people. Examples are the proposition to introduce more participatory democracy or a strong emphasis on integration.

16. Measuring populism Anti-elitism Elites are not individual persons. Criticisms regarding for example a prime minister or a businessman are usually not anti-elitist. Only if these individuals are portrayed as representatives of a certain elite these criticisms should be seen as anti-elitist. Criticisms regarding a specific government, political party, company, medium or organization is usually not anti-elitist. It is only anti-elitist if it concerns an elite in general, or if a specific government, political party, company, medium or organization is clearly portrayed as a representative of an elite in general.

17. Measuring populism Coders Codebook Training sessions Take-home excercises Reliability test 1   New codebook, new training sessions, new exercises, new reliability test Reliability test 2 

18. Measuring populism Example 1 The biggest political problem is that politicians try to escape the real social problems we face. Moreover, the established political order governs our country in a nontransparent way. The same is true for politicians in Brussels: the problems and interests of Dutch citizens are systematically ignored. The corruption in the European Union has increased dramatically.

19. Measuring populism Example 2 We support the immediate introduction of referenda on the national level. We think that the powers of central political officials, such as the mayor, should be extended. The will of Dutch citizens should be the point of departure for political decision-making again!

20. Measuring populism Example 3 We are the only party that really wants to do something about the most pressing political problems. In order to cope with these problems, the political system and the attitudes of politicians must change dramatically!

21. Measuring populism Computerized content analysis – Dictionary, no coders – Words – Only anti-elitism – Words like: Elit*, consensus*, undemocratic*, corrupt*, propagand*, politici*, *deceit*, *deceiv*, *betray*, shame*, scandal*, truth*, dishonest*, establishm*, ruling*

22. Content validity Classical content analysis: – People-centrism + Anti-elitism Computerized content analysis – Anti-elitism

23. Face validity

25. Concurrent validity

26. Impact on parties H1: the programs of mainstream parties in Western Europe have become more populist since the late 1980s

27. Impact on parties

28. H1: the programs of mainstream parties in Western Europe have become more populist since the late 1980s H2: the greater the electoral losses of a mainstream party, the more populist the programs of this party become H3: the more successful allegedly populist parties, the more populist the programs of mainstream parties become

29. Impact on parties

30. Research design Part 2 Case selection: FR, GE, IT, NL, UK Time frame: 1988-2008 Populisme as a scale Content analysis of opinion articles – 2 elite newspapers, 1 tabloid per country – 4 weeks before general election – Opinion of author of article – Different kinds of article

31. Impact on media H1: Public debates in the media have become more populist in the last two decades

32. Impact on media

33. H1: Public debates in the media have become more populist in the last two decades H2: The electoral success of allegedly populist parties positively affects the degree of populism in public debates in the media

34. Impact on media

35. H1: Public debates in the media have become more populist in the last two decades H2: The electoral success of allegedly populist parties positively affects the degree of populism in public debates in the media H3: The public debates in tabloid media are more populist than in elite media

36. Impact on media

37. H1: Public debates in the media have become more populist in the last two decades H2: The electoral success of allegedly populist parties positively affects the degree of populism in public debates in the media H3: The public debates in tabloid media are more populist than in elite media H4: Letters are more populist than other opinion articles

38. Impact on media

39. Research design Part 3 Case selection: NL Time frame: 2008-2013 Populisme as a scale Content analysis of election manifestos LISS: political discontent & vote choice

40. Impact on public opinion Expressing discontent logic – Political dissatisfaction  vote choice Fuelling discontent logic – Vote choice  political dissatisfaction

41. Impact on public opinion

44. Populism: a large impact Electoral success populists Established parties employ populism Political discontent among the public Media have become more populist

45. Populism: not omnipresent Established parties not more populist After electoral success populist parties less populist Political discontent among the public did not increase Populism in media with ups and downs

46. Populism and democracy Liberal democracy – Democratic pillar – Liberal pillar Political representation Checks and balances Minority rights Populism & democratic pillar: Populism & liberal pillar: No populist Zeitgeist Strong liberal institutions

47. The near future Populism is here to stay – European integration – Bankers and bonuses – Cartel formation Thank you!