Populism and euroscepticism have become contemporary buzzwords, increasingly analysed in parallel or tandem. The debate over the proper definition of the two concepts is deeply embedded in the literature, leading to the emergence of multiple definitions. However, traditional conceptualisations still lack a theoretical synthesis that accounts for the growing interconnection between the two political phenomena. To address this gap, my analysis provides an alternative theoretical framework that incorporates traditional definitions into a unified theory, explaining existing synergies between neopopulism and euroscepticism. The primary goal of the study is not to elaborate new definitions of the two phenomena. Instead, it aims to explain the evolution of contemporary neopopulist manifestations by empirically applying traditional low-level indicators of populist rhetoric and euroscepticism to the study of euromanifestos. The study carries out a diachronic qualitative analysis, employing the holistic grading technique to evaluate the general qualities of four populist parties ‘euromanifestos. The innovative character of the fluid euroscepticism theory is twofold: it merges traditional conceptualisations of the two phenomena by measuring euroscepticism as both a “populist-like rhetoric” and as a general stance on the EU, while also offering an alternative approach to study euroscepticism as a gradational discursive quality. This framework is used to test my two assumptions that parties’ position in their national systems and the respective type of political regime shape different and fluid neopopulist politics of euroscepticism. The analysis reveals that euroscepticism is frequently employed by neopopulist actors as a fluid discursive quality, demonstrating that neopopulism and euroscepticism are not discrete concepts but continuous ones, which take on varying degrees and forms. Consequently, neopopulist actors cannot be definitively categorised as soft or hard Eurosceptic, as their stance on the EU fluctuates fluidly depending on the domestic political context.
Populism and euroscepticism have become contemporary buzzwords, increasingly analysed in parallel or tandem. The debate over the proper definition of the two concepts is deeply embedded in the literature, leading to the emergence of multiple definitions. However, traditional conceptualisations still lack a theoretical synthesis that accounts for the growing interconnection between the two political phenomena. To address this gap, my analysis provides an alternative theoretical framework that incorporates traditional definitions into a unified theory, explaining existing synergies between neopopulism and euroscepticism. The primary goal of the study is not to elaborate new definitions of the two phenomena. Instead, it aims to explain the evolution of contemporary neopopulist manifestations by empirically applying traditional low-level indicators of populist rhetoric and euroscepticism to the study of euromanifestos. The study carries out a diachronic qualitative analysis, employing the holistic grading technique to evaluate the general qualities of four populist parties ‘euromanifestos. The innovative character of the fluid euroscepticism theory is twofold: it merges traditional conceptualisations of the two phenomena by measuring euroscepticism as both a “populist-like rhetoric” and as a general stance on the EU, while also offering an alternative approach to study euroscepticism as a gradational discursive quality. This framework is used to test my two assumptions that parties’ position in their national systems and the respective type of political regime shape different and fluid neopopulist politics of euroscepticism. The analysis reveals that euroscepticism is frequently employed by neopopulist actors as a fluid discursive quality, demonstrating that neopopulism and euroscepticism are not discrete concepts but continuous ones, which take on varying degrees and forms. Consequently, neopopulist actors cannot be definitively categorised as soft or hard Eurosceptic, as their stance on the EU fluctuates fluidly depending on the domestic political context.
The Neo-populist politics of “Fluid Euroscepticism”: A comparative analysis of four populist parties’ European electoral manifestos.
CHIESURIN, ELISA
2023/2024
Abstract
Populism and euroscepticism have become contemporary buzzwords, increasingly analysed in parallel or tandem. The debate over the proper definition of the two concepts is deeply embedded in the literature, leading to the emergence of multiple definitions. However, traditional conceptualisations still lack a theoretical synthesis that accounts for the growing interconnection between the two political phenomena. To address this gap, my analysis provides an alternative theoretical framework that incorporates traditional definitions into a unified theory, explaining existing synergies between neopopulism and euroscepticism. The primary goal of the study is not to elaborate new definitions of the two phenomena. Instead, it aims to explain the evolution of contemporary neopopulist manifestations by empirically applying traditional low-level indicators of populist rhetoric and euroscepticism to the study of euromanifestos. The study carries out a diachronic qualitative analysis, employing the holistic grading technique to evaluate the general qualities of four populist parties ‘euromanifestos. The innovative character of the fluid euroscepticism theory is twofold: it merges traditional conceptualisations of the two phenomena by measuring euroscepticism as both a “populist-like rhetoric” and as a general stance on the EU, while also offering an alternative approach to study euroscepticism as a gradational discursive quality. This framework is used to test my two assumptions that parties’ position in their national systems and the respective type of political regime shape different and fluid neopopulist politics of euroscepticism. The analysis reveals that euroscepticism is frequently employed by neopopulist actors as a fluid discursive quality, demonstrating that neopopulism and euroscepticism are not discrete concepts but continuous ones, which take on varying degrees and forms. Consequently, neopopulist actors cannot be definitively categorised as soft or hard Eurosceptic, as their stance on the EU fluctuates fluidly depending on the domestic political context.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
tesi laurea magistrale Elisa Chiesurin def.pdf
accesso aperto
Dimensione
1.24 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.24 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
The text of this website © Università degli studi di Padova. Full Text are published under a non-exclusive license. Metadata are under a CC0 License
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12608/77449