The present study explores the presence of religion in the political field in Brazil through a populist discourse. The aim of this study is to understand how religion is used in populist discourse, contributing to studies regarding populist rhetoric, in terms of the reasons as well as the effects of that. The base of this study is the analysis of the political discourse of the electoral campaign of Jair Bolsonaro, elected President of Brazil in 2018. The Theory of Critical Discourse Analysis or Tridimensional Theory of Norman Fairclough is used in a theoretical and methodological perspective, using the formal features of the discourse texts for explaining how religion is present in the political field. The data consists in the analysis of the videos published in the official YouTube Channel of the candidate during the period of the electoral campaign, considering also the three first speeches after winning the elections. The findings demonstrate that religion is not quantitatively present in the source material, however, the analysis suggests a possibility of the existence of a “religious populism”, since the centrality of religion would make this presence qualitative. This centrality is suggested through the verification of four perspectives, which consist in the presence of religion as Legitimacy of the Presidency; as Formal Content; through the Subjects who participate of the electoral campaign; and in the material form, through the Fundamentalist Content of the discourse. Finally, the study contributes to the field of political rhetoric in a sense of providing a partial analysis of a political discourse that had the power of convincing the largest country of South America, suggesting the reasons and effects it may promote in that society.

This study seeks to explain political leaders' motives to action, by studying how Jair Bolsonaro and Emmanuel Macron have acted in the matter of the fires in the Amazon rainforest. It is assumed that while political leaders may try to act rationally, they are influenced by psychological factors in terms of educational background and style. The theories of rational choice and political psychology are therefore used and integrated to explain their motives. The method used in the paper is a comparative qualitative content analysis, in which various statements and speeches made by the Presidents are read and analyzed. The results of the thesis show that for Bolsonaro, the Amazon fires is an internal matter and should be handled by the Amazonian countries. He seems to be seeking to achieve national goals, while being influenced by his conservative educational background. Macron indicates that the Amazon is an issue for the international community and that it is of major importance for the whole world. He appears to be seeking international goals, while being influenced by his liberal educational background. The assumption that political leaders' style influence their motives to action is not supported.

By a common characterization of populism as a threat to democracy, this study further examines whether populism entails a threat or a corrective to democracy. The research is based on the theoretical framework by Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser and Cas Mudde which emphasizes the inclusion and exclusion factor of populism to determine the impact on democracy. Thus, the study characterizes the inclusionary and exclusionary populism regarding rhetoric towards indigenous peoples. In account of populism in government and populism in opposition to impact democracy differently, the empirical case study outlines Jair Bolsonaro and Gustavo Petro. A text analysis with focus on content analysis reflects the methodological approach by analyzing quotations of populists connected to indigenous peoples. The conclusion follows that Gustavo Petro indicates inclusionary populism while Jair Bolsonaro indicates exclusionary populism.