Abstract:The literature on authoritarianism and exclusive forms of nationalism often implies that authoritarian and exclusive-nationalist individuals will prefer radical right-wing populist parties such as Austria's FPÖ. The theoretical case for such implications appears sound as party programs for radical right-wing populist parties invoke rhetoric that should appeal to individuals with either of these characteristics. To date, these implications have not been examined. This paper examines quantitative survey data from 5 Western European countries with electorally viable radical right-wing populist parties to determine if radical right-wing populist parties are preferred by authoritarians and/or exclusive-nationalists. Analyses indicate that the radical right-wing populist parties studied here are consistently preferred by exclusive-nationalist individuals, though not necessarily to all other parties, but only inconsistently preferred by authoritarian individuals. While more nuanced investigation is still needed, it is clear that, contrary to the assumptions in the authoritarianism literature, radical right-wing populist parties cannot always rely on authoritarian individuals for support.

A BSTRACT This article argues that individuals in countries with a more diverse political discourse express high levels of social tolerance relative to those in low-discourse countries. Political systems with more parties facilitate the consideration of a broader range of issues, including those relevant to the interests of marginalized groups, and greater exposure to these issues increases individually-held levels of social tolerance. Using data from the World Values Survey and other sources, we demonstrate that the number of parties in the legislature is positively related to social tolerance. Our results are robust across several model specifications.

No abstract

Abstract:One of the main principals upon which liberal-democratic and non-democratic regimes differ is the incorporation of diverse viewpoints into public life. Exposure to such variety highlights any existing heterogeneity in society, and, for most individuals, exposure to this heterogeneity promotes tolerance of difference (pluralistic conditioning). However, those who are exposed to diversity under aversive conditions are instead pushed toward intolerance of difference (aversive pluralistic conditioning). We thus predict that increased democracy will increase tolerance of outgroups in general while decreasing tolerance among authoritarians, who are defined by their inherent distaste of diversity, relative to the general population. We test these predictions with multilevel models and survey data across several countries and find strong support for our expectations: under non-aversive conditions, exposure to the diversity inherent to effective democracy corresponds with higher levels of tolerance of outgroups; exposure under aversive conditions corresponds with relatively lower levels of tolerance toward outgroups.

Building on the work of Inglehart and colleagues (e.g., Inglehart, 1971;Inglehart & Welzel, 2005), Welzel (2013) sets out a step-by-step theory explaining how democracies arise from processes of modernization. The intermediary stages in the causal chain he sets out explain the connection between action resources and emancipatory values. In short, Welzel provides strong evidence that people must first have the material, intellectual, and connective resources to exercise certain freedoms before they develop values that will motivate them to seek out those freedoms. While we are convinced by much of Welzel's argument, we also note a substantial Welzel's (2013) theory of Human Empowerment elucidates a step-by-step process in which individuals gain the means, motivation, and guarantees to exercise universal freedoms and civic agency. The human empowerment process is initiated with the attainment of action resources which provide people with the means to overcome constraints imposed by resource scarcity. With an increase in action resources comes an increase in existential security and the motivation to look beyond the fulfillment of physiological needs. Existential security encourages