Movement parties of the left, right, and center: A discursive‐organizational approach

Abstract

The term “movement party” has gained widespread currency in the social sciences in recent years, finding extensive application to political parties ranging from the radical left (Della Porta et al., 2017) to the far right (Caiani & Císař, 2019; Pirro & Castelli Gattinara, 2018). Unlike with other academic buzzwords such as “populism,” however, there is also a notable lack of readily identifiable and competing theoretical paradigms that have made systematic attempts at conceptualizing the term—a problem that Kitschelt (2006, p. 278) already pointed out with his arguably first such attempt, noting that “movement party” lacks well-defined status as “a formal concept with a specific terminological content.” Since then, an influential strand of scholarship building on Kitschelt's work has emerged around what might be termed an interactive-mobilizational approach, for which the primary definitional criterion for being a “movement party” is a hybridity of mobilizational repertoires in the electoral-institutional and protest arenas giving rise to a loosely formalized interactive balance between movement and party orientations (hence the proposed syntagma “interactive-mobilizational”). As will be argued in the following, while this approach has succeeded in spawning a wide range of applications across distinct party types (from anti-austerity to far-right), the definitional focus on protest activity concedes insufficient attention to the organizational dimension and renders the concept of movement parties more or less reducible to what Borbáth and Hutter (2021) have referred to as “protesting parties.” In recognizing both the merits and limitations of this literature, this paper proposes an alternative discursive-organizational approach, drawing on the author's previous work based on the post-foundational discourse theory of Laclau and Mouffe (2001[1985]) to conceptualize movement parties as a distinct form of political organization: one that is predicated on horizontal integration of autonomously organized movement actors as the basic decision-making agents and constituent subjects within the party. From this perspective, I go on to examine three examples of movement parties of the radical left, center, and far right, respectively: the CUP (Candidatures d'Unitat Popular) in Catalonia, the (now defunct) Együtt in Hungary, and the Right Sector in Ukraine. All three examples vividly illustrate the inherent organizational precarity (and, in some instances, ephemerality) of the movement party form, but also the willingness of these actors to maintain a movement party structure in high-stakes institutional contexts and their ability to exert recognizable political weight within these settings. The discursive-organizational approach presented here draws on an expanded framework of post-foundational discourse theory in which political organization is understood as a performative extension of discursive constructions of collective identities (hence the syntagma “discursive-organizational”). As I will argue, movement parties are characterized internally by a privileging of a certain type of relation—namely, horizontal coordinative links between autonomously operating movement actors who maintain a dual identity as representatives of the party and of their respective movements—in contrast to what I call Volksparteien of a new type (VNTs) such as Podemos and France Insoumise, which are characterized by vertical plebiscitary links between a centralized unitary leadership and a broad, undifferentiated popular base (e.g., via leadership-initiated referenda open to anyone registered online). As such, movement parties and VNTs can be considered paradigmatic opposites along the horizontal/vertical spectrum; movement parties tend to display a networked or coalitional structure, featuring “assemblies,” “platforms,” and joint executive organs bringing together representatives of distinct movements that remain organizationally separate and autonomous—in the language of social movement theory, as contentious claims-making actors in their own right—while pooling their decision-making input within the party. In this vein, the discursive-organizational approach can contribute to an awareness of the inherently precarious, tension-laden, and often transient nature of the movement party phenomenon—as already recognized by Kitschelt (2006)—while also going beyond the latter's interactive-mobilizational approach to develop an understanding of the organizational specificity of the movement party form. In the following, the paper proceeds in three main steps: first, an overview of the interactive-mobilizational approach, from Kitschelt's foundational work to more recent contributions; second, a presentation of the discursive-organizational approach, featuring conceptual reflections in conjunction with empirical an of the three movement parties of the radical left, center, and far right in by a The empirical is of an the to a of organizational distinct movement party as as notable examples of their or conceptual and empirical a for a the of which are in the Kitschelt's on a foundational for what has an interactive-mobilizational strand of on movement parties (e.g., & Císař, 2019; Porta et al., Pirro & Castelli Gattinara, 2018). Kitschelt's (2006, is from movement to party” as a for of the protest and institutional rise to movement parties as of political who from social movements and to the organizational and of social movements in the of party an of in that emerged in the and in to and political parties in the of and protest movements Kitschelt & & & The of this is in movements parties and of party such as that of protest movements In his work on “movement as a Kitschelt the as a specific within this to of collective and social parties collective via a of electoral-institutional and protest but with in the of formalized organization or of this the of movement parties in their mobilizational both protest and as as their of organizational and which in for between movement and party orientations the the movement parties are characterized by this between of protest and the right of as to the from one or the Kitschelt's movement parties are inherently and tend to be As the movement parties often parties the develop organizational and p. examples such as the parties in that the “movement party” can be a transient is noting here that Kitschelt's a specific of organizational that the organizational of movement parties can a wide ranging from