Globalization of populist party voting?
Two theoretical debates form the basis of this thesis. One debate is about globalization and relative deprivation. The globalization thesis argues that globalization created winners and losers and the losers are more likely to vote for populist parties. Relative-deprivation on the other hand argues that people perceive their situation as being worse than others in society and this increases the likelihood of voting for populist parties. The second debate is about majoritarian versus consensus democracy. On the one hand it is argued that consensus democracies have less accountability and are therefore more prone to the rise of populist parties. On the other hand it is argued that consensus democracies use proportional representation and therefore populist parties can get elected more easily. This assumes a direct relationship, but research has shown that types of democracies can also have a moderator effect. This thesis investigates this perspective and analyzes to what extent the model of democracy influences the relationship between the losers of globalization/relatively deprived and voting for populist parties. This is investigated by conducting a multilevel logistic regression analysis on the European Social Survey of 2012. The outcome is that the type of democracy does not have a moderator effect on the losers of globalization/relatively deprived. Another important finding is that the globalization thesis mainly applies to populist far-right parties, whereas relative-deprivation mainly applies to populist far-left parties.
Faculteit der Managementwetenschappen