Democratic Backsliding and the Mainstreaming of the Radical Right in Bulgaria

The electoral breakthrough of a radical anti-establishment party usually attracts attention, as it raises concerns about increasing political extremism and a crisis of democratic legitimacy. Some radical challengers turn out to be short-lived, while others prove to be sustainable in the long-run. One important determinant of radical newcomers’ political survival is the type of interaction between them and the mainstream parties. What strategies can mainstream political parties adopt to neutralize the radical challengers and drain their electoral support? What happens when mainstream parties forcefully challenge, or ignore, or, perhaps, attempt to moderate the radical newcomer? Is the radical challenger likely to benefit more from consistent combativeness with the political establishment or from pursuing a working relationship with the mainstream? We argue that the effects of different types of interaction depend on the level of popular legitimacy enjoyed by the establishment parties. In polities marked by high levels of political corruption and widespread popular discontent with the functioning of the democratic regime, a cooperative strategy pursued by the mainstream parties neutralizes and eventually hurts a radical challenger’s political survival, especially if the challenger relies heavily on protest voters. The paper illustrates the plausibility of this hypothesis by tracing the relationship between Bulgaria’s mainstream parties and the main radical anti-establishment challenger, Ataka, since 2005.