with a and to the of of being the in is both and however, a dual movement and party in with a of formalized organization: paradigmatic examples of “movement such as the predicated on a of organizationally and formalized such as the or the of party and which have also for their (e.g., by a between party and to the of and p. have pointed out from the of radical theory that for protest movements on of or is and and are but be as the of more (e.g., will be in the In a of the interactive-mobilizational approach as by Kitschelt is the definitional focus on a dual of actors operating both in the protest and the & Castelli Gattinara, p. which go in with a wide range of organizational characterized by a of The organizational dimension is but primary this approach as is the the of organizational that movement The specific form of organization that from a mobilizational is Since the the of the movements of the and their of on movement parties within the interactive-mobilizational has work on distinct party such as “movement parties (Della Porta et al., 2017) or right movement (Caiani & Císař, a conceptual these have the definitional focus on the dual party and social movement which in with a range of organizational of movement a here to to with the paradigmatic of the anti-austerity being and the (Della Porta et al., and an understanding of based on political and discursive the hybridity of “movement in their of contentious from the protest within the of that is to a wide range of radical right parties in the from the for and the to and the to and The approach can be to have succeeded in spawning a with a of applications to empirical across and The merits of this be in the that a is for “movement as to and often transient within the of political in of the of of the the mobilizational hybridity of protest and repertoires or to as the definitional criterion for a “movement Borbáth and Hutter for have proposed the term “protesting for the of in protest for a political party to be a movement party and a an organizational dimension is however, has left in the as movement parties are in of the of organizational the of a movement party reducible to to there is form of movement party organization from this perspective, but a of is this conceptual the merits of a understanding to the and by the movement party the alternative approach in the to The post-foundational discourse theory of Laclau and Mouffe (2001[1985]) an understanding of discourse that beyond and and in their and performative understanding of as as also Laclau & I have proposed an expanded framework of post-foundational discourse for the of political organization as a performative extension of in this a between “movement and parties of a new as horizontal and vertical of respectively: parties are predicated on the horizontal integration of autonomously organized social movement actors via and collective leadership within the VNTs are characterized by vertical plebiscitary links between a centralized unitary leadership and a undifferentiated of as the by the party The basic this is political actors collective identities and on the of organizational The theoretical here are and (2001[1985]) understanding of radical as a horizontal of and between that an specific to (e.g., and theory of that the vertical dimension of the of on the of a a wide range of around a In this vein, radical and can be understood as paradigmatic of horizontal and vertical characterized by a distinct of collective identities are in of horizontal between autonomously operating movement actors autonomously contentious of their or a vertical as to 2017) of around a popular this to these of horizontal and vertical out of political organization that have in the in the of the movements of the I that movement parties are a paradigmatic form of horizontal organization the autonomously organized movement actors as decision-making agents (e.g., by giving their own within the VNTs are predicated on a vertical of a broad, undifferentiated of as the within the party (e.g., via that open to anyone registered and by these plebiscitary to a centralized unitary leadership In other the party types are characterized by a privileging of a certain type of in their collective identities and on the of organizational horizontal coordinative between organizationally separate movements in the of movement parties and vertical plebiscitary links between a centralized leadership and a undifferentiated popular base in the of this discursive-organizational approach, I the term “movement party” as to a of The party is organized as to be by movement who maintain a dual identity as representatives of the party and of their respective The of a movement party organization in networked or coalitional featuring or to movement actors to with their movement within party in to a collective leadership with the of the vertical of across representatives of the paradigmatic of a movement party in this is the CUP in be in the from a on a organizational the party which as a for social movement actors such as radical and in the organizational with their own such as of the on the other can be understood as the paradigmatic of movement parties along the horizontal/vertical on the of a in to a of referred to as of the and to in decision-making via plebiscitary referenda in the and with party In this vein, the concept is to understanding of characterized by a of a of plebiscitary via referenda by and to a The of such a party is Podemos in referred to as the predicated on building the party around organized but the of the from the to the of their to with the of a in the of between the base and the leadership also & 2018). the of party the of movement parties proposed here is of which is as a of constituent such as and the main being the at in with party however, a of movement parties as understood here in a horizontal of the to the leadership of the party in the form of a collective leadership The concept of in draws on the of which also as a for his concept of party” to the or contrast to parties with their an and undifferentiated base with a party leadership that on a in more of In this the as understood here a of the the is already in the of party the paradigmatic contrast between movement parties and VNTs for a understanding of and as the of political from the of who the basic constituent subjects of party organization movement actors registered to their links are to what of leadership with plebiscitary the on movement the proposed here between movement parties and VNTs from a discursive-organizational is of what Kitschelt as a