Bounded Polarization: How Democratic Conceptions Condition the Effects of Affective Polarization on Norm Violations

Séminaire axe Partis, Élections, Représentation with Luana Russo, Associate Professor University of Maastricht

Abstract

Affective polarization is widely seen as a threat to democratic stability, as partisan hostility may increase citizens’ tolerance for democratic norm violations. Yet empirical findings are inconsistent, and the mechanisms linking partisan affect to democratic erosion remain unclear. This paper advances a conditional and multi-stage framework. We argue that affective polarization does not uniformly undermine democratic commitment; its consequences depend on how citizens conceive of democracy itself. Using original survey-experimental data from Italy, we distinguish between rule-constrained and majoritarian democratic conceptions and examine their interaction with affective polarization. We show that polarization increases support for institutional norm violations, but primarily among citizens who lack a strong rule-bound understanding of democracy. Among citizens with robust constraint-oriented conceptions, the effect of polarization is substantially attenuated. Furthermore, democratic conceptions shape whether citizens recognize institutional violations, whereas affective polarization plays a stronger role in driving support and rhetorical justification once normative boundaries are crossed. These findings suggest that polarization becomes democratically dangerous not simply when partisan hostility is high, but when it coincides with weak commitments to institutional constraint.