ABSTRACT While political leaders increasingly combine populist and secessionist appeals, systematic evidence remains lacking regarding their effectiveness in mobilizing public support. Drawing on original survey data from Republika Srpska in Bosnia and Herzegovina, where leader Milorad Dodik employs populist‐secessionist rhetoric, this study finds that such discourse functions primarily as an elite‐level strategy without corresponding public resonance. Contrary to expectations, individuals with stronger populist attitudes—particularly anti‐elitism—demonstrate lower support for both secession and Dodik's party, reflecting the paradoxical effects of sustained populist rhetoric under long‐term incumbency. Traditional factors, including ethnic identification, ingroup bias and economic grievances, prove substantially stronger predictors of secessionist attitudes than populist sentiments. Beyond documenting these empirical patterns, the analysis illuminates a broader theoretical puzzle about how populist attitudes manifest differently when populist leaders exercise prolonged control within autonomous institutional frameworks. These insights extend scholarly understanding of ‘thin ideologies’, demonstrating how their strategic deployment by political elites may fail to reshape the fundamental drivers of mass political attitudes in divided societies.
Semir Dzebo (Wed,) studied this question.