Do Affective Polarization and Populism Affect the Support for Holding Referendums?

What populism and polarization have in common is that their relationship with democracy is an ambiguous one. Studies have found that certain degrees of polarization can be helpful for citizens to make up their minds about their choices and because of that encourage them to democratic participation. Similarly, populism can help increase participation by, for example, presenting policies in a simpler language. Citizens with less political interest and political knowledge might be incited to participate in elections and democratic politics in general. However, high levels of polarization lead to the irreconcilability of factions and thereby to gridlock. Democracy can be regarded as incapable of solving citizens’ problems. Likewise, populism can be destructive to democracy when occurring in certain forms and degrees. While populism is not per se antidemocratic, populist parties and leaders, when in power, repeatedly challenge democratic elements. To disentangle how polarization and populism affect democracy, I focus on certain specifics of these three concepts (democracy, populism, and polarization). Namely, I analyze how affective polarization and individual-level populism affect the support for the direct democratic instrument of holding referendums. Drawing on survey data from Austria and Germany, I find that being affectively polarized has a positive effect on the support for holding referendums. However, this effect is moderated by citizens’ individual-level populism. Thus, this study provides insights into citizens’ preferences for democratic decision-making, dependent on their levels of affective polarization and populism.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Politics and Governance
Published
2024-10-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.8590
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.46

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do Affective Polarization and Populism Affect the Support for Holding Referendums?

Marco Fölsch
2 citations
Politics and Governance
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
4.46
article

Do Affective Polarization and Populism Affect the Support for Holding Referendums?

Marco Fölsch
article en
2 citations

Abstract

What populism and polarization have in common is that their relationship with democracy is an ambiguous one. Studies have found that certain degrees of polarization can be helpful for citizens to make up their minds about their choices and because of that encourage them to democratic participation. Similarly, populism can help increase participation by, for example, presenting policies in a simpler language. Citizens with less political interest and political knowledge might be incited to participate in elections and democratic politics in general. However, high levels of polarization lead to the irreconcilability of factions and thereby to gridlock. Democracy can be regarded as incapable of solving citizens’ problems. Likewise, populism can be destructive to democracy when occurring in certain forms and degrees. While populism is not per se antidemocratic, populist parties and leaders, when in power, repeatedly challenge democratic elements. To disentangle how polarization and populism affect democracy, I focus on certain specifics of these three concepts (democracy, populism, and polarization). Namely, I analyze how affective polarization and individual-level populism affect the support for the direct democratic instrument of holding referendums. Drawing on survey data from Austria and Germany, I find that being affectively polarized has a positive effect on the support for holding referendums. However, this effect is moderated by citizens’ individual-level populism. Thus, this study provides insights into citizens’ preferences for democratic decision-making, dependent on their levels of affective polarization and populism.

Politics and GovernanceVol. 12
University of Salzburg (AT)
Universität Salzburg
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
4.46
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.