Abstract:
How do far-right actors perceive their agency in disseminating their worldviews? With the global rise of the far right, it is crucial to understand the communication strategies of far-right extra-parliamentary anti-immigration actors. Based on interviews with Norwegian and Danish far-right members of protest groups, blogs, right-wing alternative media, political parties and associations, this paper explores their communication methods, motivations, target audiencesand perceived influence. Drawing on Parkinson’s concept of performative democracy, we analyse how these actors stage their communicative roles across public and digital spaces, shaping their rhetoric to audience expectations and opportunities for influence. Normalization – the process by which ideas become accepted as standard – emerges as central to their attempts to shape public discourse. Content analysis of the interviews reveals four distinct roles: ‘Debate nuancers’ aim to influence mainstream discourse and policymakers through information and lobbyism, shifting discourse rightward. ‘Enlighteners’ employ provocation to spark controversy. ‘Mainstream returners’ previously adhered to the first two roles but now seek to appear more legitimate and moderate. Lastly, ‘Right-wing ideology debaters’ engage in internal far-right ideological discussions. These roles reflect varying perceptions of the societal mainstream, the political system and appropriate tactics. Together, they highlight the strategic and performative nature of far-right communication. By tailoring their approaches to different platforms and audiences, these actors seek not only visibility but legitimacy. Understanding these dynamics provides insight into how the far-right gains traction and influence political discourse.
Read the full article in Journal of Contemporary European Studies [link].