Dutch political scientist Cas Mudde, a specialist in populism, shed light on the implications of the "Ibizagate" scandal on Monday 20 May at an event organised by the Permanent Representation of the Netherlands to the EU. According to him, this will not influence voters in the upcoming European elections, but it will make the governing parties think twice before considering a coalition with the extreme right.
The "Ibizagate" scandal (see EUROPE 12230/22) caused the collapse of the extreme right-wing government coalition in Austria between the Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) and the Austrian People's Party (ÖVP), after the release of a video by Vice-Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache, in which the latter said he was willing to offer public contracts to a Russian oligarch in exchange for hidden funding.
The FPÖ announced late Monday evening that it would withdraw all its Ministers from the government, without waiting for the early parliamentary elections that are expected to take place in September. This follows Chancellor Sebastian Kurz's decision to dismiss far-right Interior Minister Herbert Kickl. The Speaker of the Austrian Parliament also indicated that a motion of censure by the opposition against the Chancellor will be voted on 27 May.
For Cas Mudde, this type of scandal hitting far-right parties does not discourage the populist vote. Voters of populist parties have a very low bar, he explained. They consider all other politicians corrupt. In their minds, if populist parties "steal", but they do something at least good for them then it is fine, they are better than everyone else.
Thus, a scandal like "Ibizagate" will not, in his opinion, influence voters, but should, on the other hand, influence the elite. "It will make other parties look again at their local far right parties and think like ‘should I really make a collaboration with them?’", he said.
Cas Mudde also reported on the rally last Saturday of 12 extreme right-wing Eurosceptic parties in Milan. "In terms of organization and collaboration, that's not new, it is a bit more successful", he said, but it is not "impressive" either
In his opinion, this type of event gets disproportionate attention from the media. "There was no one that was significant there", he said, noting the notable absence of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.
For him, history is only repeating itself in relation to 2014. At that time, too, everyone said that they would form a large group in the European Parliament. In the end, it took them almost a year and a half after the European elections to form a group, he recalls.
Populism under the microscope
A recognised specialist in the populist phenomenon, Cas Mudde defines it as an "ideology that puts society into two different groups: the pure people on the one hand and the corrupt elite on the other hand". According to him, the distinction is not about money necessarily, it is first and foremost moral. It is about whether you are "good" or "bad", "authentic or not", he explained.
Among populists, the role of the leader is particularly interesting. "Technically the leader is not leading. The leader is part of the people", explained the political scientist.
"So they don't necessarily feel that Nigel Farage is leading them. Farage is one of them and the reason why they like him is because he can do that better but not because he has better ideas", he used as an example.
It is on the basis of this discourse that populists sell themselves. The American President, Donald Trump, knows how to do this very well, when he says to his constituents in his speeches: "I brought you back to the White House". In this way, he can present himself as a "vehicle of the people", according to Cas Mudde.
However, Donald Trump, the individual, is not a populist, he explains, because he sees himself not as part of the people, but rather as being above all else. "Trump, as a political phenomenon, is populist", he said.
According to Cas Mudde, the rise of populism can be, to some extent, linked to the democratization of our societies. "One of the reasons why people are more critical about politicians today and particularly why they act on that, it is not so much that politicians are worst or more corrupted than they used to be. We have a more independent media, and so we hear more about it. Most of people have more self-confidence. They feel that they are better informed, they feel that they are capable to criticise the elite", he explained.
Previously, most citizens who voted for the far right did so because they feared losing their position or privileges. Today, it is above all for socio-cultural issues, he noted. According to him, economic anxiety certainly plays a role in the populist vote, but it is the socio-cultural translation of this feeling that is decisive. (Original version in French by Marion Fontana)