ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

Red alert! The role of threat and intolerance in the climate discourse of radical political actors in Belgium and the Netherlands

Climate Change
Communication
Political Ideology
Jasper Praet
Ghent University
Jasper Praet
Ghent University

Abstract

From ‘climate psychopaths’ to ‘green terrorism’, verbal attacks on climate action proponents have become widespread. In general, political intolerance in the form of verbal abuse poses a significant challenge to democracies, manifesting in affective polarization, religious prejudices, and hostility toward ideological opponents. However, an underexplored question remains: how do radical parties justify intolerance toward ideological dissidents? Research in political psychology highlights authoritarianism as a key predictor of intolerance at the individual level. This literature demonstrates that perceived threats heighten submission to authorities and intolerance towards deviants. Hence, this study examines how radical political parties legitimize hostility by leveraging the ‘authoritarian dynamic’ (Stenner, 2005), suggesting that verbal aggression towards climate activists and their allies is deemed acceptable because they are viewed as disrespecting particular norms and values. To address this gap, we conduct an AI-augmented content analysis of climate policy discourse from one populist radical right party (PRRP) and one populist radical left party (PRLP) in Belgium and the Netherlands. Climate policy serves as an ideal case for comparison, as both groups frame environmental policies as sources of threat, though from different perspectives. The radical left views global warming and capitalist policies as an existential crisis, while the radical right only emphasizes the socio-economic disruptions of climate mitigation policies. Our findings suggest that while both radical left and right parties engage in intolerant discourse, the radical right employs more explicit, personal, and derogatory rhetoric. Though the radical left exhibits intolerance, its authoritarian tendencies are less intense and they have a different target. This asymmetry highlights how authoritarian dynamics operate differently across ideological lines. Understanding these mechanisms provides insight into how radical parties normalize intolerance, reinforcing authoritarian rhetoric in political discourse. Addressing these dynamics is essential for safeguarding democratic norms against escalating ideological hostility.