Research
2026
- Working Paper 1De-emphasizing Globalization: Mainstream Party Responses to Populist Right SuccessAlex Honeker2026
Are populist right parties (PRPs) making mainstream parties more economically protectionist? From West to East, European parties of the populist right have experienced increasing electoral success by running on platforms stressing cultural and economic protectionism. While previous studies have found a causal link between populist right success and mainstream parties (MSPs)’ accommodation on immigration, the degree to which PRP success leads to MSP accommodation on economic protectionism remains unexplored. In this study I argue that, while MSPs are unlikely to accommodate PRPs’ economic protectionism, they are likely to respond to the PRP electoral threat by de-emphasizing trade and globalization in their campaign messages. I test this de-emphasis hypothesis by conducting a quantitative text analysis of the Twitter campaign rhetoric of 36 MSPs in 17 European democracies. The findings from statistical analyses and a regression discontinuity design indicate that, unlike immigration, MSPs do not accommodate the protectionist positioning of successful PRPs. However, when it comes to salience, successful PRPs cause MSPs to de-emphasize economic globalization in their messaging. The findings call for a deeper exploration of MSP responses to populist challenges on economic issues.
- Working Paper 2How ‘Right’ is the Far Right? An Original Survey on Populist Right Elites’ Economic Positioning and Intra-Party DifferencesAlex Honeker2026
How economically right are far-right parties and elites in Europe? During the last three decades, populist right parties (PRPs) in Europe have made increasing electoral gains. Previously seen as “neoliberal” or lacking clear economic stances, the positioning of these parties on economic issues remains less explored. In this study, I conduct an original survey of PRP elites and present new evidence on their economic positioning on a series of global and domestic economic issues, as well as intra-party differences in elites’ positioning and priorities based on the type of region (“winning” or “losing”) they represent. I find that PRP elites position their parties mostly on the protectionist side on globalization while being more divided on domestic issues. Moreover, PRP elites representing “losing” regions are more likely to prioritize globalization and trade issues and position their parties in a more protectionist and left-wing direction on global and domestic economic issues respectively.
- Working Paper 3Carbon or Wind? Radical Right Moderation on the EnvironmentAlex Honeker and Jae-Jae Spoon2026
What explains radical right positioning on environmental issues? The increasing salience of climate change has created a new cleavage between green parties proposing policies to reduce emissions and radical right parties defending old forms of energy production. However, there is variation in the extent to which the radical right campaigns on an anti-environmental agenda. In this paper, we build on previous studies looking at issue expansion among niche parties and the use of environmental chauvinism by radical right parties by looking at the role of government participation. We argue that radical right parties in government moderate their anti-environmental positions and their environmentally chauvinist rhetoric. Moreover, we expect this moderation to be conditional on 1) the ideology of the governing coalition, and 2) the party’s government experience. To test our hypotheses, we use data from Twitter/X on European radical right parties from 2009-2021. This study has implications for our understanding of issue competition on the environment and how government participation may moderate the radical right.
- Working Paper 4Disgust Sensitivity and Attitudes Towards International TradeAlex Honeker2026
Does disgust sensitivity shape attitudes towards international trade? In the last decade, the free flow of goods across the world has been put into question by political elites from populist right parties. Interestingly, these parties have not only connected trade with nativist appeals, but have also promoted protectionist policies by portraying imported products as dangerous for people’s health or having lower standards compared with local products. Previous studies have looked at the role basic human emotions such as disgust play in shaping individuals’ policy attitudes on issues like immigration, health policy, and moral issues. However, the extent to which unconscious predispositions such as disgust sensitivity shape economic and foreign policy issues has been less explored. In this study, I run a survey experiment among U.S. voters to test whether disgust can be activated by elite frames to shape voters’ attitudes towards international trade in a protectionist direction. The findings show that common populist rhetorical frames make individuals higher in disgust sensitivity more economically protectionist. Moreover, I show that these results are not driven by xenophobia, political ideology, or party affiliation. The findings in this study provide evidence on how unconscious predispositions shape voters’ economic and foreign policy views and the role they play in the contemporary politicization of globalization.
- Working Paper 5Autarky vs. Exchange: Explaining Populist Right Parties’ Positioning on Economic GlobalizationAlex Honeker2026
What explains populist right parties’ positioning on economic globalization? What makes these parties more likely to campaign on globalization-related issues? Traditionally seen as niche parties focused on cultural protectionism and nativism, a growing number of European populist right parties (PRPs) have adopted an anti-globalization message focused on economic nationalism (opposition to the participation of foreign companies in the national economy) and economic protectionism (opposition to free trade and economic integration). However, there remains significant variation in both PRP positioning on globalization and the salience of this topic in parties’ campaign messaging. In this study I explore what explains the variation behind these parties’ positioning and salience on globalization issues by introducing a theory of populist right party development that predicts differing levels of economic protectionism among PRPs. In order to test this theory, I create a new dataset of PRPs’ campaign messaging on globalization-related issues via a quantitative text analysis of parties’ tweets. The findings provide partial evidence for the theory, particularly the key role of parties’ government participation in moderating their protectionist positioning.