Why people vote for thin-centred ideology parties? A multi-level multi-country test of individual and aggregate level predictors

Abstract

The present research investigates the individual and aggregate level determinants of support for thin-centred ideology parties across 23 European countries. Employing a multilevel modelling approach, we analysed European Social Survey data round 7 2014 (N = 44000). Our findings show that stronger identification with one’s country and confidence in one’s ability to influence the politics positively but perceiving the system as satisfactory and responsive; trusting the institutions and people, and having positive attitudes toward minorities, i.e., immigrants and refugees, negatively predict support for populist and single issue parties. The level of human development and perceptions of corruption at the country level moderate these effects. Thus, we provide the first evidence that the populist surge is triggered by populist actors’ capacity to simultaneously invoke vertical, “ordinary” people against “the elites”, and horizontal, “us” against “threatening aliens”, categories of people as well as the sovereignty of majority over minorities. These categories and underlying social psychological processes of confidence, trust, and threats are moderated by the general level of human development and corruption perceptions in a country. It is, therefore, likely that voting for populist parties will increase as the liberally democratic countries continue to prosper and offer better opportunities for human development. Stronger emphasis on safeguarding the integrity of the economic and democratic institutions, as our findings imply, and preserving their ethical and honest, i.e., un-corrupt, nature can keep this surge under check.

Populism in Peru: Populist attitudes and perception of the populist offer and its relationship with political cynicism and attitudes toward democracy

“…(Aslanidis, 2016;Mudde and Rovira Kaltwasser, 2017;Çakal et al, 2022). As was previously observed, the previous classification places different identity processes at the core of populist discourse, which is how populist promoting agents attempt to persuade people to support their political objectives (Marchlewska et al, 2018;Stathi and Guerra, 2021;Çakal et al, 2022). This produces an interesting paradox since, on the one hand, identity affiliations to processes of populist nature establish a position where malfunctioning and corruption in the system are perceived as alien to those who adhere to the populist cause.…”

“…This produces an interesting paradox since, on the one hand, identity affiliations to processes of populist nature establish a position where malfunctioning and corruption in the system are perceived as alien to those who adhere to the populist cause. Thus, for example, rhetorics about corruption frame a corrupt and unreliable "other" to whom are attributed, through denunciation, the difficulties that members of the ingroup (the moral people) would be facing (Mudde and Rovira Kaltwasser, 2017;Çakal et al, 2022). However, on the other hand, processes of political, economic, and social crisis where populism emerges, are also often framed by institutional weakening and corruption, which has produced in the citizenry a certain tolerance and acceptance of these problems at the individual and institutional level (see Quiroz, 2013;Levitsky and Ziblatt, 2018).…”

“…In particular, populism as a discursive framework carries a political message with a particularly potent content to elicit emotional reactions, which, in line with Jerit’s (2004) proposal, would allow it to project representations that can consensually result in positive (for example, toward the moral people) or negative (for example, toward the corrupt elite) beliefs and attitudes ( Aslanidis, 2016 ; Spruyt et al, 2021 ). The discursive strategy will emphasize contents that make salient the identification with the people, as opposed to the elites, to give political meaning to citizen dissatisfaction and demands ( Rooduijn et al, 2016 ; Aslanidis, 2016 ; de la Torre, 2017 ; Marchlewska et al, 2018 ; Busby et al, 2019 ; Meléndez and Rovira Kaltwasser, 2019 ; Hawkins et al, 2020 ; Stathi and Guerra, 2021 ; Çakal et al, 2022 ). In conclusion, the populist discursive frame promises certainty and cognitive simplicity to cope with an unfavorable political situation.…”

“…The consequences of political cynicism are considered potentially dangerous for the development of a society, as it mitigates civic and democratic values and attitudes, and tends to reduce citizen participation in the political sphere, as a result of hopelessness or disinterest in public affairs ( Patterson, 2002 ; Chaparro, 2018 ) and increases citizens’ adherence to authoritarian or populist political positions as forms of opposition to the political system and what it has traditionally represented ( Bélanger and Aarts, 2006 ; Levitsky and Ziblatt, 2018 ; Çakal et al, 2022 ). Espinosa et al (2022c) find in a recent study in 11 Ibero-American countries, that the elements that constitute political cynicism goes beyond political distrust toward the system in general, so it is important to extend its understanding to the perception of corruption present in the system as a specific element on which distrust develops.…”

“…The aforementioned suggests that a populist discursive framework could develop from the expressed distrust of the system, where society and its citizens are portrayed in the two groups mentioned above: “the moral people” vs. “the corrupt elites.” ( Aslanidis, 2016 ; Mudde and Rovira Kaltwasser, 2017 ; Çakal et al, 2022 ). As was previously observed, the previous classification places different identity processes at the core of populist discourse, which is how populist promoting agents attempt to persuade people to support their political objectives ( Marchlewska et al, 2018 ; Stathi and Guerra, 2021 ; Çakal et al, 2022 ). This produces an interesting paradox since, on the one hand, identity affiliations to processes of populist nature establish a position where malfunctioning and corruption in the system are perceived as alien to those who adhere to the populist cause.…”