Yes we fear : an issue saliency analysis of the impact of terrorist attacks on electoral campaigning rhetoric in Europe

Abstract

Since 2014, the European continent has suffered a great number of terrorist attacks carried out by ISIL, jihadist movements and Islamic lone wolves. The rise of Islamic terrorism has affected various levels of society, instilling fear and incentivizing political parties to act on the matter. While traditional literature on terrorism and party competition focuses on the frame and discourse around the politics of fear, this study contributes with a different perspective on the debate. In this work, the impact of terrorist activities on electoral campaigning rhetoric is assessed through Budge and Farlie’s issue saliency theory, which extrapolates party stances from the varying emphases given to different issues. The research introduces the comparison of three sets of pre- and post-attack case studies: France pre and post 2015 November attacks, Germany pre and post 2016 Berlin attack, and United Kingdom pre and post 2017 Westminster attack. Drawing on saliency theory, the analysis of party manifestos from the selected countries uses as baseline the coding system developed by the Comparative Manifesto Project and adds specific codes to draw attention on statements on terrorism. The comparison is based on the study of variations in saliency of terrorism and security issues, measuring party responsiveness to the terrorist threat. The findings reveal that parties react to terrorist attacks by increasing terrorism saliency but right- and left-wing parties differ in their way of setting the agenda around the issue. Right-wing parties resulted more responsive to terrorist activities and prime the issue in their campaigning rhetoric to gain electoral advantage.