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.

中文翻译：

---

“就像我们肯定必须变得更加环保，但是……”：分析民粹主义环境话语中的情感话语实践


以往对右翼民粹主义环境问题的研究主要集中在政治参与者及其论点上。相比之下，本研究从芬兰外行人的角度审视环境民粹主义话语。我们利用访谈（ n = 25）来分析环境谈话中的情感话语实践，确定了四种部分相关的实践：贬低“烦人的自由主义者”、将普通农村人口塑造为受害者、将责任外化到“真正的”污染者身上，以及美化“令人讨厌的自由主义者”。芬兰的大自然。这些实践揭​​示了环境话语中的主体地位、影响和功能。我们对社会心理学领域的贡献有三个方面。首先，我们在新的背景下应用情感-话语方法，加深我们对环境民粹主义情感的理解。其次，我们探讨民粹主义推理和论证的微妙特征，揭示民粹主义环境话语的功能和社会影响。第三，我们对外行人的身份和话语的分析提供了对社会环境问题两极分化的动力的见解。我们认为，由于环境问题的情感和两极分化性质，与右翼民粹主义相关的怀疑环境话语可能会持续存在。