Threatening visibility Radical right Homophobes in European Parliaments 2012

Transcription

1 Threatening visibility Radical right Homophobes in European Parliaments 2012 A report by Martha Hannus, Expo Photo: Expo

2 Författare: Martha Hannus epost: Cover photo: Expo

3 Contents Foreword 5 Threatening Visibility Radical right Homophobes in European Parliaments 6 Summary 6 Introduction 6 The Situation of LGBT Rights in Europe Today 8 Attacks and laws limiting the freedom of expression 8 The human rights of LGBT people 8 A report on organised intolerance 10 Radical right Homophobia: History and Ideology 11 A threat to the white race 11 Broken families and weak men 11 Pinkwashing the radical right agenda 12 Covariation in intolerant attitudes 13 Addressing the intolerant agenda 13 A Surge of Radical Right Parties in Europe? 14 Radical right and Anti-Immigrant Parties in European Parliaments 16 The influence of radical right parties in Europe 16 European Variations and Strategies 20 Bulgaria: Widespread homophobia and a problematic discourse 20 Hungary: a nationalist majority 24 France: pinkwashing the Front National 27 The Netherlands: Intolerance towards intolerance? 29 Sweden: a backlash against visibility? 32 Analysis and Conclusions 36 No obvious covariation 36 Radical right homophobes steering the debate 36 LGBT rights as a part of a European nationalist identity? 37 Popular prejudice as an obstacle 38 A long term strategy to address the intolerant agenda 39 Appendix Radical right parties in European Parliaments 40 Literature appendix: 50 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments

4 4 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments 2012

5 foreword During the last year there have been an increase in numbers of incidents of harassments against Pride parades in Europe, and in some countries people have been denied permission to parade. Some countries even have introduced so called anti gay legislation. These are alarming tendencies challenging the human rights. In many European countries, radical right parties have taken place in the parliaments. In some cases this have led to worse living conditions not only for LGBT persons, but also for people from other ethnical backgrounds than the majority in those countries, for example the Romani people, the Muslims and the Jews. The report also describes how other groups like trade union representatives is a target for the radical right. Just as women s rights and the struggle for gender equality also are threatened by their presence in the policy making. The ongoing economic crisis in Europe, with its high unemployment rates, is also a risk factor for an increased support for those parties. Such an evolvement would create further antagonism among people counter acting the equal value of, and equal rights for all people. This report was initiated by TCO, to reinforce the striving for a more open and including society. This Expo report Threatening visibility, -far right homophobes in European parliaments describes what influence radical right parties have in the parliaments of Europe, and what role they may play when it comes to defending or not defending human rights, and LGBT rights in particular. The author of the report, Martha Hannus, Expo, responds for its contents. The aim of the report is to keep up the good work for more tolerant societies, characterized by inclusiveness and human rights. threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments

6 THREATENING VISIBILITY RADICAL RIGHT HOMOPHOBES IN EUROPEAN PARLIAMENTS Summary The report gives an overview over the parliamentary representation of radical right parties in EU countries. Using five different cases, the report further investigates how different parties in different countries perceive and address LGBT rights. Hence, the report contributes with new knowledge about the intersection between homophobia and radical right ideology in Europe in the 21 st century. General conclusions: Homo-, bi- and transphobia is an integral part of the radical right ideology The success and influence of radical right parties varies greatly between European countries. There is a difference between more traditional, openly anti-semitic and racist parties that oppose LGBT rights, and parties with a mainly anti- Muslim agenda, that seem indifferent to LGBT rights. In some countries, other parties are more problematic than the radical right, since they have more influence on policy, and have an agenda of opposing LGBT-rights. This is particularly the case for conservative Christian parties. Widespread homophobia is in some places a larger threat than organised intolerant groups. For human rights organisations, anti-discrimination organisations and trade unions, the issue of homophobia and radical right-wing extremism is important for several reasons. First, the agenda of these parties is in contrast with promoting equal rights for all. Second, human rights and minority organisations as well as unions are often also targets for extremists. Third, all of these organisations can work together in combating widespread homophobia and racism in order to diminish the influence of these parties in future elections. Introduction Violence and hostility towards LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bi and Transsexual) people have long been key components of the ideology of intolerant, racist and Nazi parties. Recent developments in Europe, including the prohibition of Pride parades and legislation to abolish so called gay propaganda as well as attacks on LGBT activists, show that the situation and the physical security and safety of LGBT persons in Europe are still matters of great concern. Furthermore, the recent electoral successes of extreme right parties around Europe raises concern about the stability and future implementation of existing legislation on anti-discrimination, human rights and hate crime in European countries, as well as the possibility for progressive 6 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments 2012

7 Pride, Stockholm. Photo: Expo developments in the field of human rights. In their parliamentary positions, intolerant parties can influence legislation and thereby human rights for all. For trade unions, this is a cause for great concern. Not only do the basic values of these parties fundamentally differ from those of trade unions, but in fact; unionists are often also targets of intolerant groups. What influence do these parties actually have in European parliaments? What are their positions on LGBT rights? What does this tell us about the future prospects for people to live a life free from discrimination? This report aims to address these questions. First, an overview of the influence of intolerant parties in European parliaments will be provided, and second, a number of case studies will be used to show how these parties work and what their positions are on LGBT rights. threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments

8 LGBT Rights in Europe Today Attacks and Laws Limiting the Freedom of Expression In 2012, news sources all over Europe painted a disappointing picture of the developments concerning the human rights of LGBT persons. In a statement from September 11, 2012, ILGA-Europe expressed concern over recent violent incidents with transphobic and homophobic motives, such as the physical attack on a man in Belgrade, the assault on participants in the annual Transgender Europe Conference in Dublin, and the brutal physical attack on two persons in Montenegro(ILGA-Europe statement, ). In August, in Moscow, Russia, a high court turned down an application from an LGBT activist group to organise Pride parades, and out-ruled such events for the following 100 years. The application was a way to draw attention to the continuous prohibitions of Pride parades in the city. Laws or law amendments, so called anti-gay laws, are discussed or have been discussed in a number of parliaments and regional bodies around Europe, including in several regions in Russia, Moldova, Latvia, Lithuania and Ukraine. These laws, prohibiting gay propaganda for the protection of morals, criminalise the distribution of information on LGBT rights and limit the Members of Nationaldemokratisk Ungdom, NDU, arrested by police after attacking Pride Stockholm. Photo: Expo freedom of expression for LGBT activists and persons. Recently, Serbian authorities announced that the Belgrade Pride parade had been prohibited, since the security of participants could not be guaranteed. This was the second year that the Belgrade Pride parade was called off. The European Fundamental Rights Agency describes the European landscape with regards to LGBT rights as mixed and uneven (FRA Homophobia Study, 2010). The Human Rights of LGBT People In September 2012, the European Parliament adopted a directive recognising the specific needs for protection for victims of crimes with a bias related to characteristics such as sexual orientation, gender, and gender identity (European Parliament Resolution 2012/2657). The directive is to be transferred into the legislation of member countries. This may be seen as a 8 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments 2012

9 step towards establishing a shared legal framework in order to adequately protect the human rights of LGBT people. But despite improvements like this, the situation is still far from perfect. According to ILGA Europe, the legal human rights situation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans- and intersex people in Europe is far from guaranteeing the full equality of every citizen. The ILGA Europe Rainbow Index is a rating on how well the legal frameworks of the European countries protect the human rights of LGBT persons in 42 categories, including the right to asylum, equality, non-discrimination legislation and institutions, freedom of assembly and expression, legal gender recognition, and provisions for same sex partnership and parenting. The result is a score ranging between 30 (respect for human rights, full equality) and -12 (gross violations of human rights, discrimination). The best performing country listed by ILGA is the UK, with a score of 21, while Russia and Moldova share the lowest score, Among the EU countries (listed in the table below) the UK, Germany and Spain have the most LGBT friendly politics, while Cyprus and Latvia do not manage to protect LGBT rights. Seemingly, most European countries have a lot left to do before they can actually legally provide for and protect the rights of LGBT people. Because of this, the future possibilities to introduce progressive legislation in the field are of great importance and interest. Tabell 1: Rainbow Index in EU countries EU countries Rainbow Index 2012 UK 21 Germany 20 Spain 20 Sweden 18 Belgium 17 Netherlands 16 Portugal 15 (Norway) 15 Hungary 14 Austria 12 Finland 11 Czech Republic 9 Denmark 9 Ireland 9 Slovakia 9 Slovenia 9 Luxembourg 8 Bulgaria 6 France 6 Lithuania 3 Italy 2,5 Estonia 2 Greece 2 Poland 2 Cyprus 1 Latvia 1 Source: ILGA-Europe Rainbow Index and Rainbow Map 2012 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments

10 A Report on Organised Intolerance So far, reports on intolerance toward LGBT persons in Europe have focused on the issue of discrimination of individuals, hate crimes and violence towards LGBT persons, and restrictions on the freedom of speech all of which are important areas to address in order to improve the situation for human rights in Europe. However, the intersection of racism, nationalism, and LGBT rights, and the issue of intolerant parties and politically organised intolerance, has not received sufficient attention. Often, these two areas are treated separately. Hostility towards human rights in general and LGBT rights in particular, which is an intrinsic part of the ideology of intolerant groups is therefore not addressed and accounted for. Thus, this report contributes with a new perspective on the intersection between radical right ideology and homophobia in Europe. Why is hostility towards LGBT persons such an important part of the agenda of many radical right parties? How large is their influence in European parliaments? And most importantly: in what way can we expect these parties to act in proposals concerning anti-discrimination and LGBT rights? The purpose of this report is to shed some light on these issues and provide an overview of the future of anti-discrimination legislation, its implementation, and the human rights situation in an expanding Europe under crisis. 10 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments 2012

