In a CDDRL research seminar series talk, Postdoctoral Fellow Alex Mierke-Zatwarnicki presented her research on “Varieties of Identity Politics: A Macro-Historical Approach.” She explored how identity politics — strategies of political mobilization based on group identity — shapes the development of new political parties, particularly those trying to establish themselves in a competitive environment.

Mierke-Zatwarnicki explained how challenger parties use identity politics to address challenges like uniting diverse groups, building party structures, and navigating uncertainty. Identity politics help create internal unity and differentiate these parties from competitors. She identified two main types:

1. Solidaristic Identity Politics: This type relies on a clear ingroup — a homogenous group with a shared identity and common interests that form the party's main support base. By emphasizing a common identity, parties can strengthen internal cohesion and appeal to voters with a unified message.
2. Oppositional Identity Politics: When a clear ingroup is not available, parties may use oppositional identity politics, which involves creating a sense of "us versus them." By identifying specific outgroups as adversaries, the party can unite a diverse coalition of supporters around a common enemy.
    

To illustrate these two types of identity politics, Zatwarnicki used examples from six political parties in the UK, Netherlands, and Germany, focusing on social democratic and fascist parties:

• Social Democratic Parties: The Labour Party in the UK exemplifies solidaristic identity politics. The party relied on class identity to unify workers, gain trade union support, and differentiate itself from the Liberal Party. Over time, Labour evolved from being solely a worker’s party to a party focused on "progress," with its class-based identity helping to maintain a stable group of supporters.
• Fascist Parties: The NSDAP (Nazi Party) in Germany during the interwar period used oppositional identity politics. Without a clear ingroup, the NSDAP targeted minorities, Marxists, immigrants, and others to build support. This strategy created an "us versus them" dynamic, allowing the party to unite a heterogenous electorate in a time of social and economic instability.
   

Mierke-Zatwarnicki’s research combined qualitative case studies and quantitative text analysis to show how these styles of identity politics have been used. She concluded that while both styles can be challenging to employ effectively, each can succeed under particular circumstances:

• Solidaristic identity politics are most successful when a strong, well-defined group, such as the working class, can be rallied.
• Oppositional identity politics can be effective in contexts of social fragmentation. This strategy is not limited to right-wing parties; left-wing movements like the Occupy movement have also used oppositional identity politics.
   

In conclusion, Mierke-Zatwarnicki demonstrated that identity politics is a powerful tool for new political parties striving to gain a foothold. Whether by focusing on shared identities or emphasizing opposition to outgroups, identity politics shapes how parties form, build their base, and compete in elections.