This chapter (A previous version of this article on party manifestos will appear in the Hellenic Review of Political Science, no. 166 (January 2026), under the title: “Political Polarization in Greece: An Analysis of Thematic Differences and Rhetorical Strategies in Party Programs (2012–2019),” by Costis Pierides and Fani Kountouri), examines top-down political polarization in Greece during the turbulent period 2012–2023 by analysing both party manifestos and parliamentary policy statements. Drawing on mixed methods-quantitative data from the Comparative Manifesto Project and qualitative discourse analysis—it develops a typology of polarizing rhetoric and identifies patterns of issue, ideological, and affective polarization. It suggests that polarization is not merely a reflection of social cleavages, but a strategic tool shaped by ideological belongings (party families) and party system roles. Party manifestos emphasize issue-based and ideological divisions, while parliamentary speeches display heightened personal attacks and moral delegitimization. Far-right and radical-left parties consistently adopt more intense forms of polarization, while governing parties use moderated rhetoric. The study highlights the evolution of polarization from issue-based contestation to identity-based conflict and maps rhetorical thresholds when political discourse shifts from disagreement to confrontation, especially during institutional crises.