When countries have (longer) perceived periods of GDP decline or non-growth (such as the Great Depression, which represented a 'crisis of Capitalism ie a reason to try Communism et al.),
When there are low hurdles to enter a political party in a contest (minimum electoral threshold),
When a country lost in WWI,
When a country has not had a long experience already being Democratic (especially prior to 1914), or when they haven't been exposed to successful democracy (enhancing value) (social capital is essential for making democracy work effectively) (longer histories accumulate such capital),
...
High unemployment combined with immigration tends toward right-wing extremism (unemployment has no effect on right-wing populist votes when the number of immigrants is low, it has been suggested by study by M. Golder 2003),
High inflation undermines confidence in ability of mainstream parties to manage economy in 20s, collapse of prices, production, financial stability in 30s,
...
Both communists (left-wing extremists) and fascists and secessionists (right-wing) (both of which want to change the political system in the country, not just the leaders), got more votes in 1929, 1930 etc. Party examples: NSDAP in Germany, Arrow Cross in Hungary, Iron Guard in Romania. Free Thinkers in Greece no a straightforward classification.
However, Germany distinctive in how pronounced this was. (Possible reasons: unusually severe Depression, defeat in WWI radicalizing effect, easy for small parties to enter Parliament, loss of men and materiel, product shortages.)
...
1929 significant rises in votes and seats for right-wing extremists:
Austria
Belgium
Chile a bit
Finland a bit
Germany very pronounced
Hungary
Netherlands a bit
Norway a bit
Romania
For left-wing extremists:
Bulgaria (yes, both right and left)
Chile
Denmark a bit
Germany (yes, both)
Greece
Greece
Finland at this time saw much less votes for left-wingers. Norway a little bit too.
From the authors, I guess relying on data not in the graphs: Austria, Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Germany and Hungary all saw substantial increases in the extreme right vote, Communists gained support in Chile, Greece and France.
...
Point: Chancellor Bruning's lack of room for maneuver under the gold standard as resulting in deflationary overkill that contributed to to Nazi's rise to power.
Point: Post WWI, new nations were created with little regard for ethnic and religeous considerations, resulting in heterogenouse populations posing a challenge to democratic systems. Arbitrarily redrawn borders, resentment, tension, hostility. Ethnic groups splintered by new borders. Saddled with high levels of ethnic fractionalization (eg successor states to Austro-Hungarian Empire).
Point: Versailles Treaty identified with parliamentary democracy, assuring support for nationalist campaigns for annulment.
Point: Returning from WWI, people were acclimatized by military service to authoritarian forms of organization, so they then blamed government for economic hardships experienced, failing to provide security, and they entertained authoritarian alternatives.
Point: Proportional representation amplifies voice of narrow interests across the political spectrum.
Point: The civic culture is tranmitted between generations in the home, schools, and in the broader society (Almond and Vera 1989 pp. 367-68)
Point: Things said to be interrelated strongly with sustaining democracy: industrialization, urbanization, wealth and education (as if these wouldn't sustain ANY political system)
Point: Right-wing vote effect only showed up after 1929, for Communists it was present before 1929, and can be thought to be declining possibly. Also, it was a period of strident sectarianism in Communism, and their enemies were other left-wing parties.
Point: It is implied that a one-standard-deviation increase in growth lowers the probability of there being a fascist party by 18%. (these things can be measured some ways.)
Point: The Great Depression benifited the extreme right but not the extreme left.
Point: Short-lived economic fluctuations did not have a major impact on the extremist right-wing vote. It was longer-run business cycle conditions that mattered.
Question: Is there still a role for the business cycle?
Point: If a country already had fascists partys in Parliament, more pronounced effect. Fascist vote rose 1.3% after 1929 in countries where fascists had no previous parliamentary representation. 7.5% when they had already entered parliament.
Point: Fascist parties seemingly offered a "Third Way" between communism and liberal economic orthodoxy.
Point: Predictably, a higher minimum share of the vote needed for a party to gain parliamentary representation made it more difficult for extremists to gain seats in parliament. Less obviously, a higher threshold also appears to have lowered votes for extremists in the first place.
---
Economic crisis and political extremism in Europe: from the 1930s to the present - A. Klapsis (2014)
Items for consideration: global financial crisis, 2014 European Parliament elections (the gaining of ground by parties that are anti-system parties that are anti-liberal, closed-race, xenophobic, Eurosceptic)
1929 recap: $billions wiped out in a few hours, thousands of companies went bankrupt, production levels declined rapidly, affected one by one the countries of Europe. Germany, since it had been largely dependent on US loans. American investors withdrew money from German industries (along with withdrawing from everything), which unavoidably led to bankruptcy. German and other European exports to US dropped to almost zero.
Last election pre-1929 compared with peak result post-1929: Significantly up right-wing parties in Germany (3 to 43%), Romania, Hungary, Belgium, Austria (0 to 9%). Finland was already high pre-1929 and was a bit higher (15 to 18%).
By the mid-1970s all Western European countries had become parliamentary democracies. The success of the European community was seen as an additional victory of liberalism over totalitarianism. Right-wing extremism seemed to be a thing of the past, and they had only marginal if any influence on public opinion.
In the 70s and 80s violent far-left extremism, Red Army Faction in Germany, Red Brigades Italy, 17 November Greece, posed a bigger threat.
80s 90s National Front in France Flemish Block in Belgium, vote share increased. Anti-liberalism, Euroscepticism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism. Some neo-Nazi groups spreading including in former Communist countries in the East.
Global financial crisis, boosted political extremism in Europe. Unemployment, fall in living standards. National Front in France, Freedom Party of Austria, JObbik in Hungary, Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, Golden Dawn Greece.
