PERSPECTIVE DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS TRANSFORMATION OF THE LEFT The Myth of Voter Losses to the Radical Right Silja Häusermann, Herbert Kitschelt, Tarik Abou-Chadi, Macarena Ares, Daniel Bischof, Thomas Kurer, Mathilde van Ditmars and Markus Wagner January 2021 Across Western Europe, social democratic parties have on average experienced a decline of their vote share in parlia­ men­tary elections of more than 10 percentage points over the past 15 years. A pro­ minent thesis in the de­bates about the reasons for these losses is that social demo­cra-­ tic parties have lost working class voters to right-wing pop­ ulist and radical right parties. In this policy brief, we provide evidence which shows that this interpretation is at odds with the best empirical data we have on vote switching. The policy brief focuses on voter outflows away from social democratic parties. Both past and potential future losses are predominantly to green and left-libertarian parties, followed by main­ stream right parties.

DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS TRANSFORMATION OF THE LEFT The Myth of Voter Losses to the Radical Right

Introduction INTRODUCTION Social Democratic parties are currently facing a fundamen­ tal electoral crisis. Across Western Europe, they have on av­ erage experienced a decline of their vote share in parlia­ mentary elections of more than 10 percentage points over the past 15 years. In some countries, such as France and the Netherlands, their score even sank below 10 percent. This development has stirred major debates in both aca­ demia and politics regarding the reasons for these elector­ al losses. A prominent thesis in these debates is that social democratic parties have lost working class voters to rightwing populist or radical right parties – because of fiscally too conservative or socio-culturally too progressive posi­ tions. However, this thesis is at odds with the available em­ pirical data, which indicates that social democratic parties have predominantly lost to green, left-libertarian, and mainstream right parties. We think that it is crucial to root the debates on the causes of electoral losses in empirical analyses of voter flows, i. e. in»vote switching« data. Hence, in this policy brief, we provide a selection of results from an ongoing collective book project on the electoral transformation of social democratic parties and the left in general. This policy brief focuses on voter outflows from the social democratic parties, on which we have very good and robust data from most Western European countries. The goal of the policy brief is thus primarily an empirical one: to provide solid empirical answers to the following questions: 1. To which parties are social democratic parties losing voters? 2. Are social democratic parties losing mostly work­ ing-class voters, or middle- and upper class voters? The policy brief is structured as follows: A first section shows vote switching from the social democratic parties to competing parties for Western Europe generally and for Germany in particular. It also uses panel-data to verify where vote switchers»end up« over the course of several elections. The second section studies the patterns of fur­ ther potential losses: how likely are current social demo­ cratic voters to switch away from social democracy and where to? How likely is it that social democratic parties will be able to construct a new, loyal core constituency? The conclusions then add more speculative reflections on how the empirical patterns we see relate to existing hypotheses on the causes of social democratic electoral decline. 1. TO WHICH PARTIES ARE SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTIES LOSING VOTERS? WHAT IS THE CLASS PROFILE OF VOTER LOSSES? Figure 1 is based on the analysis by Abou-Chadi and Wag­ ner(2020). It shows the patterns of vote switching away from social democratic parties in the 2000s and 2010s based on data from national election studies(the best elec­ toral data available) in Austria, Denmark, Germany, the Figure 1 Vote switching form SD to other parties by decade, 7 West European countries pooled 2000 Vote switching to … Vote switching to … MR Lib GR RL RR OTH 0 10 20 30 40 percent 2010 MR Lib GR RL RR OTH 0 10 20 30 40 percent 1