11 Radical Right Homophobia: History and Ideology For intolerant groups, anything and anyone who deviates from the norm of preference is seen as a threat. The enemy of choice can differ, but often, the norm of heterosexuality is an important component of what Paul Taggart in his work on populism has termed the heartland, the ideal place in time and space that intolerant groups want to preserve or recreate (Taggart, 2000). A Threat to the White Race In racist and Nazi ideology, the idea of the superiority of the white race is central. For groups with an ethnopluralist ideology, the idea of the separation of races or ethnicities is crucial. The ethnopluralists argue that races and ethnicities should be kept separate, but that none is superior to the other. One part of these ideologies is the idea of a specific cultural heritage, which is transferred between generations. Part of this cultural heritage is the idea of the nuclear family, heterosexuality as a norm, and traditional gender roles, where men and women are seen as intrinsically different, and are assigned different roles in society based on their biological characteristics, where men are the main earners and the home is the domain for women (Expo and RFSL, 2005, p. 15). As a result of this, people who in some way break or challenge the norm of heterosexuality become a threat to the preferred societal order. Hate and hostility toward LGBT persons have been part of the propaganda of these ideologies since Nazi Germany and the Holocaust, where gays and lesbians were killed in the death camps. Maranata, right christian demonstration against Pride and the hbt-movement You shall not lie with a mail (!) as with a women. Photo: Expo Broken Families and Weak Men There are several reasons why intolerant groups see LGBT persons as a threat. For many racist and Nazi movements, the nuclear family is seen as the threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments

12 smallest entity in society and an important base for coming challenges. For other groups, non-heterosexual ways of life are seen as unproductive and unnatural for the race or cultural heritage to continue, the main purpose of relationships is to produce children. Another view held by many radical right parties and radical right groups today is that LGBT rights, feminism, and rights for women weaken the position of man in society and make male individuals weak rendering them incapable of defending their families and their race from foreign elements, or participating in the coming apocalyptic war. In his manifesto, the Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik argued that this is a reason why the West is incapable of defending themselves from the Muslim threat. In a 2005 survey of the attitudes towards LGBT people in the Swedish race ideological environment on the internet, EXPO and RFSL showed that LGBT persons are often described in terms of disease and paedophilia, that they need to be exterminated in order to protect the normal society, and that they are also described as a threat to the family and the survival of the race (Expo and RFSL, 2005). Some groups speak about a gay lobby as well as a Jewish lobby with the agenda of crushing the nuclear family rather than promoting LGBT rights, a view that is increasingly taking place in racist conspiracy theories. The media is seen as collaborators that promote a positive image of LGBT persons as a part of the conspiracy, at the same time as LGBT persons are becoming more visible. Some, who try to soften their rhetoric and move towards mainstream politics, still describe LGBT persons as psychically unstable people in need of help to become normal. Pinkwashing the Radical Right Agenda Some radical right or populist parties have somewhat changed their agenda with regards to LGBT rights. This is particularly true for groups involved in the growing anti-muslim movement, where the counter-jihad movement constitutes a subgroup. This movement has largely left the anti-semitic radical right, and instead focus their agenda on protecting the free and democratic Europe from the savage Muslims and Middle Eastern countries. In this war for freedom, the protection of human rights, minorities, and freedom of speech and expression serves as a medium to attack Muslims and Islam. In line with this, anti-muslim groups sometimes position themselves in favour of LGBT rights but only when it suits their overall aim: to attack Muslims. This is especially the case for the so called counter-jihad movement, a movement that opposes what they perceive as the islamisation of the world. Examples of this include the creation of an LGBT division by the UK-based violent street movement English Defence League, and the attempt by their sister organisation, the Finnish Defence League, to participate in a Pride parade in Tampere, Finland, in the summer of On the other hand, anti-muslim groups picture a demographic threat: the Muslims have more babies than other Europeans (or Americans), and when they become a majority, they will impose Sharia law upon Europe. For more conservative anti-muslim activists, the need to increase the birth rates of their own population is important, and LGBT people can be a threat to this goal as well as to conservative Christian values. 12 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments 2012

