For a long time, polls have given the Austrian Freedom organization a decisive lead. If this trend persists until the parliamentary elections next year, its leader should become Chancellor. This would be the top success of this group, which has existed on the national political scene since the mid-1950s. However, it was only in the early 21st century that the top political successes were achieved erstwhile it participated twice in the creation of the government. FPÖ is simply a organization for which freedom is the main value. It is due to this slogan that it is shaped on issues related to the economy or worldview issues.
In carrying out the FPÖ analysis, it should be noted that this is simply a group that brings together elements of German nationalism and liberalism. It besides has roots in the Austrian NSDAP, which in the first half of the 1930s absorbed the National-Liberal Groups of the Austrian National Council – the Greater German People's organization and the People's Union. FPÖ is an example of a organization that separated itself from the Independent Union formed in the late 1940s (VDU, Verband der Unabhängigen). The VDU brought together all those who did not support the "red-black" coalition of SPÖ (Sozialdemocratische Partei Österreichs) and ÖVP (Österreichische Volkspartei), i.e. liberals, monarchs, anti-clerical conservatives, and above all erstwhile Nazis who, after the end of planet War II, were deprived of the ability to hold higher offices and exercise the right to vote. The Austrian NSDAP besides recruited a large part of VDU and FPÖ management.
Austrian Freedom organization (Freiheitlichen Partei Österreichs – FPÖ) is simply a group formed in 1956. Her first leader was Anton Reinthaller – a advanced authoritative in III Reich affairs of food and agriculture, for which the work was awarded the honorary title SS–Brigadeführer. Although he shared most of the views of his associates, he was not proven to have any criminal offences in the course of the post-war denasification process. However, he was sentenced to short prison for betraying Austria by supporting Anschlussu.
The improvement of the organization and the strengthening of its position on the Austrian political scene are mostly divided into 5 periods. In the first decade of its existence, FPÖ was weak organizationally and programically. The FPÖ programme objectives were limited to respective subjects. Its representatives focused primarily on highlighting the function of the nation in political life. The mediocre programme offer made FPÖ unsupported by voters and was on the margins of the Austrian political scene.
Since the mid-1960s, Friedrich Peter served as president of the FPÖ, who sought to increase the importance of the organization under consideration. The standardisation phase was characterised mostly by unchangeable election results. The staff of the organization were supported by people with higher education, which strengthened intellectual foundations and improved the quality of the program offer. The coalition capacity of FPÖ besides grew. This phase ended in 1970/1971. At that time, the support of the number government of SPÖ by FPÖ took place. The organization analysed at that time expressed, among others, support for the improvement of electoral law, which was itself beneficial to it.
The next phase is the alleged political acceptance phase which began in the second half of the 1970s. Under Norbert Steger (1980-1986), FPÖ headed towards liberalism. The problem of this group remained a weak organization and a deficiency of structures. This component importantly limited the coalition capacity of this party. The party's position on the Austrian political scene was besides aggravated by the fact that there were expanding divisions. This problem intensified in 1983 erstwhile FPÖ became active in the creation of the national government, together with SPÖ. An crucial event in the decade of the 1980s was the election for organization president. As of 1986, this was served by Jörg Haider, who in direct competition defeated Steger..
In spite of Haider's expectations of this change, Chancellor Vranitzky responded, who announced the date of the fresh elections. Their consequence led FPÖ to enter the phase of populist protest. In terms of the support received and thus mandates, this was 1 of the most successful periods in the past of the party. The climax was the consequence in the election to the National Council, which was held in 1999. The FPÖ then scored 26.9% and somewhat defeated ÖVP became the second strongest party. It is worth noting that in any regions of the country FPÖ received very advanced support, much higher than in the full country. An example is Carinthia, where 42.09% of voters voted for FPÖ. Many thanks to Haider, who skillfully managed this union as governor. In the populist phase of the protest, a large proportion of the remaining parties were consistently considered unfit to form a FPÖ coalition. At that time, the group analyzed was at the threshold of power, but needed a coalitionist who would be willing to regulation with him.
