‘Like we definitely have to go greener, but…’: Analysing affective–discursive practices in populist environmental discourse

Abstract

Previous studies on environmental issues in right-wing populism have mostly focused on political actors and their argumentation. In contrast, this study examines environmental populist discourse from the perspective of laypeople in Finland. We used interviews (n = 25) to analyse affective–discursive practices in environmental talk, identifying four partly interrelated practices: belittling the ‘annoying liberals’, constructing the ordinary rural people as victims, externalizing blame to the ‘real’ polluters, and glorifying Finnish nature. These practices shed light on subject positions, affect, and functions in environmental discourse. Our contributions to the field of social psychology are threefold. First, we apply an affective–discursive approach in a novel context, deepening our understanding of affect in environmental populism. Second, we explore the nuanced features of populist reasoning and argumentation, shedding light on the functions and social implications of populist environmental discourse. Third, our analysis of identities and the discourse of laypeople provides insights into the dynamics that contribute to the polarization around environmental issues in society. We argue that the sceptical environmental discourse associated with right-wing populism may persist precisely due to the affective and polarized nature of environmental issues.