13 Radical right-wing populist parties such as the Sweden Democrats in Sweden know by now that they have to avoid expressing hostility towards LGBT people. However, quotes from individual candidates suggest that these parties are far from tolerant, and their traditionalist stance on issues such as the sterilisation of trans persons and adoption for same sex parents, in combination with their continuous embrace of the cultural heritage and nuclear family suggest that the norm of a heterosexual nuclear family is still at the core of their nationalist politics. Covariation in Intolerant Attitudes There is also another reason to expect that one intolerant ideology often exist next to another one: the empirical argument. In the report Intolerance, prejudice and discrimination: A European report, published by the Friedrich Eberhard Stiftung in 2011, the authors find a strong relationship between prejudice towards one group and prejudice towards other groups that are at first glance completely different. Among the people that took part in the survey (a representative sample of 1000 persons per country interviewed by telephone), anti-immigrant attitudes are related to anti- Semitism, anti-muslim attitudes covariate with anti-semitism, and so on. However, the relationship is not equally strong for all combinations for example, anti-muslim attitudes and homophobia appear to be more weakly related. The strongest relationship with regards to homophobia is found between sexism and homophobia, but the relationship is also significant for racism, anti-immigrant attitudes, and anti-semitism. These relationships describe the situation in Europe as a whole. However, when looking at individual countries, it becomes clear that homophobia and racism are more strongly related in some places. In Great Britain, the relationship between racism and homophobia is as strong as the relationship between sexism and homophobia for all of Europe, to give an example. Addressing the Intolerant Agenda It is important to note that the hostility towards LGBT persons on the part of racist, nationalist and Nazi groups is different from the everyday homoand transphobia that LGBT persons meet, since it is incorporated in an ideological framework and a political context (Expo and RFSL, 2005, p. 21). It is also important to note that there are clear links between homoand transphobic propaganda and actual physical attacks toward LGBT people. Thus, to address those groups that actively, with verbal and physical attacks, target LGBT people, is of uttermost importance in the process of securing the human rights of all citizens. threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments

14 A Surge in Radical Right Parties in Europe? All around Europe, radical right parties place stopping immigration at the top of their political agendas. They often also disapprove of increased rights for minorities, and find anti-discrimination legislation and measures to combat hate crime a waste of money, or even discriminatory towards the majority population. These parties usually, but not always, have a history of racism and Nazism, and an agenda of intolerance and discrimination towards one or more groups in society. There are a number of names and labels for these parties: radical right parties, extreme right parties, extreme right-wing populists, anti-immigrant parties, anti-muslim parties, anti-establishment parties and new populist parties are among the terms used. Whichever term used, these parties have in common that they look backwards, toward an idealised homeland or utopia: the heartland (Taggart, 2000, p. 2-3). The heartland is populated by the people who populists speak to and claim to speak for, be it a specific ethnic group, race, or just ordinary people. These parties also have in common that they usually have a scapegoat, someone to blame for the problems in society such as the Jews, the Muslims, the Roma, foreigners in general, or the LGBT community. They also claim to speak for ordinary people in opposition to the corrupt establishment and elite. It is not within the scope of this report to come up with a new, all-encompassing definition of this party family (For a discussion on how to best define the populist radical right party family, see Mudde, Cas, 2007, Ch. 2). Suffice to say that the parties of interest share an agenda of intolerance and hostility towards one group or another. There are different ways to study the ideology of political parties in order to determine to what party family they belong. Some look mainly at the position of those who vote for the party, some at party manifestos and documents and some at the position of party leaders, which can lead to different results and definitions. For the purpose of this report, definitions from the European Election Database are used, along with literature on the topic. The differences between the parties included in this report need to be stressed. Considering the aforementioned discussion on similarities and differences between the parties included in the radical right family, it is already evident that not all of these parties have an openly racist, anti- Muslim, anti-roma or anti-semitic agenda. Some are best described as anti-immigrant, nationalist or national conservative parties. More information on definitions and ideologies can always be found through the list of references. However, they all want to defend a heartland from some kind of outgroup. The following description of potential anti-lgbt parties does not include all parties that have a potential to be hostile towards norm-breakers. For example, many Christian parties around Europe are hostile towards LGBT persons, and in some countries almost all parties use anti-lgbt rhetoric 14 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments 2012

15 Pride, Stockholm. Photo: Expo in order to gain votes. However, this report is limited to parties that due to ideological reasons related to nationalism, racism and protection of the national heritage have an argument and a motivation to oppose human rights for LGBT people. However, even if radical right parties (and among them parties with an anti-lgbt agenda) seem to be here to stay, it is important to remember, as Wilson and Hainsworth note in their report on radical right parties in Europe for the European Network Against Racism, that the emergence, consolidation and success of radical right parties in recent times has not all been one-way traffic (Wilson and Hainsworth, 2012). Parties like the Danish People s Party, Swiss People s Party in Switzerland, and the Norwegian People s Party have actually lost ground in the parliamentary elections in The vote for Front National was lower in 2007 than in In the UK, the BNP has lost a lot of their seats on local councils during the 2000s. But still, extremist parties take place in European parliaments. Without overestimating the influence and success of these parties, it is important to consider the significance of these parties in legislative assemblies around Europe. threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments

16 Radical Right and Anti-Immigrant Parties in European Parliaments The parties described below are parties that have put up candidates in elections to national parliaments. Some of the parties are well known, others less. Some of the parties mentioned do not currently have a representative in a legislative assembly, but are included because of the increasing likelihood that they soon will, or because they have recently held positions in parliament. In some countries, no significant radical right party can be found. These countries are Cyprus, Estonia, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal and Spain. This, of course, does not mean that there is no party with such an agenda only that it has not received enough support, or does not oppose LGBT rights or immigration based on an explicitly radical right agenda. For example, conservative religious parties are not included in this report. It is also important to remember that cross-country comparisons are difficult, and that attention should be paid to local circumstances. The ideas of radical right parties differ depending on in which country they exist, and in some countries, their agendas are more mainstream than in others. Radical right parties in European Parliaments An overview of intolerant radical right parties in European parliaments 2012, votes in the last election and current position in parliament. For a more detailed account of the situation in each European country, see the appendix. Austria: Freedom Party of Austria 17,5 % & Alliance for the future of Austria 10,7 %, both in opposition Belgium: Vlaams Belang 7,8 %, in opposition Bulgaria: Ataka 9,4 %, pivotal position in opposition Denmark: Danish People s party 12,3 %, in opposition Finland: True Finns 19 %, in opposition France: National Front 3,7, in opposition Greece: Golden Dawn 6,9, in opposition Hungary: Fidesz 52,7 in government, Jobbik 16,7 %, in opposition, Italy: Lega Nord 8,3 part of government coalition Latvia: National Alliance 13,9 % part of government coalition Lithuania: Homeland Union Lithuanian Christian Democrates 15 %, Netherlands: Freedom Party 10 %, in opposition 16 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments 2012

17 Sweden Democrats leadar Jimmie Åkesson talking to Swedish minister of migration Tobias Billström. Photo: Expo Norway: The Progress Party 22,9 %, in opposition Poland: Law and Justice 29,9 %, in opposition Sweden: Sweden Democrats 5,7 %, pivotal position in opposition The Influence of Radical Right Parties in Europe As we have seen, the size and influence of radical right parties vary across Europe. Just as the support for other parties vary, there is no constant support for an extremist agenda nor is it constantly absent. It has been argued that the existence of radical right parties and right wing populism is an inherent feature of Western democracy. Even when focusing on both the supply of radical right parties, and the demand for the same it is important to understand the success of these parties, it does not seem like the demand for these parties would suddenly disappear. As Van Der Brug and Fennema argues: In all post-industrial societies, there is a substantial group of citizens with so much fear of immigrants that they are willing to support a radical-right party if they see it as democratic, and if the established parties provide no alternative (2007). At the same time, these parties fundamentally challenge the basic features of a liberal democracy: the equal rights of all. As the overview over the situation in Europe shows, some parties are more influential than others. In most countries, radical right parties are marginalized. In countries like Cyprus, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal and Spain there are no parties of significance that campaign on a racist or purely anti-immigrant agenda. In the UK, Slovenia, Slovakia, Germany and the Czech republic, there are parties that have a history or an ideology that makes them somehow significant, but they do not hold any seats in the legislative assembly. In France, the Front National holds only 2 seats, but receives quite a large support in for example the presidential election. However, the successes of radical right parties across Europe are uneven when looking at the tendencies for the last two elections. In Austria, threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments

18 France and Hungary, radical right parties have increased their number of seats in parliaments. In Finland, the True Finns made a landslide victory, and in Sweden a radical right party entered the parliament for the first time in In Greece, the neo-nazi party Golden Dawn entered the parliament in In the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Germany and Norway, anti-immigrant or radical right parties have had a stable support. In some countries such as Italy, changes in the composition of parties makes it difficult to assess whether the support for these parties have changed. But radical right or anti-immigrant parties are also losing support. In Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and the UK, these parties are losing support. Hence, it is difficult to talk about a surge of extremist parties. Their electoral success might depend on many things, but presumably not on a lack of demand for their policies, but rather on local circumstances such as party organisation, leadership and policy formulation. Serbian policemen stand guard at the entrance to a conference hall in central Belgrade where Serbia s gay activists were forced to hold 2012 Pride indoors. The writing on the poster signed by the Serbian ultra nationalists reads: Message to the government. Stop the gay parade. Listen to your people not to Brussels. Photo: AFP/Andrej Isakovic/Scanpix In some countries, the parties are held back by other political parties rather than by lack of support among the voters. This is the case for Belgium, where Vlaams Belang received almost 8 per cent of the vote, and 12 seats in parliament, but where the other parties are holding up a cordon sanitaire against the party, thus effectively excluding them from any influence. The situation is somewhat the same in Sweden, where no party wants to co-operate with the Sweden Democrats. However, due to the fact that the party has a pivotal position in the legislative assembly, they have the potential to influence policy. In other countries, radical right parties have themselves chosen to remain outside government coalitions, whether asked to join or not. This is the case for Finland, where the True Finns proclaimed that they would not be a part of a coalition. Some parties are large enough to become coalition partners in coming governments. This is the case for Norway, Denmark and Poland as well as Austria, and where there is no consistent policy to exclude the party from government. In the Netherlands, the Freedom Party has been a support party to the government before, even if they are now excluded from influence. 18 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments 2012