The inauguration of the Schüssel-Riess-Passer government on February 4, 2000 was an expression of this. As expected, the deficiency of staff, organizational and strategical transition from populist protest to direct participation in power was very hard to implement. Haider did not want to ease his Euroscepticism and anti-immigration attitude. This resulted in, among others, an global boycott of Austria and the weakening of freedomists (e.g. in Vienna in 2001 their support fell from 27.6% to 20.16%).
Figure 1. FPÖ organization logo
Source: FPÖ, https://www.FPOe.at/team/die-FPÖe/bundesparteiobmann (1.12.2023)
Since its inception, FPÖ has tried very hard to share the Austrian political scene. Her representatives created themselves as representatives of the masses, which are underestimated and discriminated against by elites. The activists were very critical of the functioning of the Austrian political system. The sense of proportional democracy, consensus, corporateism and social partnership was undermined. Leaders of this group felt that a much more effective tool of democracy was a plebiscite that was opposed to typical governments. FPÖ considered itself a typical of the interest of the groups which were persecuted by the centre of power created by: SPÖ, ÖVP, ÖGB and the Austrian Chamber of Commerce. The Austrian Free organization was both an example of a organization removed from the creation of the political scene after planet War II, and a typical of a conventional nationalist (all-German) political camp that formed the Austrian organization strategy after planet War II, along with socialists and chapencies.
With a clear change under Jörg Haider's regulation to powerfully right-wing bias in 1986, and the ensuing appeal to a much wider group of FPÖ voters besides made programme changes. Andreas Mölzer suggests that "the conventional point of view of FPÖ, including its conventional ideological bases, had to be interpreted more openly, and so inevitably in a more obscure way". This ambiguity reflected the versatility and opportunism of FPÖ populism. The view remained valid only in the sense of the general value system, not as a programming point. In this respect, the word of the organization president became more crucial in the FPÖ than the party's programme. Therefore, in the days of Haider's presidency (1985-1997) there was a programme based on national-liberal assumptions. In the late 1990s, the organization had to limit conventional programming values. However, this should have been done in specified a way as not to deter its main voters. The resignation of these positions was a condition for going beyond the conventional electorate and gaining greater support.
This included, on the 1 hand, a break with attachment to Germanism, Haider in 1995 demanded that the organization depart from “Germanism”. Therefore, FPÖ turned to Austria without questioning its membership in the German cultural and cultural community. FPÖ stressed the importance of affirmative Austrian patriotism.
In this decade, there was besides a closeness to the Church. Haider said in 1993 after an audience with Pope John Paul II that FPÖ had changed its attitude in relations with the Catholic Church. The cool distance to religion was replaced by friendly, friendly intimacy.
The 1997 organization programme referred to the function of Christianity in the Austrian State. It was pointed out that it was essential to keep the intellectual foundations of the West and to defend Christian values. In order to preserve these values, the FPÖ considered itself an perfect partner for Christian churches erstwhile there were different viewpoints on policy issues. Nevertheless, this position became a platform of links with conservative Catholic environments.
The decade of the 1990s and the beginning of the 21st century was the period during which the organization presented gained the highest rates of support among Austrians. With this in mind, it is worth examining the results of the FPÖ elections in elections not only to the National Council, but besides in local elections and elections to the European Parliament.
The in-depth analysis shows that FPÖ has revealed a certain dependence since 1956, as shown in Figure 1. For decades, the party's participation in the elections remained at around 5% and played only a marginal function in Austria's two-party system, in which ÖVP and SPÖ dominated. Until the 1980s, the electorate of this organization was primarily nationalists, erstwhile Nazis and war veterans.
