The Relevance of Historical Experiences for Shaping Responses to Anti-System Actors. Theorization of Militant Democracy

Several authors have argued that historical context fundamentally shapes national choices about responses to anti-system actors. The most common argument about the impact of the past relates to experiences of authoritarianism. The influence of Weimar instability and Nazi dictatorship on Germany’s ‘militant democracy’ is the paradigmatic example. However the experiences of authoritarianism may also be mobilized in rejection of militant responses to extremism. The relevance of historical experiences for explaining responses to anti-system actors may thus depend on how the past is ‘remembered’ and ‘mobilised’ for political ends. In the paper, we compare Spanish and Polish strategies against extremism. These states experienced periods of authoritarianism, adopted various measures of militant democracy (albeit targeting different kinds of extremist threats) but nevertheless avoided militant styles of ‘democratic defense’ thereafter. Examining these cases we pay particular attention to discourses justifying strategic choices and the role of historical memory therein, as well as political resources (institutional, ideological or otherwise) of speakers articulating different positions. Our focus on discourse also permits an analysis of the role of ethical and normative issues in public debate, including the process of shaping the conceptions of democracy, legitimacy, liberty and human rights in both countries. This may provide insights into understanding of contemporary practices of reactions to anti-system groups, an important topic in face of the growing position of populist parties and movements in various European countries. Working ‘abductively’, we draw on theoretical insights of literatures on ‘militant democracy’, ‘historical memory’, ‘securitization’, ‘democratization’ and thus adopt interdisciplinary approach.