19 However, there are also examples of countries where extremists have quite a large influence. The most striking example is Hungary, where the party in government Fidesz has taken a nationalist turn, and where Jobbik holds 17 % of the vote. Here, the nationalist agenda has a lot of influence. But also more moderate nationalist parties or parties with a lot of influence from anti-immigrant movements are, or have been, part of government coalitions in for example Lithuania and Italy. One can conclude that the possibility to influence legislation varies between parties and countries. Just as support for these parties vary, their influence varies depending on possible coalition partners and their size in the legislature. But pure size and influence are not the only things that matters for LGBT rights, naturally, the position of the parties on LGBT rights matter. Not all of these parties have the same stance on LGBT rights. In order to fit into the political system, some claim to support rights for LGBT people. Others furiously oppose Pride parades and same sex marriage. And some seem indifferent focusing on other issues at hand. To better assess the future prospects for human rights, it is necessary to find out how, and why, radical right parties talk about LGBT rights. In order to do so, a couple of cases from different parts of Europe, with different traits and histories, have been chosen. threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments

20 European Variations and Strategies In order to better account for differences and similarities in how different types of intolerant parties perceive LGBT rights, five illustrative cases have been chosen: Bulgaria, France, Hungary, the Netherlands and Sweden. The countries selected represent different geographic parts of Europe. They have become democratic countries at different points in time, and they have joined the EU and thus complied with and implemented certain anti-discrimination legislation at different times. Some of the countries have a more progressive position on LGBT rights in general. The influence of the parties varies, as well as the main ideology of the party. These countries should not be seen as ideal types, but rather as interesting cases that can tell us something about radical right strategies on LGBT rights in different circumstances. The result shall not be seen as an attempt to determine once and for all why and how these parties grow, or under what circumstances they oppose LGBT rights. Rather, the purpose is to give an overview of tendencies, positions and thoughts on LGBT rights among radical right parties in Europe today. Sweden is a Nordic country, perceived as tolerant and equal, which has a small radical right-wing populist party. The party has gained representation in the parliament only recently, when running on a mainly anti-muslim agenda. Bulgaria and Hungary are both new EU member states in Eastern Europe, where the main intolerant parties Ataka and Jobbik campaign on a traditional radical right platform. However, there are important differences. Hungary is one of the countries in Eastern Europe that has the most tolerant legislation, but where nationalism is very influential in everyday politics. Bulgaria shows quite a poor performance when it comes to legislation to protect LGBT persons. However, nationalist ideology is not at all as influential as in Hungary. France is one of the founding members of the EU, and the Front National was one of the first parties to manage to gain votes on a racist, ethnopluralist agenda in the 1970 s, after a setback for almost all racist parties after World War II. The Front National has also increasingly embraced the anti-muslim agenda. The Netherlands is widely seen as a tolerant and liberal country, and its main anti-immigrant party, the Freedom Party, has distanced itself from the anti-semitic agenda of many of the other European radical right parties, and campaigned on a platform where they claim to defend LGBT rights from Muslim extremism. Both the Front National in France and the Freedom Party in the Netherlands have been models for other parties around Europe, the Front National with its ethnopluralist agenda leading up to electoral success in 1984, and the PVV (Freedom Party) with its liberal profile and its opposition against Muslims (Rydgren, 2005; Vossen, 2011). Bulgaria: Widespread Homophobia and a Problematic Discourse Bulgaria, an Eastern European country, joined the European Union in the latest wave of enlargement in The country is a free democracy with 20 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments 2012

21 An activist waves a rainbow flag in front of the Bulgarian parliament, the former headquarters of the Bulgarian Communist Party, during the fifth Sofia Pride Photo: Reuters/Stoyan Nenov/Scanpix limited press freedom. The main extreme right party, ATAKA, is neither very successful, nor particularly marginalised. The Rainbow index for Bulgaria is 6 similar to neighbouring Romania, but significantly lower than most European countries. In Bulgaria, the main nationalist party is the ATAKA (National Union Attack). The party was founded in 2005 by a group of smaller nationalist extremist groups. Their policies focus on xenophobia and the preservation of national pride and the centrality of orthodoxy. (EED, 2012) ATAKA has had stable support from the electorate and received 9.36 % of the national vote in the elections in This gave the party 21 seats in parliament, however, later several deputies left the party, and today only 10 remain within Ataka. The party in government, the Citizens of the European Development of Bulgaria (GERB), had the parliamentary support of ATAKA, but the leader Volen Siderov withdrew their support in 2011 (BHC, 2011). But homophobia is also widespread in other parties. For example, in January 2012, Minister of Culture Vezhdi Rashidov said in an interview that he finds the gays to be the most unpleasant community, since they combine the worst qualities of women and the most despicable qualities of men (Sofia News Agency, ). The Prime Minister in 2011 made several homophobic comments and quotes, according to the ILGA Annual Review, including stating in our party we are normal people. ( ) So we hope to be and not embarrass ourselves in old age, and, commenting on charges that he ruled with a firm hand, saying that it is better with a firm threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments

