NATIONALIST POPULISM AND POST-COMMUNISM

both the examined time periods. On the other hand, it can be argued that the presence of nationalist populist appeals in the political language of the elite can be explained by a certain demand on the side of the population. This might lead us to the conclusion that nationalist populism occupies quite an important and stable position in the mass political cultures of both the examined countries. In this regard, a further examination of the relationship between the elite and mass political culture, political culture and language, as well as the ways in which they influence one another should be underlined. Next, the political discourses in both countries displayed a certain continuity in terms of their thematic orientation. This continuity was particularly apparent in the case of the statements focusing on positive national self-presentation and animosity toward ethnic “others”. It can also be argued that the ethno-national principle continued to play an important role in all three of the examined categories of political discourse, even though the importance of the so-called “new others” was increasing. Finally, it can be argued that language does not serve as the only indicator of the political culture in a particular country. On the other hand, a discourse analysis can contribute to more complex research of the political culture, in a manner that is complementary to other approaches. So far, only modest initiatives have been realised in this field, while a big portion of the political discourses remain without an adequate analysis. My research study might therefore be understood as an attempt to exploit unconventional scientific tools in the research of political discourse and, at least to some extent, political culture. Last but not least, this study can also serve as a database for further analyses in this field and possibly as an inspiration for further research.

82