Introduction: Re-conceptualizing Sub-state Mobilization

Abstract

Throughout Europe, stateless nationalist and regionalist parties (SNRPs) have moved from 'niche' actors in party systems to mainstream political players. No longer the 'outsider' in party politics, these parties have successfully entered government at the regional and state levels and many have been responsible for pushing the agenda for radical constitutional change. Yet the success of SNRPs in moving from 'protest to power' is not without its challenges. This contribution explores the importance of nationalist and regionalist party adaptation to the twin challenges of multi-level politics (i.e. operating at the regional, state and European levels) and a multi-dimensional policy space, whereby they must articulate policy proposals alongside their territorial demands. As a result of these challenges, there is a need to re-conceptualize what SNRPs are fighting for, and the compromises they are willing to accept to achieve success.

To see ourselves as others see us: identity and attitudes towards immigration amongst civic nationalists

“…FNP is mostly associated with linguistic and cultural issues whereas the SNP's main objective is an independent Scottish state. Considering these differences, the SNP and the FNP are representative of the very diverse autonomist and SNRP party families (De Winter and Türsan 1998;Hepburn 2009a).…”

Position, selective emphasis and framing

“…On the contrary, as niche parties advance a very narrow set of issues and receive electoral support exclusively on this basis, they will be unable to boost their support by emphasising non-niche issues in their programmes (Adams et al, 2006;Ezrow, 2008;Meguid, 2008: 14-15). However, more recent work has challenged this proposition, and has provided substantial empirical evidence of the strategic capacity of ethno-regionalist parties (Alonso, 2012;Elias, 2009;Gómez-Reino, 2006;Hepburn, 2009;Zuber, 2012). This literature highlights the fact that ethno-regionalist parties often choose to position themselves on issue dimensions beyond their core business, and that such choices are usually driven by a desire to compete with more established partisan rivals for votes.…”

A different appetite for sovereignty? Independence movements in subnational island jurisdictions

“…Many have moved from fringe/niche/pariah status to mainstream political players, with all the challenges that this shift from 'protest to power' entails (Hepburn, 2009). Perhaps counter-intuitively, the drive for wholesale independence may have been dampened by this shift to the mainstream.…”

“…However, constitutional restructuring is not the only goal of these movements. Such parties seek the general aim of 'territorial empowerment', which includes seeking to enhance the political, socioeconomic and cultural capacity of the region, often within the framework of the state (Hepburn, 2009). The presence and activities of independence-leaning movements can contribute significantly to a more successful negotiation with, and securing of even more generous measures of autonomy and capacity from, metropolitan powers.…”

“…The presence and activities of independence-leaning movements can contribute significantly to a more successful negotiation with, and securing of even more generous measures of autonomy and capacity from, metropolitan powers. This is especially true when SNRPs can exploit the existence of a distinct history, culture, language and identity to form the basis of their nationalist discourse and claims for selfdetermination (Keating, 1988;Elias, 2008;Hepburn, 2009). This mobilisation can also be facilitated by the existence of autonomy arrangements which enable the territory to flex its capacity, and potential for even more self-government, as a political entity.…”