Abstract
We analyzed the relationship between modern forms of populism and citizen support for exclusive welfare policies and proposals, and we focused on support for left-wing- and right-wing-oriented welfare policies enacted or proposed during the Lega Nord (LN)–Five Star Movement (FSM) government in Italy (2018–2019). In light of the theoretical perspective of political ideology as motivated by social cognition, we examined citizens’ support for the two policies considering adherence to populist attitudes, agreement on the criteria useful to define ingroup membership, and personal values. We also took into account the role of cognitive sophistication in populism avoidance. A total of 785 Italian adults (F = 56.6; mean age = 35.8) completed an online survey in the summer of 2019 based on the following: support for populist policies and proposals, political ideologies and positioning, personal values, and ingroup boundaries. We used correlation and regression analyses. The results highlight the relationships between populism and political conservatism. Populism was related to the vertical and horizontal borders defining the “people”; cognitive sophistication was not a relevant driver. We identified some facilitating factors that could promote adherence to and support for public policies inspired by the values of the right or of the left, without a true ideological connotation.
Highlights
Starting from the already discussed key evidence, we aimed to investigate whether the endorsement of populist ideology explained support for Lega Nord (LN)–Five Star Movement (FSM) welfare policies better than personal values
Each set of predictors inserted into the sequence of estimation added a contribution in terms of R2 change, especially when we entered the ingroup boundaries (PSE, people versus national elites (PNE), NNI; Step 2) and personal values (TR, CF, SE, PO, UN; Step 4) into the model
Multivariate analyses indicated that income and retirement were significantly predicted by the following variables: age, the people versus national elites (PNE), nonnational inclusion (NNI), populism (POP), and security (SE) (Age (Pillai’s Trace = 0.01, F(3772) = 4.06, p < 0.05), PNE (Pillai’s Trace = 0.01, F(3772) = 5.29, p < 0.05), NNI
Summary
One of the main differences between populism and other “thick-centered” ideologies (Mudde 2004) is that ideologies such as socialism, liberalism or conservativism refer to more structured and consistent political thought. 2017), a national/ethnic dimension is added to the notion of the “people” This dimension, consistent with right-wing cultural instincts (Taguieff 1995), can be approached as a horizontal in/out opposition between nationals and non-nationals, and highlights the close proximity between populism and nationalism, as well as how the two can be partially conflated. Both “revolve around the sovereignty of ‘the people’” The same in/out dimension opens the door to the acceptance of nationalist identity demands, such as claims in defense of the sovereignty of the nation-state against supranational political bodies (e.g., the EU) and/or to the exclusion of specific social groups (e.g., immigrants) from the national community
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
