Values, Taboos, and Votes: How Basic Human Values Affect Populist Electoral Support

How do individuals’ underlying value orientations affect populist voting? Building on the congruency model in social psychology, we theorize that voters holding non-conformist values feel closest to political actors who employ a taboo-breaking style debate. Moreover, hypothesize security and universalism feed into vote choices between right-wing left-wing parties. Leveraging structural equation modeling (SEM) data from 2017 German Longitudinal Election Study (GLES), find predict voting for far-right Alternative Germany (AfD), but not The Left. Further, are associated with higher probability of only also mainstream These findings point role basic human electoral support parties behavior general. Wie beeinfussen grundlegende individuelle Wertorientierungen das Wählen populistischer Parteien? Aufbauend auf dem sozialpsychologischen Kongruenzmodell argumentieren wir, dass sich Wähler*innen mit nonkonformistischen politischen Akteuren am nähesten fühlen, die durch einen tabubrechenden Stil der öffentlichen Debatte auszeichnen. Darüber hinaus nehmen wir an, Werte Sicherheit und Universalismus Wahlentscheidung zwischen rechten linken Parteien einfliessen. Wir untersuchen Umfragedaten aus (GLES) implementieren Strukturgleichungsmodelle. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, nonkonformistische rechtsradikalen populistischen für Deutschland (AfD) wahrscheinlicher macht, jedoch nicht linke populistische Linke. korrelieren einer höheren Wahrscheinlichkeit nur populistische, sondern auch moderate zu wählen. Befunde sprechen Rolle grundlegendender menschlicher Wertvorstellungen Wahl allgemeinem politischem Verhalten. Dans quelle mesure les valeurs sous-jacentes portées par individus influencent-elles le populiste? Á partir du modéle de la congruence développé en psychologie sociale, nous posons que électeurs porteurs non-conformistes se sentent plus proches d’acteurs politiques recourant á un populiste et n’hésitant pas ábriser des tabous. De plus, formulons l’hypothése selon laquelle sécurité d’universalisme conduisent choix électoraux concentrés entre partis traditionnels gauche droite. En appuyant sur modélisation équations structurelles données l’étude électorale longitudinale allemande montrons prédisent pour parti droite l’Allemagne mais sont associées une probabilité élevée voter non seulement populistes aussi traditionnels. Ces résultats soulignent rôle sous-jacent joué humaines fondamentales concernant soutien électoral faveur comportements général. It came as surprise many observers when Donald Trump’s approval ratings increased after delivering speeches 2016 US presidential primaries against opponents, women, disabled people, Mexican immigrants, even members his own party (Panizza, 2017: 415). comments, however, did astonish students populism were familiar populism’s “solidarity dirty secret” (Reyes, 2005). People love hear things leaders they sympathize keep this themselves comply norms correctness. Populists’ “taboo-breaking” (Mudde, 2004: 554) is limited aggressive campaign strategies. More generally, populists call question governing “establishment” norm contributing public discussions restrained politically appropriate fashion. So far, research has analyzed leaders’ (van Brug & Mughan, 2007; McDonnell, 2016), manifestos (March, 2017; Pauwels, 2011; Rooduijn 2011), communication strategies (Aalberg, Jagers Walgrave, 2007). In light growing Europe beyond, furthermore highlighted sociodemographic factors (Oesch, 2008) well attitudes (Akkerman al., Andreadis Stavrakakis, Loew Faas, 2019; Rama Santana, 2020; Rooduijn, 2018; Wuttke 2020). recently, studies have turned examining psychology angle. Most notably, Bakker al. (2016) found personality trait agreeableness propensity several European countries. Norris Inglehart (2019) consider authoritarian driver citizen authoritarian-populist similar vein. However, line mainly overlooked potential (Schwartz, 1994) voting, though been shape (e.g., Barnea Schwartz, 1998; Caprara Vecchione, 2017). This article seeks address gap, arguing specific draw engage style. approach (Aichholzer Willmann, Zimbardo, 2004), hold citizens closer sharing orientations. Borrowing an often scholarly perspective populism, suggest reveal their by employing distinct (Moffitt, Moffitt Tormey, 2014). characterized ‘bad manners’ violation behavioral When perform particular public, observe these behaviors and, according hypothesis (Caprara prefer whose most congruent argument, values—that is, low appreciation self-restraint everyday life—conceive actors’ unconventional overlap desirable behavior. match non-conformism behavior, turn, manifests previous shown guide ideology, such or orientation We thus make more likely. develop choice incorporates established explanatory choice—such issue opinions (Campbell 1960; Leimgruber, 2011) variables 2008)—and citizens’ values, namely conformity, security, examine federal election confront our theoretical argument empirical data. case provides us opportunity elucidate it offers two parties, one left (The Left) right (Alternative [AfD]), deemed claims debate (Rooduijn 2019). At same time, recent work indicates AfD Left verbal visual varying degrees. Specifically, state branch Rhineland-Palatinate use negative words scandalizing phrases press releases than (Scharloth, 2017), generally electioneered exceptionally provocative posters campaigns at level (Doerr, 2021). Given different levels performances, be particularly interesting study ground which relationship choices. (SEM), investigate association opinions, choice. likely Left, substantial predictors electorate. Interpreting theory, populists’ success, part, relies voters’ sympathies remainder organized follows. First, building Tormey (2014), conceptualize style—a received relatively little attention studies. After summarizing main features discuss how those may inform stances Next, explain selection, measures, methodological present results SEM analysis. Finally, background value-based theory its broader implications apparent disregard ‘appropriate’ ways acting realm, deliberate flouting expectations practices […]. [T]hese performances manifest ways, including self-representation, slang, incorrectness, fashion other displays contempt ‘usual’ ‘respectable’ politics. implies engaging aim contrast ‘mainstream’ Populism, style, does refer what speak out loud behave public. Considering gradual concept (Jagers Moffitt, 2020), can differentiated regarding dominance presented Simultaneously, (temporarily) assume while necessarily making ideational (Bos 2013: 194). Whereas (2017) focuses using debate, actors, general, deliver performances. Without doubt, attract attention, where media plays critical transmitting messages being conveyed Brants, 2014; Kestilä-Kekkonen Söderlund, Empirical evidence Western suggests supporters pay parties’ bases (Kestilä-Kekkonen Michel Similarly, increase perceived legitimacy Netherlands, yet among lower-educated, cynical, less efficacious 2013). research, As norm-violating discourse, individuals perceive reflect values. shown, tend appear 2016; 2004). Before elaborate principle detail, briefly attitudes. idea incorporate models no means new Amongst others, scholars Michigan School, 1960: 177), Funnel Causality core tradition, informed considered directly (Dalton, 2014: 184). Indeed, relevant factor choice, both shaped structures According Rokeach (1973: 5), “[a] enduring belief mode conduct end-state existence personally socially preferable opposite converse existence” (emphasis original text). An attitude, contrast, “refers organization beliefs around object situation” (Rokeach, 1973: 18) turns opinion once verbally expressed (Katz, 168). Consequently, revolve subjects, immigration, abstract related issues. Drawing Rokeach’s seminal work, Schwartz (1994) developed system he defines “desirable trans-situational goals, importance, serve guiding principles life person entity” 1994: 21). grounded universal needs, vary importance individual another, identified any society. Schwartz’s consists set ten categorized four groups: openness change, self-enhancement, conservation, self-transcendence. Research frequently used independent latent variable, For instance, conservation lower self-transcendence immigration-friendly (Davidov Meuleman, 2012). such, influenced traits, held partially genetic predispositions 61–62). Apart influencing various policies, indirectly Leimgruber (2011), effect Switzerland, posited He finds entirely, indicating latter must translated concrete By influence (Barnea 2006). How, then, parties? literature suggests, intend break taboos sphere voter-politician reason performed accord applied traits makes despite similarly forming personalities, devoted somewhat surprising, yield power Furthermore, without behaving accordingly. context always do; possible endorse actors. Our analysis focus explored domain voting. drawn aligns orientation. Against approve show realm. argue domains help specify proposes conformity referring “restraint actions, inclinations, impulses upset harm others violate norms” 1992: 9), points extent complying desirable. If individuals, score neglect following life. authoritarianism While undoubtedly essential component refers “tension autonomy conformity” (Feldman, 2003: 47). To operationalized decomposed conformity. should emotional proximity performing identity might create feeling proximity; “recognize similarities differences citizens” (Nelson Garst, 2005: 491). non-conformity because closeness believe actor behaves orientations, she holds views. additional feeding skepticism towards “mainstream” politicians (Rooduijn, Similar fundamentally society’s opinion. Voters like outsiders environment identify outsiders. “outsiderdom” showing discontent rules sum, drawing rich expect disregards ‘respectable politics’. voter-party votes polling day, cast party. Hence, hypothesize: Hypothesis 1.Voters weak congruence, build party’s ideology. Again, congruence. comparing ideological placement, (2017: 388) “welfare all people” (universalism) hand, “preserving order status quo” (security) other, constitute trade-off placements across 16 societies. evidence, function anchors statements Concerning desire live “safety, harmony, stability society, relationships, self. derives group requirements” 9). oriented toward individual’s society subscribe agenda, usually stresses law-and-order policies. nurture skeptical immigration salient over years, strong promote anti-immigrant agendas. feeds populist. inclined progressively champion societal change rather stability, would hinder implementation progressive 2a.Voters 2b.Voters Besides represents another based appealed Universalism, defined “understanding, appreciation, tolerance, protection welfare people nature” 12), relates lens through fellow beings irrespective background. Put differently, inclusive view, opposed think exclusionary terms about out-group people. sense, anti-universalism identical racist (Moskowitz Stroh, 1994). system, implying exhibit universalist cater conveying (weak) will opinions. positive derived refusing oppose Conversely, guided Striving equality regardless typical claim left-leaning strongly Therefore, derive hypotheses: 3a.Voters 3b.Voters direct provided inconclusive whether exert (Leimgruber, seek test scenarios mentioned before, issues environmental economic could apply values; radical non-mainstream on, integration. policy areas remain (Rama 2018). determinant additionally first place. characteristics determinants Oesch (2008) societies, working class become gradually disaffected democracy works, resulting fertile responsible quo. following, design characteristics, gained strength years. radical-right Deutschland) far-left (Die Linke) classified 2019) represented Bundestag (Federal Parliament). Since part government, governmental neglected mediating variable study. degrees With respect AfD, Berbuir (2015: 173) “patterns communication” distinguish others. Although still lack comprehensive analyzing begun stylistic elements AfD's Left’s parliament campaigns. Investigating branches’ linguistic lens, Scharloth uses considerably engages language significantly vein, Doerr (2021) examines AfD’s “used images gender sexual freedom together anti-Islam rhetoric national levels” (12). Taken together, indicate Nonetheless, scarce deserve future research. success self-perceptions thereof (Bergmann Other advanced economically privileged (Lengfeld, agenda generate (Schmitt-Beck, became increasingly since so-called “refugee crisis” 2015. former principal except Greens (Dilling, 2018: 94), assumed “AfD’s rise cannot sufficiently explained defection discontented Christian Democrats” (Dillin