The public opinion effects of antisemitic elite cues: a survey experiment on the Hungarian Soros campaign

Abstract

Right-wing populist leaders have long vilified left-wing activist George Soros to justify their policies. They accuse Soros and his organisations of being globalist elites who attack national sovereignty and traditional family values. The accusations themselves are loaded with antisemitic tropes. Despite this, it is unclear whether these populist, anti-elite messages effectively persuade citizens, or if antisemitic appeals specifically drive their impact. To answer these questions, we conduct a survey experiment in Hungary mimicking the Hungarian government's propaganda, which sometimes uses Soros as a symbol to mobilise support. We show that a random Soros' endorsement reduced policy support among pro-government respondents but increased it among anti-government ones. This suggests that Soros-bashing serves as a partisan cue in populist communication, helping to shape constituent preferences. However, overt antisemitic priming did not amplify the effects of Soros cues on policy preferences. These findings highlight the potential and limits of populist elite cueing.