Reply to John W. P. Veugelers

Nonna Mayer (1)

1 CEVIPOF - Centre de recherches politiques de Sciences Po (Sciences Po, CNRS)

It is always instructive to learn what others see in your book, especially in the eyes of an expert of the European extreme Right such as Jack Veugelers. He reads Ces Français qui votent FN as a study in “the social basis of party politics,”relying on survey data and showing “a predilection for multivariate analysis” which he obviously does not share. Although he admits that my approach sheds light on problems such as the double nature of the FN’s constituency, the decisive influence of gender, or the relation between the votes for Le Pen’s party and the local presence of immigrants, he expresses some doubts about “the scope and precision” as well as “the reliability” of the book’s methodology. I should have gone “beyond data on the social background of voters” and given more attention to “the party’s organizational activity … partisan identification and voter flows.” The chapter he prefers is the last one, where “Mayer suddenly expands her framework to include the leadership, organization and the legitimacy of far Right parties” and “lends importance to both collective memories … and the way in which other parties have responded to the far Right.” On the whole, because they are not “integrated within a comprehensive view of the phenomenon,” my findings fail to answer the “big questions” one should ask about the FN, such as the reasons for its electoral breakthrough and endurance, its connections with the former nationalist Rights or its impact on the French party system and regime. I only partly agree with these remarks, and therefore gladly accept FPC&S’s proposal to answer them. [Article's first paragraph]

Domains: Political science; Sociology

Nonna Mayer. Reply to John W. P. Veugelers. French Politics, Culture & Society, 2000, 18 (1), pp.95 - 100. ⟨10.3167/153763700782378184⟩. ⟨hal-03458476⟩