of between horizontal between movement and vertical or what Porta et p. have referred to as a range of from to In contrast to these movement parties are understood here in a as to one of this the privileging of horizontal between movement as to a distinct organizational form. The as in the previous is that an interactive-mobilizational the hybridity of mobilizational repertoires as the of movement parties while the organizational dimension a discursive-organizational approach, by the of movement parties is understood in an organizational being reducible to protest that the party is organized as a horizontal of movement who maintain a dual within the party and their respective movements formalized for such as and collective leadership From this perspective, parties such as France Insoumise, the or as a unitary party in are movement but the VNTs characterized by a privileging of a vertical of plebiscitary links to a centralized here that this between movement parties and as the one between and a of and As and and in form or in a of a horizontal of (e.g., a of the radical to be in their as with their own within party The between horizontal and vertical is a but of can the other to develop and also on the other (e.g., a within a party the of via the of a in their is also that parties from a movement party to a or to both in an to the of both of the first be in from a of radical to a unitary party of and around to the popular will by and the the of more recent parties of this also & & that also to for the for the party in of the of horizontal and vertical can be in for and in the such as with from the movement as the discursive-organizational approach presented here a more understanding of “movement in the interactive-mobilizational literature, the is to to what Kitschelt already recognized as the inherently tension-laden, and often transient nature of the movement party drawing on a theoretical framework in an awareness of the but between and the approach here can contribute to a understanding of these and in to a of the organizational dimension in movement parties from other party types as VNTs as proposed to be is the ability of this approach to across contexts and party right movement for be from a discursive-organizational as will be in the empirical that is in the such as and can be in a formal of radical their theoretical such as and for & to distinct of organizational that can be on the far right in to the radical left or the In the following, I three such of movement parties of the left, center, and right for and as a for a CUP in Catalonia, Együtt in Hungary, and the Right Sector in Ukraine. The have for their and in of their and in a wide in of or and organizational renders to out a of the movement party from the radical left to the to the far right, as a for also on the of The CUP has an within the in with at the from to while Együtt in and the Right Sector in and has in and and in the of the The that are of a the on a overview of organizational distinct movement party as in these own as as notable examples of their or I from the conceptual of here (e.g., of and for the of a the empirical will be the understanding of and as The d'Unitat CUP or to the as the as a of for radical in to a and of at the The CUP have organizational in a of networked social and radical left to a as an within in of already the CUP gained in and in the and in at the for the first in of the and three in the The CUP their to in the with a joint and of the and in a for the in which to a of high-stakes that will be in the CUP have with and institutional weight and for a in the In the the CUP in for the first and in the new The organizational structure the of a movement of a of at the of across the that autonomously with the of anyone who the to in the decision-making can an by with a and the right to and in the decision-making of the as as the of CUP at a which in the as a collective leadership of the party d'Unitat The CUP are characterized by a structure d'Unitat p. the the in which are organized and is in in specific and movement also the CUP as a a of together in to their decision-making The of in contrast to what has as the in parties such as The basic decision-making and constituent within a movement party CUP is the organized in the registered in leadership-initiated dimension to the movement party structure is the in which the political that the expanded CUP in the are and in the joint work d'Unitat a of horizontal organizationally distinct and but movement The high-stakes in on display to the the movement party at an by the the for the bringing together the and the by emerged on as the with of the the for a to a and the The and to the as in the in in in with by with at the of the the CUP the on the to a of the of the which on and of and to a of for on this the to on in of the lack of a for in the the of in in with and for new a between the CUP and on as a As these the CUP to their movement party as a political in a high-stakes of with less the and the on the a in the of the in on the made by CUP their decision-making at the of the of the party. with the of this decision-making the party arguably main with an alternative to as and a that go on to the with from the in the of the the CUP and a by the the CUP as a paradigmatic of a movement party to the and that such a be to in institutional but also as as the willingness of the party to maintain a movement party structure with an of in a such as the in The CUP to the and institutional weight that a movement party with organizational can to The Együtt for in in a joint of three the for and the and The for a joint of the with a for the with a in of the In the of a the from of and the of the to the of the and the Együtt as a of a via from The of the three as the in this with being across of and a for by a who with the an and protest the by the and the a for and the of that together from both of the the from the and the the as a that parties and as a for a joint for the this to the already a the that the three the of the a political party in The party structure to that of a movement party as based on a of horizontal between the three constituent with own within the new party and being at the leadership and and a collective leadership of the party maintain their organizational and but in the of the new political via the three by to a party is this coalitional or coordinative between contentious actors from remain and separate in their own right while pooling their decision-making input via organized within the to a distinct movement party in this with the performative to a broad, of a of movement actors the party to the party Együtt a with for party by who a the between the being by a featuring the from both in to as joint the the a by the and bringing together the main parties and of the three of the by to Együtt and one to The a joint of own in the within Hungary, of the and one three other parties between and the lack of in beyond the however, the Együtt and of a around In of as a unitary party the three constituent and with as and the to the party In this Együtt movement party of and collective leadership to the three The party a within the of the and one in the leadership in In Együtt a and of a movement one a a in a and a certain institutional weight in the within a in and for the far the The party movement party structure this of the of a party and by actors from as the of a also succeeded in an with the as an extension of horizontal at the leadership but to this to other The movement party of Együtt to an with the party in in a of with the and The Right Sector is the of the three recognizable of a movement party in with leadership The in in the of the in gained in (and, with in and of from and to the competing the for of with In the following, the in on the Right networked in conjunction with in the with as a political party in the of an movement party of the far right and in the of by the leadership of The Right Sector emerged as an of such as and of as as (hence the to the of the of the protest in a display of at the of which the of The Right Sector but also with the by of with other for from p. the on that the willingness for Right of in that of the party on a as of with political to the for the Right Sector p. In this the Right Sector on the of an movement to the in the of what a activity as based on and as to the of the to the leadership to the three main parties and and their the In this the Right Sector in from which to from protest and from in (e.g., in the of the The Right Sector organizational in in to the out of the of a and willingness to in between and and in the of and the of the Right Sector as a political party in a in with (from as party and for the in this that and the Right political and be in the new as by a the Right organization from this is to is to here a certain movement party of horizontal organizationally distinct movements at the of the political in with the of and his performative as a with at his who at will for the and as a for political on the the of Right Sector as a party characterized by by to the certain an of a on and the of or the to the in which in with on the of the from other political and such as the that the in the The Right as a movement party with weight within the in of such as the to the or and left the Right Sector the of the with in and the that in the of his as party the of this first of the Right in which presented as an extension of the on the and as a certain political weight from the with of and as with on the to which the party as a for movement actors of the far the however, predicated on the coalitional nature of the Right movement party in a pooling together of in this vein, as a of the that the the Right ability to his as this the Right Sector the party in the of with less in the a in the in that the Right Sector less of the In the and which in for and his party of the the Right Sector the and together with other but these in both and the Right Sector is to be with own the in the of on is a of attention for for the the to which of and the have paper presented an discursive-organizational approach to the and of “movement from a of the concept as understood in what I to as the interactive-mobilizational The of the discursive-organizational approach is to to a understanding of movement parties as inherently to and often transient already recognized by Kitschelt in his foundational work on the to a understanding of the organizational dimension that is but left as a range of within the interactive-mobilizational I a of a movement party as a form of party organization the horizontal integration of autonomously organized movement actors as the basic decision-making agents and constituent subjects within the as in networked or coalitional with or for movements as as a collective leadership of the party as a parties in this can be understood as a paradigmatic of which a is the often characterized as a “movement party” the horizontal/vertical the discursive-organizational approach a more and understanding of movement the examples here of and the Right Sector illustrate the wide range of political and contexts in which movement parties from this can from the radical left to the to the far All three for their illustrate a movement party at the to movement or contentious actors from around these be on an the of or an via organizational of horizontal movement actors who are within the party in their movement such as their own as as joint executive organs bringing together constituent this horizontal in a of with vividly in the of the Right Sector as an movement three here to the willingness of the actors in to maintain their movement party in high-stakes institutional such as the in Catalonia, in Hungary, and the in Ukraine. All three to the political that movement party with their can this is to specific by or as in the of Együtt and the Right or in a more as is out to be the with the The CUP in that movement parties can also maintain as and actors across of or parties the between the three can also be in to the of with the of collective leadership in with the movement party in contrast to the Right on leadership or of the movement party of and collective a for a drawing and building on the discursive-organizational approach presented here for empirical work across a wide range of As a discursive-organizational approach can contribute to of in movement party and go within the organizational of political The or between the horizontal of movement parties on the one and institutional or on the other be in three here and is for the of organizational from a movement party in in the of rise in own the of also of movement parties will a for from a discursive-organizational perspective, in to protest such as the movements of the or more social movements and such as the In this vein, the presented here also be to the and of movement parties in to their is a for which the paper might as a conceptual and empirical a discursive-organizational strand of within the The work for this by the and between and the of the of the I to as as at the the of and the for their and organized by is a at the of and at the of