Should I Stay or Should I Go? Analysis of Populist Radical Narratives in British Party Politics That Led to Brexit

Thursday, July 13, 2017
Gilbert Scott Building - G466 (University of Glasgow)
Karen Umansky , Public Policy, Tel Aviv University
Itai Sened , Public Policy, Tel Aviv University
The impacts of Brexit are still hard to estimate, but the question regarding what led England to this decision reverberates since the results of the UK referendum. This research aims to assess whether the impact of UKIP’s political rise and then its political maneuvering and its effect on other parties’ positions may have been part of the political process that led to Brexit.

We hypothesize that New Radical parties [NRPs] highlight what we refer to as “legitimate” enemies (LE) to penetrate the political arena and achieve electoral success.  According to Carl Schmitt, leaders utilize an enemy to enhance their political agenda. We add the notion that such an enemy becomes “legitimate” when it is held responsible for public concerns. We use Riker’s theory that to upset an existing balance, new parties must introduce new dimensions to the political sphere to complete our analytical framework. We argue that the UKIP introduced a new dimension – the EU – where it held a relative advantage, to enter in force the sphere of the U.K. politics and then to change the entire configuration of this political sphere.

We use the Uncovered Set to assess and demonstrate the changes that then redefined the substantive landscape of British politics as a result of the introduction of this new dimension and the realignment it caused in the relative positioning of the relevant parties on this and the more traditional dimensions over the period of three general elections in the UK – 2005, 2010 and 2015.