Figure 1. Support for FPÖ in the 1956-2019 Austrian Parliament elections
Source: FPÖ, https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freiheitliche_Partei_%C3%96sterreichs(23.11.2023)
As has already been pointed out, in the decade of the 1980s there was a programme transformation and FPÖ became a populist group led by Jörg Haider. The fresh leader began to actively search the consideration of the working class and voters who were in a disadvantage due to the national government's policies to date. FPÖ began to rise interest among those who were bored or disappointed by the current policy of the groups in power.
Under Haider's leadership, the organization initiated the implementation of the "Austria First" programme. The most crucial point of this programme was opposition to immigration and globalisation. Euroscepticism and anti-elitism were besides characteristic of this period. While FPÖ declared its readiness to defend Christian civilization from Islam in socio-cultural terms, its socio-economic position increasingly drifted to the left. The party's large asset was the strength and charisma of Haider and his successors Heinz-Christian Strache and later Herbert Kickl.
Twice, in 2000 and 2017, FPÖ formed a ruling coalition with ÖVP. In both cases, the organization failed due to crucial interior problems, thereby losing a large part of the electorate. In 2005, the division of the organization led to the creation of a faction led by Haider, called the Alliance for the Future of Austria (BZÖ). Competing straight with FPÖ, BZÖ failed to win the erstwhile voters. The BZÖ situation deteriorated importantly after Haider's tragic death in a car accident in 2008.
Figure 2 shows support for BZÖ and FPÖ. This illustration shows a clear increase in support for FPÖ after 2013.
Source: R. Heinisch, D. Hofmann, The Case of the Austrian extremist Right and Russia During the War in Ukraine, Brussels 2023, p. 33.
Following the failure of the Second Coalition Government ÖVP – FPÖ in 2019, the group afraid suffered crucial electoral losses. Charts 3 and 4 show the conduct of the general elections (parties of the main parties' votes) in 2017 and 2019. Their analysis shows a clear decline in support of FPÖ (about 10 pp. in 2 years). The largest beneficiary of FPÖ's weakening was ÖVP, which improved its electoral performance by 6% in 2 years.
Figure 3. FPÖ – 2017 National Council elections
Source: R. Heinisch, D. Hofmann, The Case of the Austrian extremist Right and Russia During the War in Ukraine, Brussels 2023, p. 35.
Figure 4. FPÖ – 2019 National Council elections
Source: R. Heinisch, D. Hofmann, The Case of the Austrian extremist Right and Russia During the War in Ukraine, Brussels 2023, p. 35.
Table 1 shows the results of the Land elections. These figures show that the group has the highest support in Carinthia, Salzburg and Lower Austria. It is worth noting that the support obtained by this group in the local elections allowed it to form a union government in the 4 national states. This was the case in Lower Austria, advanced Austria, Salzburg and Vienna.
Table 1. Elections to local governments
Source: Elections to local authorities, https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freiheitliche_Partei_%C3%96sterreichs(23.11.2023)
Table 2 presents FPÖ results in elections to the European Parliament. From 1996 to 2019, the group in question received the highest support in 1996. At that time, more than a million votes were cast on FPÖ, allowing the organization to win 6 seats in the EP. It should besides be added that FPÖ has won at least 1 mandate in each of the elections held so far.
Table 2 PE election
Source: EP election, https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freiheitliche_Partei_%C3%96sterreichs (23.11.2023).
In the political scandal that forced FPÖ in 2019 to leave the government, Heinz-Christian Strache (leader) and Johann Gudenus – the main typical of the Russian relations organization were involved. After the removal of Strache and Gedenus from the party's authorities, Herbert Kickl – an idealist who creates FPÖ for the right-wing anti-system party.
The current FPÖ programme was published in 2011. It points out that the safety, peace and prosperity of Austria and its citizens are essential for the members of this group. It stresses the functioning of Austria within the German-speaking cultural community and free country Europe. The programme's authors declare that the organization afraid is active in: strengthening the freedom of individuals and societies, promoting democracy, developing the regulation of law, promoting the principles of marketplace economy and social justice. The FPÖ emphasises Austria's right to self-determination and to preserve and defend the views on the functioning of societies that derive from the tradition of the party.
