Research & Projects

Using Lasco and Curato's (2019) concept of Medical Populism, to analyse and discuss political discourse in Romania following the Colectiv fire in 2015, through the COVID-19 Pandemic in 2024.  This is a Critical Discourse Analysis, using the Discourse-Historical Approach on political party website and Facebook posts. 

Conference of the Standing Group of Extremism and Democracy: 9 – 10 June 2025. London; United Kingdom

Paper now under Review: 10.06.25 as: “Selective Irredentism in Romanian Populist Radical Right Discourse” 

Proposal Abstract:

Hungary and Hungarians have long been a target of ire for Romanian populists. Following 1989, Funar, Becali, Vadim Tudor and Diaconescu all heavily utilised anti-Hungarian rhetoric. Funar’s PUNR in particularly weaponised this, presenting itself as a barrier to Hungarian separatism in Transylvania. This continues to be present in the rhetoric of AUR and George Simion, showing opposition to Hungarian language and minority rights.

However, when looking further east to Ukraine and Moldova, Diana Sosoaca, George Simion, and Calin Georgescu have all suggested that historical territories should be returned - notably North Bukovina, now part of Ukraine. Similar opposition has been voiced to language and religious policies, including calling for Romanian language acceptance. 

Coming at a time in which Ukraine is under invasion from Russia, this irony is of note - Romanian populists are irredentists, yet they call for others to accept historical drawing of borders. Using content analysis methods, I will show how this contradiction is present in the foreign policy of Sosoaca and Simion, and is emblematic of their wider foreign policy perspectives including on Russia, NATO and the EU.

Who Watches the Watchmen?  

Media Framing of Militant Democracy in Romania and Moldova 

Proposal Abstract:

In recent years there has been growing interest in ideas of militant democracy, with examples in France, Germany and the Visegrad Group that have all received significant attention. But who decides when this is necessary, and does media coverage serve to provide legitimacy?   

Using a most-similar-systems design, this paper compares media coverage in Romania and Moldova, two culturally, geographically, and historically close states that differ in institutional balance and political climate. Focusing on two distinct cases: the bans of Georgescu and Șoșoacă in Romania; the bans of the Heart of Moldova Party and the ȘOR Party in Moldova, I analyse news articles from diverse outlets in each country to trace how the media frames these bans through three recurring storylines: rule-of-law duty, national security necessity, and authoritarian overreach. Coding is focused on two areas, namely tone and justification frame to answer a key question for the paper: how, and to what extent, are actions of militant democracy contested or reinforced by media coverage? 

The paper argues that media discourse in each country functions as a secondary arena of militant democracy: elite intentions are translated into narratives for public consumption, serving to consolidate or erode perceived legitimacy through coverage.