Recent crises have raised concerns about intergenerational fairness and conflict and claims that older generations imperil the future of young people. These arguments may reflect the political intolerance towards older adults: political ageism. Why and which kinds of young people are more likely to adhere to such views is still uncertain. Prior studies refer to the importance of perceived threats and authoritarian values. We introduce an interaction effect, suggesting that perceived threats temper the impact of authoritarian values on intergenerational blame attribution and discriminatory views against older individuals’ political rights. The analysis of survey data from nine European countries, focusing on respondents aged 18–34, reveals that perceived economic threat rarely relates to increased ageism. Young individuals with authoritarian values are likelier to attribute intergenerational blame and hold politically ageist views. In Sweden and the UK, however, the effect of authoritarian values diminishes when young people perceive economic threats.

The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has dominated Japanese politics since its foundation in 1955. The party's ability to support the interests of small farmers and its commitment to the middle-class through redistributive economic policies have been regarded as among the primary factors leading to its prolonged hegemony. Yet, the LDP has occasionally relied on non-economic political appeals addressing rather conservative issues such as Japan's military force and the country's traditional values. These appeals have significantly intensified under the premiership of Junichirō Koizumi and his successor Shinzō Abe, whose authoritative leadership styles and nationalist agendas reveal the relevance of non-economic values. This study focuses on the role of authoritarian values in shaping vote choice in twenty-first century Japan. Previously emphasized in The Japanese Voter, the authority–liberty dimension has gradually lost prominence in recent models of voting behavior, where socio-economic factors have had a central role in explaining vote choice. Our inquiry places new emphasis on this value dimension and provides evidence for the enduring relevance of individual authoritarian dispositions in models of vote choice.