In the sphere of promoted liberal policy, 10 basic assumptions to be followed by the organization are indicated:
- Freedom is the most precious asset. Since the Spring of the Peoples in 1848, the Austrian people were to sacrifice themselves to fight for freedom and defend it where necessary;
- Whereas it is the Austrians' work to defend their homeland, national identity and autonomy, as well as their natural livelihood;
- citizens' freedom is ensured and protected by freedom and the regulation of law and a genuine community of solidarity;
- the household in the FPÖ imagination is simply a relation between a man and a female with common children – the household is simply a natural nucleus that unites a functioning society and which, with the solidarity of generations, forms the basis for sustainable development;
- FPÖ shall support the improvement of a marketplace economy with social responsibility, private property protection and a fair distribution of contributions and benefits to the general public;
- in the area of wellness care, the FPÖ seeks to supply citizens with the best in terms of wellness prevention and medical and nursing care;
- Austria is to do everything in its power to defend its territory and stay neutral and to supply protection and assistance to its citizens in the event of danger or danger;
- the improvement of society is conditioned by comprehensive education, academic freedom and independent art and culture;
- Austria's function in the planet must be shaped by humanitarian responsibility, self-awareness and the protection of Austrian interests;
- European policies and global contacts are to be based on the rule of peoples to self-determination.
As already indicated, the basis of the party's programme is freedom. It is pointed out that human dignity is rooted in his freedom. Freedom in the form of self-determination should be interpreted as liability and it is incompatible with specified an approach to apply any repression. Freedom and work form the core of the improvement of a individual state community. The concept of freedom is rooted in the idealistic belief that people are not bound by their material needs. Freedom of the individual is restricted by the freedom of another man and citizen. Freedom, human dignity and democratic solidarity are the basis of the liberal ethos of the organization and make attitudes in the following spheres:
- home, identity and environment;
- law and justice;
- family;
- prosperity and social stability;
- health;
- safety;
- education, science, art and culture;
- cosmopolitanism and autonomy;
- A Europe of diversity.
Homeland, identity and environment are the next FPÖ program slogans. It is stressed that the surveyed group is devoted to the protection of homeland, national identity and autonomy. FPÖ members are obliged by the nation's right to self-determination to defend Austrian independency and autonomy. They declare their awareness of attachment to ancestors and work to subsequent generations. They so emphasise the importance of action to preserve the homeland for future generations.
The FPÖ emphasises that most Austrians are part of the German national, linguistic and cultural community. Nationals specified as Croats, Slovenians and Hungarians are historical minorities who, in the opinion of the FPÖ, both enrich Austria's past and form an integral part of the state.
The FPÖ points out that Austria is not an immigration country. Members of this organization so advocate a social policy focused on indigenous Austrians. At the same time, FPÖ points out that legal immigrants who are already integrated can talk German and full recognise the values of the Austrian people should be granted residence and citizenship.
The analysed organization acknowledges the fundamental values of Christian tradition. At the same time, he advocates the separation of the Church from the State. The programme states that FPÖ is ready to defend European values and the liberal-democratic order. This group is against fanaticism and extremism and advocates the improvement of a culture of peace and freedom. The FPÖ considers that the freedom of spiritual practice in Austria besides implies freedom, protected by law, not being exposed to spiritual doctrines.
The freedom of citizens is ensured and protected through freedom and the regulation of law and a genuine community of solidarity. The FPÖ depends on a state of social work based on the regulation of law and peaceful coexistence. This group declares designation of democracy and Republican form of government, constitutional principles, respect for life and human dignity, and fundamental liberal freedoms specified as freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of the press. At the same time, it was pointed out that the organization is active in building direct democracy, in the right to freedom, secrecy and direct proportional representation, as well as in media regulations that prevent monopolies and public manipulation.
The FPÖ declares that Austria is simply a community of citizens who have circumstantial rights and obligations. Citizens' rights include the right to vote, the right to decent education and the right to freedom, the right to aid the community in need. Responsibilities in turn mean solidarity between fellow citizens, paying contributions to keep public functions and a individual commitment to maintaining interior and external security. Accepting and complying with global obligations cannot harm Austrians.
Social policy in FPÖ aims to defend against difficulties that may arise from age, disability, illness, accident, unemployment or random occurrence. Social construction aims primarily to meet the housing needs of Austrian citizens. At the same time, the FPÖ stresses that action in this policy area requires effective solutions to defend against social welfare abuse.
The FPÖ in its programme shows that it takes care of equal opportunities between men and women, common respect and fair pay, regardless of gender. This group powerfully rejects the preferential treatment of a peculiar sex in order to overcome the actual "or" perceived discrimination. Statistical inequality caused by various factors cannot be compensated by hurting individuals. For this reason, FPÖ is critical of all amounts imposed and sex quotas.
The household in the FPÖ imagination is simply a social tissue that has the work of partners and generations for each other. It is the foundation of society. A kid turns a partnership between a man and a female into a family. FPÖ is simply a group active in promoting the primacy of matrimony in a conventional way, i.e. the relation between man and woman. The FPÖ rejects a separate legal body for same-sex persons.
In the field of economical policy, FPÖ promotes marketplace economy solutions while stressing the importance of social responsibility, private property protection and fair taxation. This organization considers that decent wages and reasonable taxation are conducive to Austria's prosperity. According to the members of the group concerned, low taxes and incentive schemes are crucial for business and labour marketplace development. They have precedence over grants and redistribution. FPÖ considers that young Austrian entrepreneurs should be granted start-up aid and taxation relief.
On wellness policy issues, the organization in question considers that the human right to life, wellness and dignity is not subject to utilitarian considerations. Therefore, the existence of a individual must never be questioned for economical reasons or deprived of dignity as a consequence of misuse of medicines, gene technology or negligence following illness or disability.
With respect to the safety of the FPÖ states that law and order are the fundamental values of liberal ethos which service the safety of Austrians. safety is seen as a basic request and an essential request for the affirmative improvement of humanity. Providing safety requires self-defense skills. This organization so advocates the best training and equipment of police and military authorities.
In the area of abroad policy, FPÖ advocates an approach that focuses on securing Austria's sovereignty and the nonsubjective of protecting the freedom of its citizens. All activities related to bilateral or multilateral abroad cooperation must take into account the common Austrian interests.
In ending the FPÖ approach to abroad policy, it is worth addressing the issue of war in Ukraine. In this dimension, FPÖ avoids unambiguous statements defending the Russian aggressive war. However, it uses formulas that make Austrians for victims of political machinations of EU and US elites. In the optics of the organization under consideration, political decisions taken against Russia are presented as ineffective and counterproductive. There are accusations of contributing to the escalation of the conflict. FPÖ accuses the EU of adopting its policy towards Russia without the consent of the public and blames the organisation for rising prices and deteriorating standards of living. This approach is in the opinion of the subject researchers to make the conventional Euroscepticism of the FPÖ and the anti-systemic position that underpins this party's programming. The FPÖ seeks to extend this appeal further, highlighting Austria's attractiveness, the conventional orientation of neutrality policy in armed conflicts and the benefits of close economical relations with Russia.
In conclusion, FPÖ is simply a group that focuses on voters with right-wing views. There are clear references to economical liberalism, but at the same time traditionalism in spheres specified as worldview issues. A characteristic feature of this organization is powerfully emphasised Euroscepticism and reluctance to cooperate abroad, which would entail restrictions on the sovereignty of the Austrian State. According to FPÖ Austria is the most crucial and must be guided solely by its interests in global action.
Rafał Skórniewski
