Authoritarian Socialization in Childhood and the Making of AfD Supporters
This study examines how socialization under strict authority structures—whether within the family or through civic learning environments—shapes support for far-right parties in adulthood. Drawing on theories of political socialization and authoritarian personality, I argue that exposure to rigid parental discipline, authoritarian parenting, or civic education emphasizing obedience and nationalism fosters enduring dispositions toward authority and order. Utilizing data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP), I analyze the causal effects of childhood conditions and parenting styles on adult endorsement of authoritarian values and support for the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD). While prior research has established links between authoritarian parenting and general political attitudes, this study provides empirical evidence of a direct pathway from early socialization under strict authority to far-right party support. These findings contribute to understanding the developmental origins of authoritarianism and the social foundations of far-right mobilization in contemporary democracies.
Democracy Learned or Lost? Formative Regime Experiences and Attitudinal Legacies During Backsliding
This study investigates how formative regime experiences shape democratic support in countries undergoing backsliding. Using social survey data from 1995 to 2023 across four backsliding countries, I draw on theories of attitudinal development to argue that both regime performance and individuals’ relative status within the regime may influence later democratic support. Comparing individuals who came of age before and after backsliding within the same country using GLMM and GAM models, the results show that negative experiences during backsliding among those socialized to democracy during backsliding are associated with significantly higher democratic support. Among those socialized under backsliding regimes, however, the effects are more nuanced: democratic support tends to decline overall, and the role of economic conditions remains uncertain. In additional OLS analyses using a winner–loser framework, findings suggest that being a regime loser during backsliding does not affect democratic support, regardless of socialization period. Taken together, the results indicate that regime type during formative years plays a critical role in shaping democratic attitudes, as socialization under backsliding regimes may dampen rather than strengthen democratic commitment regardless of lived experience. Overall, the study highlights the enduring influence of early regime experiences and civic learning while challenging the assumption that adversity under autocratizing contexts necessarily fosters stronger democratic convictions.
Draft & replication materials available upon request
When the Center Speaks, Who Listens? The Moral Mediation of Voter Attitudes Toward the Radical Right
This study examines how the moralization of policy messaging by mainstream parties influences voter attitudes, particularly in response to radical right parties. Drawing on theories from moral psychology and issue framing, I argue that moralized messages from mainstream elites exert a stronger impact on voters than pragmatic ones—especially when voters feel close to the party or hold strong moral convictions about the issue at stake. Building on frameworks of moralized political communication, I incorporate the strategic dimension of mainstream party responses—namely, accommodation versus opposition—to propose that the interaction between message tone (moral vs. pragmatic) and party strategy shapes voters’ perceptions of party competence and their willingness to compromise with the radical right. To test these hypotheses, I will conduct a vignette-based survey experiment in Spain, Germany, and the United Kingdom, presenting participants with varied responses from mainstream parties to radical right moralized messaging on immigration. Preliminary evidence from a pilot study in Spain indicates that only mainstream left voters are more likely to support compromise with the far right under pragmatic frames. The full survey results will be available by June 2026. This study introduces a new framework for understanding how the interplay between elite rhetoric and voters’ moral convictions shapes attitudes toward radical challengers.
PAP & draft available upon request