Advertisement

Conclusion

Chapter
Part of the Political Campaigning and Communication book series (PCC)

Abstract

Sometimes political parties co-opt a specific other party’s policy issue positions. Sometimes political parties systematically boycott a specific other party. In this book, we have argued, and demonstrated empirically, that the combination of these measures reduces the targeted party’s electoral support. In this conclusion, we summarize our empirical findings as well as their theoretical and practical implications. We also list several limitations of this study and conclude by outlining four avenues for future research.

References

  1. Akkerman, Tjitske, and Matthijs Rooduijn. 2015. Pariahs or Partners? Inclusion and Exclusion of the Radical Right and the Effects on Their Policy Positions. Political Studies 63 (5): 1140–1157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almond, Gabriel A., and Sidney Verba. 1963. The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Art, David. 2006. The Politics of the Nazi Past in Germany and Austria. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bale, Tim. 2003. Cinderella and Her Ugly Sisters: The Mainstream and Extreme Right in Europe’s Bipolarising Party Systems. West European Politics 26 (3): 67–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bolsius, Erik Jan. 1994. Racistische partijen met recht verbieden. Een onderzoek naar de juridische mogelijkheden om extreem-rechtse en racistische partijen te verbieden of te ontbinden, naar Belgisch, Duits en Nederlands recht. Utrecht: Wetenschapswinkel Rechten, Universiteit Utrecht.Google Scholar
  6. Bouw, Carolien, Jaap Van Donselaar, and Carien Nelissen. 1981. De Nederlandse Volks-Unie : Portret van een racistische splinterpartij. Bussum: Het Wereldvenster.Google Scholar
  7. Burscher, Björn, Joost H.P. van Spanje, and Claes H. de Vreese. 2015. Owning the Issues of Crime and Immigration: The Relation Between Immigration and Crime News And Anti-Immigrant Voting in 11 Countries. Electoral Studies 38 (1): 59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Capoccia, Giovanni. 2005. Defending democracy: reactions to extremism in interwar Europe. London / Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Dalton, Russell J., and Martin P. Wattenberg. 2000. Parties Without Partisans: Political Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Dalton, Russell J., Scott Flanagan, and Paul Allen Beck (eds.). 1984. Electoral Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies: Realignment or Dealignment?. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Debus, Marc. 2007. Pre-Electoral Alliances, Coalition Rejections, and Multiparty Governments. Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Swert, Knut. 2002. The Cordon Sanitaire Around the Extreme Right in the Flemish Media. Paper read at ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops, at the University of Turin.Google Scholar
  13. De Vreese, Claes H., and Hajo G. Boomgaarden. 2006. Media Message Flows and Interpersonal Communication: The Conditional Nature of Effects on Public Opinion. Communication Research 33: 1–19.Google Scholar
  14. De Vreese, Claes H., and Holli A. Semetko. 2004. News matters: Influence on the Vote in the Danish 2000 Euro Referendum Campaign. European Journal of Political Research 43: 699–722.Google Scholar
  15. Dilliplane, Susan, Seth K. Goldman, and Diana C. Mutz. 2013. Televised Exposure to Politics: New Measures for a Fragmented Media Environment. American Journal of Political Science 57 (1): 236–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Downs, William M. 2002. How Effective is the Cordon Sanitaire? Lessons from Efforts to Contain the Far Right in Belgium, France, Denmark and Norway. Journal für Konflikt- und Gewaltforschung 4 (1): 32–51.Google Scholar
  17. Easton, David. 1975. A Re-assessment of the Concept of Political Support. British Journal of Political Science 5: 435–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eskes, J.A.O. 1980. Politieke verenigingsvrijheid in Nederland. NCJM-Bulletin 5: 258–281.Google Scholar
  19. Eskes, J.A.O. 1988. Repressie van politieke bewegingen in Nederland. Een juridisch-historische studie over het Nederlandse publiekrechtelijke verenigingsrecht gedurende het tijdvak 1798–1988. Zwolle: Tjeenk-Willink.Google Scholar
  20. Fennema, Meindert, and Marcel Maussen. 2000. Dealing with Extremists in Public Discussion: Front national and ‘Republican Front’ in France. Journal of Political Philosophy 8: 379–400.Google Scholar
  21. Fennema, Meindert. 1988. Conclusions. In Communist Parties in Western Europe. Decline or Adaptation?, ed. M. Waller and M. Fennema. Oxford/New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  22. Fiorina, Morris P. 2002. Parties and Partisanship: A 40-Year Retrospective. Political Behavior 24 (2): 93–115.Google Scholar
  23. Franklin, Mark N., and Joost H.P. van Spanje. 2012. How Do Established Voters React to New Parties? The case of Italy, 1985–2008. Electoral Studies 31 (2): 297–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gardberg, Annvi. 1993. Zweden. In Racistische partijen in West-Europa: Tussen nationale traditie en Europese samenwerking, ed. F. Elbers and M. Fennema. Leiden: Stichting Burgerschapskunde/Nederlands Centrum voor Politieke Vorming.Google Scholar
