Conclusions: The Fragmentation of Nationalist Party Families in the European Arena

  • Margarita Gómez-Reino
Part of the Palgrave Studies in European Political Sociology book series (PSEPS)


Despite the scholarly emphasis on the relevance of identity politics in Europe, the political and electoral strength of minority and populist nationalist party families in the European Union remains limited to a minor space on the sides of the European party system. This chapter summarizes the main findings of the book and compares the Europeanization of these opposing nationalist party families both in their perspectives on European Integration and in their transnational inroads in the European arena. The image of minority and populist nationalist parties as polar opposites on European integration is more blurred than expected; yet perspectives on European integration add to the ideological differentiation of both nationalist party families. The weight of minority and populist nationalist party families in the European party system has improved in European elections and so is the number of MEPs elected in the European parliament. Populist nationalist parties have doubled the size of the minority nationalist party family during the 2009–2014 European elections. However, the historical trajectories of Europeanization of minority and populist nationalist party families share a structural fragmentation since translation mechanisms impinge on transnational party coordination. The choice between going on their own in political groups and integrating in other political groups and Europarties marks the fragmented evolution of Europeanized nationalisms.


  1. Akkerman, T., S. de Lange, and M. Roodhuijn, eds. 2016. Radical Right-Wing Populist Parties in Western Europe: Into the Mainstream? London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Almeida, D. 2012. The Impact of European Integration on Political Parties. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakker, R., S. Jolly, and J. Polck. 2012. Complexity in the European Party Space: Exploring Dimensionality with Experts. European Union Politics 13 (2): 219–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartolini, S. 2005. Restructuring Europe: Centre Formation, System Building and Political Restructuring. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brack, N. 2013. Euroscepticism at the Supranational Level: The Case of the ‘Untidy Right’ in the European Parliament. Journal of Common Market Studies 51 (1): 85–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Caramani, D. 2015. The Europeanization of Politics: The Formation of European Electorate and Party System in Historical Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. De Vries, C., and E. Edwards. 2009. Taking Europe to Its Extremes: Extremist Parties and Public Euroskepticism. Party Politics 15 (I): 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Winter, L. 1998. Conclusion. A Comparative Analysis of the Electoral, Office and Policy Success of Ethnoregionalist Parties. In Regionalist Parties in Western Europe, ed. L. De Winter and H. Türsan. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. De Winter, L., M. Gómez-Reino, and J. Buelens. 2006a. The Vlaams Blok and the Heritage of Extreme-Right Flemish Nationalism. In Autonomist Parties in Europe: Identity Politics and the Revival of the Centre-Periphery Cleavage, vol. 2, 47–78. Barcelona: ICPS.Google Scholar
  10. De Winter, L., M. Gómez-Reino, and P. Lynch. 2006b. Autonomist Parties in Europe. Barcelona: ICPS.Google Scholar
  11. EFA. 2009. EFA’s Electoral Manifesto for the European Elections 2009.
  12. ———. 2014. The EFA Manifesto for the 2014 European Elections.
  13. Elias, A. 2009. From Euro-enthusiasm to Euro-scepticism? A Reevaluation of Minority Nationalist Party Attitudes Towards European Integration. Regional and Federal Studies 18 (5): 557–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elias, A., and Filippo Tronconi, eds. 2011. From Protest to Power: Autonomist Parties and the Challenges of Representation. Wien: Braumüller Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. Gómez-Reino, M. 2014. European Integration and An Alternative Party Family: Regionalist Parties and the European Question. In Europe’s Contending Identities: Supranationalism, Ethnoregionalism, Religion and New Nationalism, ed. Andrew C. Gould and Anthony M. Messina. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Gómez-Reino, M., L. De Winter, and P. Lynch. 2006. The Future Study of Autonomist and Regionalist Parties. In Autonomist Parties in Western Europe. Identity Politics and the Revival of the Territorial Cleavage. Barcelona: ICPS.Google Scholar
  17. Hall, P., and R. Taylor. 1996. Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies 44 (5): 936–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hepburn, E. 2010. Using Europe. Territorial Party Strategies in a Multilevel System. Manchester: Manchester University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hix, S. 2002. Parliamentary Behavior with Two Principals: Preferences, Parties, and Voting in the European Parliament. American Journal of Political Science 46 (3): 688–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hix, S., and B. Hoyland. 2013. Empowerment of the European Parliament. Annual Review of Political Science 16: 171–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hix, S., A. Noury, and G. Roland. 2006. Dimensions of Politics in the European Parliament. American Journal of Political Science 50: 494–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. ———. 2007. Democratic Politics in the European Parliament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hooghe, L., and G. Marks. 2009. A Postfunctional Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus. British Journal of Political Science 39 (1): 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hooghe, L., and Gary Marks. 2017. Cleavage Theory Meets Europe’s Crises: Lipset, Rokkan and the Transnational Cleavage. Journal of European Public Policy (published online).Google Scholar
  25. Hooghe, Lisbeth, Gary Marks, and Carole Wilson. 2004. Does Left/Right Structure Party Positions on European Integration? In European Integration and Political Conflict, ed. Gary Marks and Marco R. Steenbergen. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  26. Iversen, T. 1994. Political Leadership and Representation in West European Democracies: A Test of Three Models of Voting. American Journal of Political Science 38: 45–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Johansson, K.M. 2009. The Emergence of Political Parties at European Level: Integration Unaccomplished. In How Unified Is the European Union? European Integration Between Visions and Popular Legitimacy, ed. S. Gustavsson, L. Oxelheim, and L. Pehrson. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Kreppel, A. 2002. The European Parliament and the Supranational Party System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Máiz, R., ed. 2001. Construcción de Europa, Democracia y Globalización. Santiago: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela.Google Scholar
  30. Máiz, R., and F. Requejo, eds. 2005. Democracy, Nationalism, and Multiculturalism. London: Frank Cass.Google Scholar
  31. Marks, G., et al. 2002. What Do Subnational Offices Think They Are Doing in Brussels? Regional and Federal Studies 12 (3): 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Messina, A. 2014. European Disunion? The Implications of ‘Superdiversity’ for European Identity and Political Community. In Europe’s Contending Identities: Supranationalism, Ethnoregionalism, Religion and New Nationalism, ed. A. Messina and A. Gould. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Morris, M. 2013. Conflicted Politicians. The Populist Radical Right in the European Parliament. London: Counterpoint.Google Scholar
  34. Mudde, C. 2010. The Populist Radical Right. A Pathological Normalcy. West European Politics 33 (6): 1167–1186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. ———. 2012. Three Decades of Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. So What? European Journal of Political Research 52 (1): 1–19. The Stein Rokkan Lecture.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Skocpol, T., and P. Pierson. 2002. Historical Institutionalism in Contemporary Political Science. In Political Science: State of the Discipline, ed. I. Katznelson and H. Milner. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  37. Steinmo, S. 2008. Historical Institutionalism. In Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective, ed. D. Della Porta and M. Keating. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Urwin, D. 1983. Harbinger, Fossil or Fleabite. In West European Party Systems. Continuity and Change, ed. P. Mair. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margarita Gómez-Reino
    • 1
  1. 1.Universidad Nacional de Educación a DistMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations