Abstract
AbstractRecently several populist parties have become part of coalition governments in multiparty democracies, specifically in Western Europe. Based on the inclusion-moderation thesis, academics assume that incumbent populist parties tone down their populist rhetoric as a result of the daily businesses of deliberation and compromises in coalitions. However, while the assumption of tamed populists in power is widespread, there is little empirical work dealing with the topic. Using a classical quantitative content analysis of 1,210 Facebook posts published by populist parties in Italy, Spain, Austria and New Zealand, this article examines whether opposition parties are more populist and nativist than those in coalition governments. The findings indicate that populists do not decrease the degree of anti-elite and people-centred messages when they are in power but rather change the type of elites they attack and the antagonist groups they juxtapose. We should therefore rethink the validity of the inclusion-moderation thesis for populist parties in coalition governments.
Highlights
Several populist parties have become part of coalition governments in multiparty democracies, in Western Europe
The same holds true for New Zealand First (NZF), a populist right-wing party that recently participated in a coalition government with the New Zealand Labour Party after being in opposition for several years
Confirming the inclusion-moderation thesis, the findings indicate that the party uses a higher degree of populist rhetoric in opposition than in government
Summary
We are confronted with an increasing number of studies concerned with the performance and consequences of populists’ government participation but with very little empirical evidence regarding the validity of the inclusion-moderation thesis for populists’ communication. Starting with Hypothesis 1a, radical right populist parties do not seem to decrease the amount of nativist statements in government, as Figure 1 shows It illustrates the percentage of posts containing nativist messages. Populist parties compensate for a lack of messages against the government by criticizing other political actors more often – such as left parties and politicians (FPÖ; Lega; M5S in its first government) or the radical right (Podemos; M5S in its second government) – depending on their coalition partner. Excluding outgroups, criticizing single political elites and – primarily – creating antagonisms between the people and political, economic or non-native counterparts cannot be observed more frequently in opposition, except for NZF At this point one might wonder whether the same observation might be valid for non-populist parties as well. The Lega gained a considerable number of votes in power, which was not reflected in its discourses
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
