2017
DOI: 10.1177/0032321717723505
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Populism and Support for Protectionism: The Relevance of Opposition to Trade Openness for Leftist and Rightist Populist Voting in The Netherlands

Abstract: Leftist and rightist populist parties in Western Europe both oppose trade openness. Is support for economic protectionism also relevant for their electorates? We assess this in the Netherlands, where both types of populist parties have seats in parliament. Analyses of representative survey data (n = 1,296) demonstrate that support for protectionism drives voting for such parties, as do the well-established determinants of political distrust (both populist constituencies), economic egalitarianism (leftist popul… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
26
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
0
26
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Whereas welfare state chauvinism is about protecting the welfare state against the external threat of immigrants, econonomic protectionism is about protecting the country against the external threat of unregulated free trade. Among right‐wing populist voters nativism is closely tied to opposition to trade openness (Van der Waal and De Koster ). While liberal proponents of free trade argue that, in the long term, it is beneficial for economies to be open because it allows them to specialize, radical right‐wing populists see trade in the short‐term as a zero‐sum game where the production of goods can either employ people in the one's own counry or abroad.…”
Section: Ennser‐jedenastik's ‘Group‐based Approach’mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whereas welfare state chauvinism is about protecting the welfare state against the external threat of immigrants, econonomic protectionism is about protecting the country against the external threat of unregulated free trade. Among right‐wing populist voters nativism is closely tied to opposition to trade openness (Van der Waal and De Koster ). While liberal proponents of free trade argue that, in the long term, it is beneficial for economies to be open because it allows them to specialize, radical right‐wing populists see trade in the short‐term as a zero‐sum game where the production of goods can either employ people in the one's own counry or abroad.…”
Section: Ennser‐jedenastik's ‘Group‐based Approach’mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first two are explanations that may be valid for both leftist and rightist populist constituencies, as they may be conceived of as threats to the people as sovereign. These focus on: their anti‐institutional mood (Canovan, ; Kriesi, ), reflected in distrust of political institutions and politicians (Kemmers et al, ); and opposition to international free trade (Van der Waal and De Koster, ). The third explanation matches a conception of the people as a class and revolves around economic concerns and focuses on opposition to inequality, such as economic egalitarianism (De Koster et al, ; De Vries and Edwards, ).…”
Section: Support For Euroscepticism Among Populist Constituencies:mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Opposition to international free trade does not, in fact, reflect economic concerns, but cultural concerns related to free trade's disruption of the national and cultural order (Hainmueller and Hiscox, ; Margalit, ; Van der Waal and De Koster, ). Concomitantly, support for protectionism proves to be part of the link between ethnocentrism and voting for a rightist populist party, albeit a very minor part (Van der Waal and De Koster, ).…”
Section: Support For Euroscepticism Among Populist Constituencies:mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations