WHAT'S HAPPENING IN EUROPE? - THE SHIFT ON THE POLITICAL AXES
By Gerrit Jan Bouwhuis
Introduction
In a few articles, I will discuss political and social developments in Europe: what is the situation now? How did it arise in recent decades? This article is about “political axes”.
Political axes
The media usually talk about “left” and “right”. André Krouwel, a Dutch political scientist, distinguishes two political axes: the “economic” axis and the “cultural” axis. He places the economic axis horizontally. That axis runs from “left” to “right”. He places the cultural axis vertically. That axis runs from “progressive” to “conservative.” Those axes represent completely different topics. The economic axis is about: more or less influence of the government on the economy; higher or lower taxes; more or less redistribution of income; more social safety nets or more financial incentives, etc. The cultural axis is about: more or less immigration; more or less EU; less or more national identity; and nowadays also: more or less concerned about the climate and more or less “woke”. These two axes represent essentially different topics, essentially different political discussions. Using those two axes you can distinguish basically four political positions. This can be visualized in the following system of quadrants:
Krouwel has developed an electoral guide with this quadrant. After completing the questions, you will then receive your own political position as a dot somewhere in one of these quadrants. Of course, not every topic can be placed on one of the axes, but these two axes and the four quadrants significantly increase the insight into the political spectrum.
New political topics: from economic to cultural topics
Political and social developments in Europe are characterized by a shift in the importance of the axes. Until the 1980s, the economic axis was dominant. It was about economics and the distribution of wealth. On that axis, the left (social democrats; and in Italy and France also large communist parties) and the right (conservatives, liberals (in the European sense, not in the American sense!) and Christian democrats stood opposite each other. That changed from the 1990s onwards. Other themes became more important. The central keyword for the changes since the 1980s is globalization. The two most important elements are: shifts in global production structures and the emergence of a global information society. This development coincided with the collapse of the Soviet Union. That reinforced that development. Furthermore, in Europe the EU was transformed from an economic community to a political union; the Euro was introduced (1998); the EU was expanded to include former Eastern Bloc countries; free movement of workers was introduced; labor migration occurred from East to West. Labor migration was not new, by the way. Turks and Moroccans had been coming to Western Europe since the 1960s, first as temporary workers, later as real immigrants. In addition, asylum migration became increasingly important from the 1990s onwards. This migration received a major boost with wars in Afghanistan and in areas in Africa and with the crises in the Arab world, including Syria from 2011 onwards. A peak was reached in 2015 with the refugee crisis (Merkel: wir schaffen das) *. This theme is completely topical. Migration has been the most important political issue since the turn of the millennium.
A close second is “Europe”. That theme became more topical after the introduction of the Euro. There was resistance against increasing “Europeanization”, and with it the erosion of national sovereignty. In 2005, the Netherlands and France rejected the European “Constitution” in referenda. After the Euro crisis in 2012, this theme received new impetus. In recent years, climate and “woke” have emerged as important topics. All these topics (migration, EU/national sovereignty, climate, “woke”) have in common that they are not economic in nature, at least not primarily. They are much more about “values”. They are about the change in one's own environment due to large groups of migrants, due to the arrival of other cultures and other religions, sometimes with radical excesses. Of course, economic factors also play a role: the changes resulting from globalization; the greater uncertainties; the relative loss of the classical production industries in Western countries, et cetera. Certainly, but the experience of the cultural change of one's own society is dominant for the political emotions of the citizens.
New political parties
Another change that occurred concerned the political spectrum. Two changes: classical political parties lost supporters, especially Social Democrats and Christian Democrats; so-called protest parties emerged. Of course, there is a relationship between the two changes. The rise of “protest parties” cannot be seen separately from immigration, the arrival of culturally different groups. Let's look at the situation in some countries.
Italy was never a stable democracy. Since 1945 there have been as many cabinets as years. The classic Christian Democrats have disappeared. The communists too. The Social Democrats still have about 20%. The remaining 80% of voters largely drift from one party to another, often around one person (Berlusconi, Salvini, Beppe Grillo, now Meloni). In 2022 Meloni achieved 26% with her Fratelli d'Italia, was the largest party and became prime minister.
In France, the social democrats have been marginalized. The Rassemblement National and its predecessor Front National have existed since 1974, first with Jean-Marie Le Pen, the last 20 years with Marine Le Pen (the daughter of Jean-Marie). They reached the second round of the Presidential elections three times. In 2002, Jean-Marie Le Pen achieved 18%. In 2017 Marine got 33.9%. In 2022, she got 41.5%.
Belgium has two identities: Flanders and Wallonia. In Flanders, all three classical parties have declined sharply. On the “right side”, since 2004 there have been two parties, the more radical “Vlaams Belang” and the more moderate “Nieuw-Vlaamse Alliantie” (N-VA, or New Flemish Alliance, of Bart de Wever. Both have a following of 20 to 25%. Vlaams Belang (the older of the two) has been kept out of power until now (cordon sanitary). The NVA rules. None of this in Wallonia. Social Democrats, liberals and greens dominate there.
In the Netherlands, Fortuyn's movement entered Parliament out of nowhere in 2002 with 17%. Fortuyn was murdered by a left-wing activist 9 days before the elections. In 2010 Wilders got 16%. In November 2023 he became 25%. The question now is whether he will govern.
In Germany, the Alternative for Germany, AfD, emerged after the Euro crisis in 2012. The party was on the verge of death when the refugee crisis broke out in 2015. In 2021 the party received 13%. For about a year the party has been polling above 20%.
In Sweden, the Social Democrats had the majority for a long time. But there too a protest party emerged, the “Sverige Democrats”. This gained momentum after 2015 when the country admitted many refugees. In 2022, they received 17.5% in elections in which increased gang violence in the country played a major role. They now tolerate a centre-right cabinet. This has happened before in Denmark.
Political identity.
What do these “protest parties” stand for?
In all cases, resistance to immigration and preservation of national identity are dominant themes. Often the protest parties are called “populist”, which can be interpreted as: talking to the voter in an unrealistic way, telling fairy tales. Those who say this like to present the developments as “inevitable”. That's nonsense. The acceptance of immigration and Europeanization are political choices.
Opponents of the protest parties also like to use the label “extreme right”, meaning “fascist”, “racist” or “Nazi”. Sometimes there is a grain of truth in that. Jean-Marie Le Pen had anti-Semitic tendencies. The Sverige Democrats had a Nazi past. The AfD in Germany is not free from Nazi taints. In all cases, however, it is either about something that has been dealt with (Marine Le Pen expelled her father from the party), or about relatively marginal elements in those parties (maybe with exception to the German AfD). And even more importantly: it is not realistic to “frame” the voters of those parties in this way. Opposition to immigration coincides with resistance to the increasing influence of Islam. And that is currently the most important reason for the accusations of racism: are the protest parties only combating radical Islam or are they violating religious freedom and therefore discriminating against an entire population group? More about this in a later article.
Finally, the position of the parties on the economic axis. Are they “left” or “right”? That varies and is not always clear. In France and the Netherlands, RN and Wilders are clearly economically left-wing. In all countries, voters for the protest parties often or even mainly come from the social democratic parties. That’s why I have placed all these parties in the left-down quadrant (see above). But so, be aware: the situation can be more variable.
Left and right.
We started this article with two “axes”. These axes are not distinguished in the media. Alas, but a fact. Journalists talk categorically about “left” and “right”. The content of those concepts has therefore completely changed. It's not about economics. It is about the values of cultural homogeneity and national sovereignty. Be aware of that. Forget the economic association.
In closure: What can South Africa learn from Europe?
One classic lesson: as political elites, try to stay close to the people. That failed in Europe. Political elites and ordinary people drifted away from each other. A cultural divide emerged.
The estrangement between elite and people as been accompanied by a third change: a change in the way political discussions took place. More about that next time.
*Editor’s note: literally ‘we can manage this’, a statement attributed to (then) Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel, during the 2015 European migrant crisis, as a core slogan of the German concept of ‘Wilkommenskultur’ (welcoming culture).
**About the author: Gerrit Jan Bouwhuis (1948) was advisor to the Minister of Finance in the Netherlands. After his retirement, he made study trips to Africa and Eastern Europe. Since 2018, he has been as an international election observer in Ukraine, Iraq, and Turkey.
Comments