Variations in European populist anti-establishment parties

This thesis examines the varying success of populist anti-establishment parties (AEPs) in Europe, asking the following questions. How comparable are populist AEPs? Why are some populist AEPs more successful than others? How deeply rooted in attitudes is populist AEP support? It has long been understood that there have been structural shifts in public attitudes and political competition, particularly in Western Europe (Inglehart 1990; Kriesi et al 2006). Throughout the continent, voters increasingly feel that established parties, and the established political system itself, do not represent them (Ignazi 1992; Katz & Mair 1995; Kriesi 2014). Where voters ask such fundamental questions, populist AEPs thrive. Studies that analyse both the populist left- and right-wing, over time and across countries are few and far between. The evolution of political competition is not limited to one side of the political spectrum, or to one region, which needs to be taken into account. This thesis uses a variety of advanced quantitative methods to analyse populist AEPs across Europe, over time, at the country-, party- and individual-level to understand how they challenge the political system. To avoid similarities and the wider phenomenon being masked, a new definition for AEPs is developed, which focuses on whether their ideology challenges the political system. Populist AEPs perform best during economic downturns, when established parties converge and when they face fewer competitors. Populist AEPs that place more emphasis on the EU in particular are more successful, as they target political elites. Their voters tend to be from a lower socioeconomic background but are primarily motivated by a sense of anger with the political establishment and ideological radicalism on a left-right basis. Their voters turn to a party that best represents them, not any populist AEP. Their success, therefore, is deep-rooted; populist AEPs are variations of the same phenomenon.