  25. Gschwend, Thomas, and Marc Hooghe. 2008. Should I stay or should I go? An experimental study on voter responses to pre‐electoral coalitions. European Journal of Political Research 47 (5): 556–577.Google Scholar
  26. Hoebink, Hein. 2004. Mit Intoleranz leben, mit Toleranz sterben. Zur Rolle der Communistische Partij Nederland im kalten Krieg. In Ablehnung, Duldung, Anerkennung: Toleranz in den Niederlanden und in Deutschland, ed. H. Lademacher, R. Loos and S. Groenveld. Munster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  27. Hopmann, David N., Rens Vliegenthart and Claes H. de Vreese. 2010. Effects of election news coverage: How visibility and tone affect party choice. Political Communication 27 (4): 389–405.Google Scholar
  28. Hotterbeex, Marcel. 1988. The Price of Delayed Adaptation: The Communist Party of Belgium. In Communist Parties in Western Europe: Decline or Adaptation?, ed. M. Waller and M. Fennema. Oxford/New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  29. Husbands, Christopher T. 2002. Combating the Extreme Right With the Instruments of the Constitutional State. Journal für Konflikt und Gewaltforschung 4: 52–73.Google Scholar
  30. Ingraham, Barton L. 1979. Political Crime in Europe: A Comparative Study of France, Germany, and England. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  31. Katz, Richard S., and Peter Mair. 1995. Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy: The Emergence of the Cartel Party. Party Politics 1 (1): 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kepplinger, Hans M., Hans-Bernd Brosius, and Joachim F. Staab. 1991. Instrumental Actualization: A Theory of Mediated Conflicts. European Journal of Communication 6: 263–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kleinnijenhuis, Jan, Anita M. van Hoof, Dirk Oegema, and Jan A. de Ridder. 2007. A Test of Rivalling Approaches to Explain News Effects: News on Issue Positions Of Parties, Real-World Developments, Support and Criticism, and Success and Failure. Journal of Communication 57 (2): 366–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Levite, Ariel, and Sidney Tarrow. 1983. The Legitimation of Excluded Parties in Dominant Party Systems. Comparative Politics 15 (3): 295–327.Google Scholar
  35. Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Stein Rokkan. 1967. Cleavage Structures, Party Systems and Voter Alignments. An Introduction. In Party systems and voter alignments, ed. S. M. Lipset and S. Rokkan. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  36. Mayer, Nonna. 2007. Comment Nicolas Sarkozy a rétréci l’électorat Le Pen. Revue française de science politique 57 (3–4): 429–445.Google Scholar
  37. Meffert, Michael F., and Thomas Gschwend. 2010. Strategic Coalition Voting: Evidence from Austria. Electoral Studies 29: 339–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Meffert, Michael F., Sacha Huber, Thomas Gschwend, and Franz Urban Pappi. 2011. More than Wishful Thinking: Causes and Consequences of Voters’ Electoral Expectations about Parties and Coalitions. Electoral Studies 30: 804–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Meguid, Bonnie M. 2008. Party Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Minkenberg, Michael. 2006. Repression and Reaction: Militant Democracy and the Radical Right in Germany and France. Patterns of Prejudice 40 (1): 25–44.Google Scholar
  41. Minkenberg, Michael. 2013. From Pariah to Policy-Maker? The Radical Right in Europe, West and East: Between Margin and Mainstream. Journal of Contemporary European Studies 21 (1): 5–24.Google Scholar
  42. Mol, Peter. 1993. Om de democratie te beschermen: de uitsluiting van zendtijd voor politieke partijen van de CPN, 1948–1965. In Van beeld tot beeld: de films en televisieuitzendingen van de CPN, 1928-1986, ed. B. Hogenkamp and P. Mol. Amsterdam: Stichting Film en Wetenschap, Audiovisueel Archief.Google Scholar
  43. More, Gillian. 1994. Undercover Surveillance of the Republikaner Party: Protecting a Militant Democracy or Discrediting a Political Rival? German Politics 3 (2): 284–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mudde, Cas. 2007. Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mudde, Cas, and Joop J. M. van Holsteyn. 2000. The Netherlands: Explaining the Limited Success of the Extreme Right. In The Politics of the Extreme Right: From the Margins to the Mainstream, ed. P. Hainsworth. London/New York: Pinter.Google Scholar
  46. Mutz, Diana C. 1998. Impersonal influence: How perceptions of mass collectives affect political attitudes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Pauwels, Teun. 2011. Explaining the Strange Decline of the Populist Radical Right Vlaams Belang in Belgium: The Impact of Permanent Opposition. Acta Politica 46 (1): 60–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pedersen, Karina, and Jens Ringsmose. 2004. From the Progress Party to the Danish People’s Party: From protest party to government supporting party. Paper read at ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops, at Uppsala University.Google Scholar
