Disagreeing to Agree: Populism and Consensus Among Members of Parliaments and Their Voters

Abstract

Populism is theoretically associated with an antagonistic interpretation of politics. Populists tend to morally delegitimize their adversaries, exhibit “bad manners” toward them, and sometimes even try to exclude them from “the people.” They are also more inclined to prioritize radical policy and institutional changes. Therefore, populism appears to be directly at odds with consensus politics. This research aims to empirically test this relationship. Using two original surveys focused on the Spanish context, we investigate the relationship between populist attitudes and the propensity to consensual political solutions, examining both citizens and their political representatives. Our results confirm that populist attitudes contribute to low support for consensual approaches toward politics among both members of parliament (MPs) and citizens, but this relationship depends on the individual’s specific dimensions of populism. Anti-systemic and moral Manichaean attitudes are associated with less consensual preferences both for MPs and citizens, whereas people-centrist and identitarian populist attitudes exhibit this negative effect only among citizens. These results provide new insights into the ramifications of populist attitudes and underscore the importance of empirically examining the concept of populism across its various dimensions.