22 hand, than with a limp wrist. In Bulgaria, gay men are often referred to as having soft wrist, which is seen as a feminine feature. This expresses a socially degrading attitude in the Bulgarian context (Pisankaneva, 2007). Overall, the political discourse in Bulgaria is a problem. Monika Pisankaneva, chairperson at the Bilitis Resource Center Foundation in Sofia, talks about an unfavourable environment of conservatism that strengthens radical right discourse: The absence of critical academic and political discourses which questions traditional values in mainstream society contributes to strengthening the radical right-wing parties. Both left-wing and right-wing parties in Bulgaria refer to traditional values as something positive and healthy for society. This creates an environment of conservatism, which is unfavourable for LGBT-led activism. Among the citizens of Bulgaria, homophobia is widespread. In the World Values Survey round for Bulgaria in 2006, 32 % of the respondents held the opinion that homosexuality can never be justified. Only 8.5 % agreed that homosexuality is always justifiable. The respondents were asked to answer the question whether homosexuality is justifiable or not on a scale between 1 (never justifiable) and 10 (always justifiable). Almost 70 % of the respondents chose a number of 5 or lower, thus suggesting that they felt more comfortable with the statement that homosexuality is never justifiable. Thus, there is no strong mandate for increased rights for LGBT people in Bulgaria. There are also gaps in the legislative provisions on LGBT rights. Hate speech legislation and the Criminal Code do not include gender identity and sexual orientation as bias (ILGA Annual Review, 2011). There is no legal recognition of same-sex partnership, and no form of adoption is available for same-sex couples. Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation only concerns the areas of employment and access to goods and services. However, there are some positive developments. In 2011, the Supreme Administrative Court decided that a city council was engaged in discrimination based on sexual orientation, when they tried to ban displays of homosexuality in public (ILGA Annual Review, 2011). When it comes to Pride parades and the freedom of assembly, annual Pride parades have been held in Bulgaria since 2008, despite opposition from several groups. In 2008, activists from the Bulgarian National Alliance violently attacked the parade, and protests continued in 2009, when ATAKA called for protesters to beat up LGBT persons (IGLHRC, 2010). Police presence at the parades has been high. While the city of Sofia in 2011 did not officially endorse the Pride parade, they did refuse permission for a counter-demonstration by an anti-lgbt group (ILGA Annual Review, 2011). In 2012, the parade gathered around 2000 persons including foreign ambassadors supporting the parade (Sofia News Agency, ). A few radical right activists opposed the march, claiming that foreign elements wanted to make Bulgaria a destination for gay sex tourism (SNA, ). The Bulgarian Orthodox Church did not condemn controversial homophobic 22 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments 2012

23 statements made by a representative for the church, who encouraged people to throw stones on the Pride parade, but instead called the parade an immoral manifestation and homosexuality an unnatural lust (Sofia Pride 2012/ILGA-Europe, ). International networking and awareness raising are important initiatives in order to improve the situation, according to Pisankaneva. She also mentions the use of social media and contact with progressive media, and collaboration with the governmental Commission for Protection from Discrimination. Referring to the EU directives concerning LGBT rights, and collaborating with EU umbrella organisations, such as ILGA-Europe, would be the best strategy for LGBT activists NGOs in their advocacy for protecting LGBT rights. Sofia Pride as a specific LGBT volunteer-driven initiative has raised a positive wave of solidarity among NGOs, informal progressive civic groups and progressive mass media. It increased its number of supporters over the years, starting with just 100 people in 2008 and reaching to 1500 in June However, so far, Bilitis has not cooperated with trade unions in promoting LGBT rights, even if Pisankaneva thinks that this kind of cooperation could be useful, particularly in the field of employment. As it is now, Pisankaneva is not sure about Bulgarian unions position on LGBT rights. According to Monika Pisankaneva, the largest threat against the rights for LGBT people is traditional values and radical political populism that create obstacles for more progressive legislation. But also the Ataka party poses a threat, according to Pisankaneva the main threat to LGBT rights since the party entered the parliament (and many local governments) in Ataka is opposed to the values that the EU represents, and call for a revision of some documents that they think endanger the national interest. Ataka brands most Bulgarian politicians and activists for human and minority rights as national traitors, and calls for sanctions against those who defame Bulgaria. Ataka fought against the integration of minorities into the public sphere, and openly expressed racist and anti-semitic values. Ataka accuses the Romas and Turks of causing the bad economic situation in Bulgaria. Its leader, Volen Siderov was sanctioned by the Commission for Protection from Discrimination and banned to use hate speech against Roma, Turks and homosexuals. And even if Ataka has fared poorly in the last elections, this has not improved the situation for LGBT rights. Pisankaneva says that the now leading party, GERB, took most of the protest votes from Ataka in the last elections. However, they maintained a conservative policy towards minorities, and a populist discourse that refers to traditional values, and the situation for LGBT rights has not changed. The situation both when it comes to political discourse and the influence of radical right populism could improve with a new government coalition, according to Monika Pisankaneva. The situation might get better if a new political coalition wins the next threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments

