Search

Over the past years, populist radical-right (PRR) parties across Europe and beyond have received much scholarly attention. The literature has mainly analysed their ideology, electoral performance and discourse. Similarly, recent scholarship has focused on the mainstreaming of PRR’s discourse and the consequences for liberal democracy. However, less attention has been paid to the way in which civil society organisations have framed and reacted to the rise of populism. This chapter explores the way in which organised civil society (CSOs) at the EU-level have interpreted the rise of PRR parties across Europe, by taking two recent crises as case studies: the 2015 refugee crises and the current COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing on a content and frame analysis of a series of publications by key EU-level CSOs over the periods 2015-2016 and 2020-2021, this chapter explores how civil society discursively constructs these two recent crises and the surge of PRR parties. This chapter aims (a) to investigate the salience and variation of the populism-nationalism compound in these crises, and (b) to assess the way CSOs position themselves towards the rise of PRRs and the societalchallenges arisen from it. The chapter discusses both the empirical data and the theoretical implications of the discourse analysis it carries out.

The COVID-19 pandemic brought with it unusual challenges to the enjoyment of human rights and reminded us that all rights have been affected by the measures taken to tackle the virus. In the context of measures to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic, it is inquestinable that the most vulnerable groups are always subject to the greatest burden: women, children, the elderly (especially those living in protected residences), people with disabilities, prisoners, but also migrants, asylum seekers, Roma and homeless people. The question is then: what was the impact of Covid-19 on human rights? This chapter explores the relationship between the pandemic and human rights, looking at the publications of EU-based Civil Society Organisations (CSOs). The chapter sketches how these frama the COVID-19 crisis, the measures to deal with it and the changing situations for individual and groups in this unprecedented situation.

Tesis doctoral inédita leída en la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Facultad de Derecho, Departamento de Ciencia Política y Relaciones Internacionales. Fecha de lectura: 03-02-2016, Esta tesis tiene embargado el acceso al texto completo hasta el 03-08-2017, Over the last decades, social scientists and democratic theorists have paid increased attention to the role of emotions in politics. However, while sociologists have emphasised primarily the role of emotions in the mobilization process, and normative political theorists have discussed mainly on the dichotomy between suitable versus harmful emotions for democratic purposes, there is still a lacuna in the understanding of the political role of emotions. It is this gap that this thesis attempts to fill. Focusing on the broad role of emotions apparent in recent anti-austerity movements in Europe, this thesis advances a theoretical inquiry, which can contribute to the connection between protest analysis, democratic theory, and populism. While in the broad scientific literature recent protest mobilizations have generally been associated with contentious processes, the rise of left-wing populism, practices of deliberative democracy, experiments in horizontal decision-making, and so forth, this research highlights the role of affects in recent anti-austerity movements, and examines how a discursive focus on emotions can enrich the scholarship on democratic theory on offer. The main argument proposed here is that, besides their central function in motivating people to engage in political action, emotions also play a significant role in the framing of democratic order. Specifically, it is contended that they have a ‘geometrical’ role in shaping the political subject – namely ‘the people’. As well, contributing to the latency of political concepts, they have an ‘evocative’ role in today’s struggle for democratic legitimacy and popular sovereignty. Finally, this investigation assesses the success of some current theories of democracy giving an account of the role of emotions in politics, and argues that an agonistic approach offers fruitful insights in this debate.

Populism emerges on the terrain of modern civil society, and yet it ultimately entails existential risks for civil society’s fundamentals: populism’s essentialist stance betrays a deep tension with the principle of plurality upon which civil society and liberal democracy are founded. This chapter focuses on the work of EU-Level CSOs, which have emerged as key actors in the anti-discrimination fight at the communitarian level over the last years. Their work involves campaigning tasks such as mapping discriminatory acts, re-framing of public discourse, and lobbying at the European level. Drawing on a document and text analysis, the chapter explores the work of EU-based NGOs, and asks to what extent they build a counter-narrative, alternative to the exclusionary discourse implemented especially by right-wing politics. To this end, this chapter focuses on the main EU-Level CSOs working on gender, race, religion, and migration.

The introductory chapter places the book in the context of the literature on populism and European studies. It serves to sketch the multiple issues and the burning questions that the rise of populism has unwrapped for scholars and practitioners at national and international level. More specifically, it delves into the matter of the impact of populism on European institutions and civil society, setting out the idea of the Brussels bubble as a key aspect in its understanding. By presenting the empirical and normative implication of populism for the EU politics, this chapter explains the relevance of a debate involving academics and practitioners. It then offers an overview of the sections and chapters.