FRIEDRICH-EBERT-STIFTUNG – TRANSFORMATION OF THE LEFT Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland, i.e. the multi-party systems of Western and Northern Europe, which are most comparable in terms of party systems and democratic context. What both figures clearly show is that the lion’s share of vote losses over the past two decades has been to main­ stream right parties(black bars), and to rival parties of the left party spectrum. Losses to green and radical left parties combined sum up to almost 50% of all vote losses, fol­ lowed by mainstream right parties. The picture is similar for Germany alone, even if losses to the CDU/CSU are relative­ ly more important than losses to the mainstream right in other countries. A key insight from Figures 1 and 2, however, is that voter losses to right-wing populist or radical right parties are much more marginal 1 . There is no substantive voter flow from social democratic parties to parties of the far right. dle classes, i.e. in intermediate and upper education levels, as Figure 3 shows for North Western European democra­ cies. The social stratification of voter losses is, however, where the pattern in Germany deviates to some extent from the general pattern of vote switching in Europe: voter losses are indeed most substantive among voters with lower ed­ ucation-levels in Germany. But even here, we do not see a substantive stream of voters switching from social demo­ cratic parties to the far right. The bulk of losses goes to the mainstream right. The evidence so far is clearly at odds with the idea of ma­ jor voter flows from social democratic towards far right parties. However, one may suspect that(working class) vot­ ers»transition« to the far right in several steps – e. g. by switching first to the mainstream right and then to the rad­ ical right, or through a period of abstention. Social democratic parties are also not primarily losing vot­ ers among lower social classes. On the contrary, the most substantive vote losses incur in the middle and upper mid­ 1 The following parties are included in the group of right-wing po­ pulist and/or radical right parties: FPÖ, BZÖ in Austria, DPP in Den­ mark, True Finns, Change 2011 and Freedom Party in Finnland, AfD and NPD in Germany, LPF, PVV, and FvD in the Netherlands, Progress Party in Norway, Sweden Democrats in Sweden, SD, EDU, FPS, Lega and SVP in Switzerland. To investigate this hypothesis, Figure 5 shows voter transi­ tion data from the analysis by Bischof and Kurer(2020), who have used the best available long-term panel data (available only for Germany, Switzerland and the UK, alto­ gether more than 500’000 individuals) to observe vote switching over the entire observed lifetime. What you see in Figure 5 are voter transition pattern between the first and the last reported vote choice. One important differ­ ence in the data between the countries is that German vot­ ers are asked about»which party respondents support«, Figure 2 Vote switching form SD to other parties by decade, Germany 2000 Vote switching to … Vote switching to … CDU/CSU FDP Gruene Linke Other 0 5 10 15 20 percent 2010 CDU/CSU FDP Gruene Linke AfD Other 0 5 10 15 20 percent 2

To which parties are social democratic parties losing voters? Figure 3 Vote switching form SD to other parties by decade and education, 7 West European countries pooled 2000 Below UpSec UpSec/Voc Tertiary 0 Below UpSec UpSec/Voc Tertiary 0 5 10 15 percent 2010 5 10 15 percent MR Lib GR RL RR OTH 20 MR Lib GR RL RR OTH 20 Figure 4 Vote switching form SD to other parties by education, Germany 2000–2017 Below UpSec UpSec/Voc Tertiary 0 10 20 percent 3 CDU/CSU FDP Gruene Linke AfD Other 30

FRIEDRICH-EBERT-STIFTUNG – TRANSFORMATION OF THE LEFT Figure 5 Transition away from Social Democrats, across entire lifespan(Germany, UK, Switzerland) Germany Switzerland 1.00 1.00 Linke SPD 0.75 Green 0.50 FDP 0.25 Union Radical Right 0.00 other none Linke SPD Green FDP Union Radical Right other abstain radical left 0.75 socdem green green−lib 0.50 christdem center−right 0.25 radical right other 0.00 United Kingdom 1.00 abstain 0.75 abstain abstain radical left socdem green green−lib christdem center−right radical right other labour 0.50 SNP green libdem 0.25 conservative UKIP other 0.00 labour SNP green libdem conservative UKIP other 4

Where to are(further) potential losses most likely? whereas in the UK and Switzerland, they were asked about actual»vote choice«. Hence, for Germany, transitions into »none« are higher than what we find regarding transitions into»abstention« in Switzerland and Germany. parties. Smaller shares can see themselves voting for main­ stream right parties, and the group of voters tempted by the idea of voting for the far right is – again – smallest on average. However, the key finding in Figure 5 is – again – that even over the entire observed lifespan, the share of social demo­ cratic voters transitioning towards the far right is marginal. Additional analyses by Bischof and Kurer(not shown for rea­ sons of space, available upon request) show that this also holds when we look at working class voters only: among vot­ ers in lower social classes, rates of political demobilization are high, but an extremely small share of them»ends up« supporting far right parties over their lifespan. Social demo­ cratic voter losses to the radical right turn out to be a myth. 2. WHERE TO ARE(FURTHER) POTENTIAL LOSSES MOST LIKELY? The current dynamics are unlikely to stabilize in the near fu­ ture, as European party systems are in transition. Hence, we end this policy brief by taking a look at voters who ac­ tually do vote for social democratic parties and try to gauge the direction of(further) potential losses. To do so, the analysis by Häusermann(2020) uses data from the Europe­ an Election survey 2019 to study»voting propensities«, i. e. the self-reported likeliness of supporting a rival party. Consistent with the findings shown above, we see that on average and across the different European countries, very large shares of social democratic voters are most likely to simultaneously be sympathetic with green and radical left The fact that social democratic parties risk the heaviest vot­ er losses to the left – and not to the right – also resonates with a finding from the analysis by Ares and van Ditmars (2020), who use data from the European Social Survey to study the intergenerational patterns of voter transition. They show that social democratic parties have been able to attract many voters whose parents were working class, but who themselves have(high)-skilled middle class occupa­ tions. However, the panel data also indicates that these newly won middle class voters are difficult to retain, as they might transition further especially towards rival left-libertarian and green parties. 3. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS The data shown in this policy brief cannot prove or dis­ prove a particular explanation for social democratic voter losses. However, it does prove that the idea of massive vot­ er flows from social democratic parties to right-wing pop­ ulist or radical right parties is a myth, even when we take long potential transition periods into account. Social dem­ ocratic parties have only marginally lost to the far right par­ ties, and today’s far right voters are not former supporters of Social democracy. Our data consistently shows that past and(future) potential outflows occur most importantly to­ wards green and left-libertarian parties, followed by main­ stream right parties. Table 1 Potential losses – share of social democratic voters who indicate a probability of>=50% that they might also vote for party X in the future % of SD voters who are potential »X« voters all countries (weighted average) Austria Denmark Finland France Germany Italy Netherlands Portugal Spain Sweden United Kingdom Greens 28.5 45 47 53 55 23 48 24 23 40 Radical Left 22.0 46 37 23 33 34 10 43 34 Moderate Right 12.9 14 6 20 9 23 4 10 15 9 12 17 Radical Right 9.2 4 11 24 17 7 14 15 5 14 8 5

FRIEDRICH-EBERT-STIFTUNG – TRANSFORMATION OF THE LEFT REFERENCES This memo builds on the following papers, which will be published in the volume Beyond Social Democracy: Transformation of the Left in Emerging Knowledge Societies, edited by Herbert Kitschelt and Silja Häusermann. Full manuscripts of the papers are available from the authors. Abou-Chadi, Tarik/ Markus Wagner(2020).»Losing the Middle Ground: The Electoral decline of Social Democratic parties since 2000« Ares, Macarena/ Mathilde van Ditmars(2020).»Who con­ tinues to vote for the left? Social class of origin, intergener­ ational mobility and party choice in Western Europe«. Bischof, Daniel/ Thomas Kurer(2020).»Lost in Transition – Where Are All the Social Democrats Today?« Häusermann, Silja(2020).»Social Democracy in competi­ tion: voting propensities and electoral trade-offs«. 6

IMPRINT ABOUT THE AUTHORS IMPRINT Silja Häusermann is Professor of Political Science at the Uni­ versity of Zurich. She has been a Fellow at the Wissenschafts­ kolleg zu Berlin in 2018/2019, and has also held positions and fellowships at the Universities of Konstanz, Harvard Universi­ ty and the European University Institute. She holds a PhD from the University of Zurich. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung| International Policy Analysis, Hiroshimastraße 28| 10785 Berlin| Germany Responsible: Catrina Schläger, Head of Department International Policy Analysis www.fes.de/ipa Herbert P. Kitschelt is the George V. Allen Professor of In­ ternational Relations in the Department of Political Science at Duke University. He is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences(AAAS) and earned a PhD from Bielefeld University in Germany. Tarik Abou-Chadi is Assistant Professor in Political Science at the University of Zurich. He holds a PhD in political science from Humboldt University Berlin. Editor: Katharina Hofmann De Moura Bestellungen/ Kontakt: info.ipa@fes.de Commercial use of all media published by the FriedrichEbert-Stiftung(FES) is not permitted without the written consent of the FES. Macarena Ares is postdoctoral researcher at the University of Zurich. She holds a PhD in political science from the Euro­ pean University Institute. Daniel Bischof is a Ambizione Grant Holder at the Universi­ ty of Zurich and an incoming Associate Professor of Political Science at Aarhus University. He holds a PhD in political sci­ ence from the University of Leicester. His research seeks to understand how norms shift in our societies using(quasi)-ex­ perimental methods. Thomas Kurer is a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Zurich and an incoming Research Group Leader at the Uni­ versity of Konstanz. He holds a PhD in political science from the University of Zurich. Mathilde van Ditmars is a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Lucerne. She holds a PhD in political science from the European University Institute. Markus Wagner is a Professor of Political Science at the Uni­ versity of Vienna. He holds a PhD from the London School of Economics and Political Science. The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung or of the organization for which the authors work. ISBN 978-3-96250-801-2

TRANSFORMATION OF THE LEFT The Myth of Voter Losses to the Radical Right Our data shows that the lion’s share of social democratic vote losses over the past two decades has been to rival par­ ties of the left party spectrum(green and left-libertarian parties), and to par­ ties of the mainstream right. Voter loss­ es to right-wing populist or radical right parties are much more marginal. There is no substantive voter flow from social democratic parties to parties of the far right. Long-term panel data analysis shows that even when studying voter transi­ tions over the longer life course, the share of social democratic voters transi­ tioning towards the far right is marginal. There is also no specific»working class exodus« to the far right: among voters in lower social classes, rates of political demobilization are high, but an ex­ tremely small share of them»ends up« supporting far right parties. Social dem­ ocratic voter losses to the radical right turn out to be largely a myth. Finally, we show that also among those voters who indicate that they have vot­ ed for social democratic parties, poten­ tial – future – losses(in terms of voting propensities for rival parties) are highest towards green and left-libertarian par­ ties, followed by mainstream right par­ ties.