24 general elections and establishes a more liberal and progressive public discourse, which emphasizes the values of the EU as a basis for national legislation and public policies. Hungary: a Nationalist Majority Hungary joined the EU in the 2004 wave of enlargement. Compared to the other countries that joined the European Union at the same time, the Rainbow Index for Hungary is higher 14, as compared to 2 for Estonia, and 1 for Latvia. Under the former government, Hungarian policy was comparatively progressive for the region: the anti-discrimination legislation introduced in 2003, for example, went far beyond the demands from the EU, extending the legislation to include not only discrimination in the workplace but also in education, housing, and access to social benefits (IRBC, 2012). However, the situation has changed. In Hungary, the most well-known radical right party Jobbik entered the parliament in 2010 with a large share of the vote. The conservative party, Fidesz, has moved from being a liberal party after the fall of the Soviet Union, to embracing nationalistic views and showing authoritarian tendencies. Thus, Hungary could be an exception in at least two ways, since they are relatively LGBT-friendly when it comes to policies, while the influence of nationalistic ideas is strong. Homophobia is widespread among Hungarian citizens. In the report Intolerance, Prejudice and Discrimination from the Friedrich Eberhard Stiftung, the perception of LGBT persons among the general public in Hungary is described as quite poor. Out of the eight countries studied (Denmark, the UK, France, the Netherlands, Italy, Portugal, Poland and Hungary), the broadest acceptance of sexism is found in Hungary. Sexism is measured in terms of agreement with the traditional division of gender roles, a situation that gives men advantages such as more power and better career opportunities and access to education (Zick et al, 2011, p. 63). The report also gives a picture of how widespread homophobia is by measuring rejection of two positively formulated statements, one about same-sex marriage, and the other about the morality of homosexuality (ibid, p ). Two thirds of Hungarians reject same sex marriage, and think that homosexuality is immoral. The only country out of the eight where homophobia is more widespread is Poland. This is perhaps the reason why, as one observer notes, rants about LGBT people are an easy way to score political points, while risking virtually no sanctions (Bruni, NYT, 2012). Discrimination against LGBT persons in Hungary is very common, but underreported. Hate crime legislation does not explicitly cover crimes with an LGBT bias, but is implicitly interpreted to cover it. ILGA also notes that the new constitution does not explicitly prohibit discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation, and that the constitution also defines marriage as an institution between a man and a woman (ILGA Annual Review, 2011). The Pride parade, established in Hungary in 1998, is one of the oldest in Central and Eastern Europe. In 2007, the parade was attacked by large groups of people. How ever, there is a wish to keep the parades: a police decision to deny the Pride parade permission was overturned by a court in 2011 and 2012 (IRBC, 2012). 24 threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments 2012

25 According to Tamás Dombos, project coordinator for the Háttér Support Society for LGBT People in Hungary, visibility and coming out are the most important factors in counteracting the problems LGBT people face in Hungary. Research shows that only very few people know that they have LGBT friends or family members, around %, meaning that people have no first hand experiences and their information is based on often prejudiced media reports. Encouraging people to come out and school programs that bring students and LGBT people closer would probably have the highest impact. So far, trade unions have not been very vocal on LGBT rights. According to Dombos, some of them attend seminars on matters that relate to LGBT rights, but they have not made any public statements countering the rise of political homophobia in Hungary. Some support has come from a small political party called Szolidaritás, which has its base in union activism, and has participated in demonstrations against the new constitution. At these demonstrations, LGBT rights were also discussed, although not by trade union speakers, says Dombos. But the political situation is also a matter of concern. The opposition parties in Hungary are weak, and the press is only partially free, according to the Freedom House. The third largest opposition party is the radical right Jobbik, which holds almost 17 % of the vote and 12 % of the seats. According to Tamás Dombos, Jobbik, which is openly homophobic, is the largest threat against the rights of LGBT people in Hungary, even if there are also other political groups with an even more radical agenda. Besides the proposals and speeches that Jobbik hold in the Parliament, they have paramilitary groups such as the Magyar Gárda, that has organised violent demonstrations against for example the Pride March and the EuroGames sports event, says Dombos. They have also openly called for abolishing registered partnership. Jobbik has proposed bills both in parliament and in cities to ban the propagation of disorders of sexual behaviour especially sexual relations between members of the same sex, and to abolish registered partnership. Dombos believes that even if the bills proposed by Jobbik in various cities as well as in the parliament were voted down by the majority mainstream parties, the proposals for banning the propagation of disorders of sexual behaviour and the open calls for the abolishment of registered partnership has had an effect on the debate. They were not able to directly influence legislation, none of these proposals were adopted, but the debate on LGBT rights shifted considerably to less progressive questions. Earlier political discussion was about marriage, adoption, etc., says Dombos. Now, the debate is focused on the propaganda laws. As a result of more visible nationalist policies, LGBT persons in Hungary experience increased levels of homophobia. In a focus group study from 2012, the authors claim that since Jobbik entered the parliament in 2010, directly racist and homophobic forms of public communication started to increase (Takács, 2012). LGBT respondents express the opinion that the political system keeps radicalising, and one of them says that the change of government swept away women s rights and gay rights from the table (ibid). threatening visibility radical right homophobes in european parliaments