Democracy Learned or Lost? Formative Regime Experiences and Attitudinal Legacies During Backsliding (with Anja Neundorf)
This study examines how formative regime experiences shape both normative and performance-based (instrumental) democratic support during periods of backsliding. Using cross-sectional data from 1994 to 2020 across 24 autocratization episodes, we draw on theories of attitudinal development to argue that regime performance during the formative years—particularly around age 18—can influence later democratic attitudes. Comparing individuals who came of age during autocratization to those socialized under democratic conditions within the same countries, the results show a strong cohort effect: economic growth during the formative years significantly predicts democratic support for those socialized under backsliding. Contrary to initial expectations, higher growth boosts democratic attachment, while support for authoritarian alternatives is largely unaffected. These findings suggest that performance-based evaluations can reinforce democratic attachments even when normative support is presumed to erode, highlighting the enduring influence of early regime experiences and civic learning under uncertain political conditions.
From the GDR to the AfD: Intergenerational Transmission of Far-Right Support in Germany
Does parental socialization shape children's support for far-right politics? Using linked parent–child dyads from the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP), I argue that exposure to GDR civic education instilled authoritarian predispositions among individuals socialized under the regime, and that these predispositions were reinforced by the economic shock following reunification when experienced during formative years. As a result, parents who were educated under the GDR and exposed to high levels of economic disruption are more likely to internalize and retain authoritarian attitudes. These attitudes are transmitted to the next generation through either ideological socialization or authoritarian parenting practices, characterized by high control and low warmth. However, I contend that parental warmth can mitigate this transmission, primarily in contexts where authoritarian predispositions and economic stress were less pronounced—such as in West Germany. Finally, I argue that this intergenerational process is gendered: fathers’ authoritarian parenting has a stronger influence on sons, who are more likely than daughters to internalize paternal attitudes and translate them into support for the radical right. Together, these findings highlight how the interaction between regime socialization, economic disruption, and family dynamics shapes the persistence of authoritarian values across generations.
Keywords: parenting, civic education, far-right ideology, authoritarian values, gender, intergenerational transmission
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 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 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 in 2026. This study introduces a new framework for understanding how the interplay between elite rhetoric and voters’ moral convictions shapes attitudes toward radical challengers.