Elections 2004 - 2014:
Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Netherlands, Sweden up. Belgium, Bulgaria down. Germany always low in far-right parties.
Point: Before 1929 Hitler's National Socialist party was nothing more than a marginal political force. 1928 3% of vote. 1930 18%. 1932 37%.
Point: Being populist, anti-system parties offered easy answers to difficult questions. Far-right parties were ultra-nationalists. The feeling of being supressed by foreign powers made voters more succeptible to right-wing extremism. People who had little or nothing to lose (peope who are convinced they have no future) were naturally more easily attracted by parties that appeared ready to destroy the existing social order and economic system and put a new one in its place.
Describe politicians as corrupt and decadent. Use mass media, especially attention of younger audiences. Use stereotypes, black-and-white arguments which, despite their poor reasoning, sound reasonable to the average voter. Conservative on social issues and sometimes openly homophobic. Reject liberal ideas and have racist tendencies. Underline the threat (of expansion of Islam in Europe). Employment and high criminality. These groups resort to violence. Eurosceptic (undermines nation states' power and authority). Seeing Russia as an ally. Funded sometimes by Russia.
Point: Authoritarian regimes aligned not always for purely ideological reasons, but also for practical geopolitical ones. The aid given by Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy to the Nationalists of Franco during the Spanish Civil War.
Point: Far-right groups have profited from the economic crisis.
Point: Far-right groups attracting more voters even in countries that have not been seriously affected by the economic crisis, like France and Netherlands. And in some of the wealthiest and most prosperous EU states, like Austria and Sweden.
Point: Some far-right groups had been quite successful even before the crisis. National Front in France.
Point: Economic crisis tends to push people to their limits. It brings to the surface fears and anxieties. Fascilitate the radicalization of choices. Tends to change the framework of the political debate.
Point: Overcoming crisis will not totally eliminate the phenomenon of political extremism by it will minimize its influence.
Point: Can emphasize economic growth in terms of social justice.
Point: When it comes to the everyday lives of ordinary people microeconomics is better. Hitler's promises in the early 1930s for the economic recovery of Germany and tackling unemployment by creating jobs for every German worker probably had a much more profound influence on voters (Tooze 2006)
Question: Is there a real danger to democracy?
1929 recap: $billions wiped out in a few hours, thousands of companies went bankrupt, production levels declined rapidly, affected one by one the countries of Europe. Germany, since it had been largely dependent on US loans. American investors withdrew money from German industries (along with withdrawing from everything), which unavoidably led to bankruptcy. German and other European exports to US dropped to almost zero.
Last election pre-1929 compared with peak result post-1929: Significantly up right-wing parties in Germany (3 to 43%), Romania, Hungary, Belgium, Austria (0 to 9%). Finland was already high pre-1929 and was a bit higher (15 to 18%).
By the mid-1970s all Western European countries had become parliamentary democracies. The success of the European community was seen as an additional victory of liberalism over totalitarianism. Right-wing extremism seemed to be a thing of the past, and they had only marginal if any influence on public opinion.
In the 70s and 80s violent far-left extremism, Red Army Faction in Germany, Red Brigades Italy, 17 November Greece, posed a bigger threat.
80s 90s National Front in France Flemish Block in Belgium, vote share increased. Anti-liberalism, Euroscepticism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism. Some neo-Nazi groups spreading including in former Communist countries in the East.
Global financial crisis, boosted political extremism in Europe. Unemployment, fall in living standards. National Front in France, Freedom Party of Austria, JObbik in Hungary, Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, Golden Dawn Greece.
Elections 2004 - 2014:
Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Netherlands, Sweden up. Belgium, Bulgaria down. Germany always low in far-right parties.
Point: Before 1929 Hitler's National Socialist party was nothing more than a marginal political force. 1928 3% of vote. 1930 18%. 1932 37%.
Point: Being populist, anti-system parties offered easy answers to difficult questions. Far-right parties were ultra-nationalists. The feeling of being supressed by foreign powers made voters more succeptible to right-wing extremism. People who had little or nothing to lose (peope who are convinced they have no future) were naturally more easily attracted by parties that appeared ready to destroy the existing social order and economic system and put a new one in its place.
Describe politicians as corrupt and decadent. Use mass media, especially attention of younger audiences. Use stereotypes, black-and-white arguments which, despite their poor reasoning, sound reasonable to the average voter. Conservative on social issues and sometimes openly homophobic. Reject liberal ideas and have racist tendencies. Underline the threat (of expansion of Islam in Europe). Employment and high criminality. These groups resort to violence. Eurosceptic (undermines nation states' power and authority). Seeing Russia as an ally. Funded sometimes by Russia.
Point: Authoritarian regimes aligned not always for purely ideological reasons, but also for practical geopolitical ones. The aid given by Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy to the Nationalists of Franco during the Spanish Civil War.
Point: Far-right groups have profited from the economic crisis.
Point: Far-right groups attracting more voters even in countries that have not been seriously affected by the economic crisis, like France and Netherlands. And in some of the wealthiest and most prosperous EU states, like Austria and Sweden.
Point: Some far-right groups had been quite successful even before the crisis. National Front in France.
Point: Economic crisis tends to push people to their limits. It brings to the surface fears and anxieties. Fascilitate the radicalization of choices. Tends to change the framework of the political debate.
Point: Overcoming crisis will not totally eliminate the phenomenon of political extremism by it will minimize its influence.
Point: Can emphasize economic growth in terms of social justice.
Point: When it comes to the everyday lives of ordinary people microeconomics is better. Hitler's promises in the early 1930s for the economic recovery of Germany and tackling unemployment by creating jobs for every German worker probably had a much more profound influence on voters (Tooze 2006)
Question: Is there a real danger to democracy?
---
Suppliment/Refrences (Only admin can write)