The Securitization of Identities in Political Campaign Manifestos : A Qualitative Content Analysis

Abstract

Populism remains a very contested concept. This is due to the bewildering types of “populism” that have emerged and which lead political scientists to see populism “everywhere, but in many and contradictory shapes” (Ionescu and Gellner 1969: 1). The concept of populism seems to be in need of conceptual clarification. This dissertation undertakes a Qualitative Content Analysis of four political campaign manifestos emanating from European populist parties to develop an innovative polar typology of populism. The parties under scrutiny are the National Rally (France), Alternative für Deutschland (Germany), Podemos (Spain) and Sinn Fein (Ireland), which together, represent the type of populism emerging in Western Europe. Firstly, this dissertation compares and contrasts the political propositions and attitudes of these political parties towards political institutions such as citizenship, residency rights, and rights to political participation. Secondly, this dissertation examines the use of securitizing (and desecuritizing) strategies and the deployment of the security grammar to convince voters to support measures that would otherwise be deemed illiberal or anti-democratic. On the basis of this informed comparison, this dissertation suggests a new conceptual and theoretical distinction between two polar types of populism, namely agonistic and antagonistic populism. As such, this dissertation proposes to differentiate between various strands of populism based on the way they portray and treat the social other. This dissertation contends that populist parties that frame the social other as an enemy – that is, an antagonistic relationship – are much more likely to propose illiberal and anti-pluralist measures and justify these through the use of securitizing strategies. For these parties, access to political institutions is contingent on nationality. Therefore, the social other should be prevented from participating in the political life of the community. In contrast, populist parties that frame the social other as an opponent – that is, an agonistic relationship – are more likely to propose measures to expand the reach of political and civil rights to all who live in the polity. These populist parties promote a vision of society in which everyone is included and encouraged to participate to their full capacity in the development of a more democratic society. The agonistic/antagonistic polar types developed throughout this dissertation provide an important theoretical distinction between various types of populism. It allows for a deeper understanding of the phenomenon of populism in its variety, and reframes the debate on its supposedly anti-democratic and illiberal nature. Ultimately, it contends that populism is not necessarily a threat to democracy. However, the more a party frames the social other as a threatening enemy through the use of securitizing strategies, the more likely this party will embrace anti-pluralist, exclusive, and anti-liberal policies.