  49. Prior, Markus. 2007. Post-Broadcast Democracy: How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Rabinowitz, George, and Stuart E. Macdonald. 1989. A Directional Theory of Issue Voting. American Political Science Review 83 (1): 93–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Reif, Karlheinz, and Hermann Schmitt. 1980. Nine Second-Order National Elections: A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of European Election Results. European Journal of Political Research 8 (1): 3–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rummens, Stefan, and Koenraad Abts. 2010. Defending Democracy: The Concentric Containment of Political Extremism. Political Studies 58: 649–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rydgren, Jens. 2005. Is Extreme Right-Wing Populism Contagious? Explaining the Emergence of a New Party Family. European Journal of Political Research 44 (3): 413–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sartori, Giovanni. 1976. Party and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Shields, Jim. 2010a. Support for Le Pen in France: Two Elections in Trompe l’œil. Politics 30 (1): 61–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Shields, Jim. 2010b. The Far-Right Vote in France: From Consolidation to Collapse? French Politics, Culture and Society 28 (1): 25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sjöblom, Gunnar. 1968. Party Strategies in a Multiparty System. Lund: Berlingska Boktryckeriet.Google Scholar
  58. Strøm, Kaare, and Wolfgang C. Muller. 1999. Political Parties and Hard Choices. In Policy, Office, or Votes?, ed. W. C. Muller and K. Strøm. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Tannahill, R. Neal. 1978. The Communist Parties of Western Europe. A Comparative Study. Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  60. Tardi, Gregory. 2004. Political Parties’ Right to Engage in Politics: Variations on a Theme of Democracy. In Militant Democracy, ed. A. Sajo. Utrecht: Eleven International Publishing.Google Scholar
  61. Tillie, Jean. 1995. Party Utility and Voting Behaviour. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.Google Scholar
  62. Van der Brug, Wouter, and Joost H. P. van Spanje. 2009. Immigration, Europe, and the ‘New’ Cultural Dimension. European Journal of Political Research 48 (3): 309–334.Google Scholar
  63. Van der Brug, Wouter, and Meindert Fennema. 2003. Protest or Mainstream? How the European Anti-Immigrant Parties Developed into Two Separate Groups by 1999. European Journal of Political Research 42 (1): 55–76.Google Scholar
  64. Van der Brug, Wouter, Meindert Fennema, and Jean Tillie. 2000. Anti-Immigrant Parties in Europe: Ideological or Protest Vote? European Journal of Political Research 37 (1): 77–102.Google Scholar
  65. Van der Brug, Wouter, Meindert Fennema, and Jean Tillie. 2005. Why Some Anti-Immigrant Parties Fail and Others Succeed. A Two-Step Model of Aggregate Electoral Support. Comparative Political Studies 38 (5): 537–573.Google Scholar
  66. Van der Eijk, Cees, and Mark N. Franklin. 1996. Choosing Europe?: The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  67. Van Spanje, Joost H. P. 2011. The Wrong and the Right. A Comparative Analysis of ‘Anti-Immigration’ and ‘Far Right’ Parties in Contemporary Western Europe. Government and Opposition 46 (3): 293–320.Google Scholar
  68. Van Spanje, Joost H. P., and Claes H. de Vreese. 2011. So What’s Wrong With the EU? Motivations Underlying the Eurosceptic Vote in the 2009 European Elections. European Union Politics 12 (3): 405–429.Google Scholar
  69. Van Spanje, Joost H. P., and Claes H. de Vreese. 2014a. Europhile Media and Eurosceptic voting: Effects of News Media Coverage on Eurosceptic Voting in the 2009 European Parliamentary Elections. Political Communication 31 (2): 325–354.Google Scholar
  70. Van Spanje, Joost H. P., and Claes H. de Vreese. 2014b. The Way Democracy Works: The Impact of Hate Speech Prosecution of a Politician on Citizens’ Satisfaction with Democratic Performance. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 26 (4): 501–516.Google Scholar
  71. Van Spanje, Joost H. P., and Claes H. de Vreese. 2015. The Good, the Bad, and the Voter. The Impact of Hate Speech Prosecution of a Politician on the Electoral Support for his Party. Party Politics 21 (1): 115–130.Google Scholar
  72. Van Spanje, Joost H. P., and Wouter Van der Brug. 2007. The Party as Pariah: The Exclusion of Anti-Immigration Parties and its Effect on their Ideological Positions. West European Politics 30 (5): 1022–1040.Google Scholar
  73. Van Spanje, Joost H. P., and Wouter Van der Brug. 2009. Being Intolerant of the Intolerant. The Exclusion of Western European Anti-Immigration Parties and its Consequences for Party Choice. Acta Politica 44 (4): 353–384.Google Scholar
  74. Verrips, Ger. 1992. Desillusies en dossiers—PvdA en CPN na de bevrijding. In Oost-Europa en de sociaal-democratie. Identiteit, beleid, aanwezigheid. Het dertiende jaarboek voor het democratisch socialisme, ed. M. Krop, M. Ros, S. Stuiveling and B. Tromp. Amsterdam: De Arbeiderspers.Google Scholar
  75. Vliegenthart, Rens, Hajo G. Boomgaarden, and Joost H.P. van Spanje. 2012. Anti-Immigrant Party Support and Media Visibility: A Cross-Party, Over-Time Perspective. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 22 (3): 315–358.Google Scholar
  76. Westholm, Anders. 1997. Distance Versus Direction: The Illusory Defeat of the Proximity Theory of Electoral Choice. American Political Science Review 91: 865–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Zaller, John R. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations