Right Wing Populist Elite Cues Decrease Support for Equality Promoting Policies

• In Event: Poster Session: Polarization, Cues and Information, and Public Opinion

Abstract

Why do some citizens oppose policies that can improve the social and economic positions of disadvantaged groups, despite the historical progress in norms and laws promoting equality? So far, the literature has explained stable policy preferences with stable political attitudes, such as ideology, partisanship, and external efficacy.
I theorize that populist attitudes are a comparatively new collection of political attitudes that increase opposition to equality promoting policies such as affirmative action, equal pay legislations, and liberal immigration laws and practices.
With the recent rise of populist movements, parties and leaders in the West, researchers started to study populism from the demand size by measuring people’s populist attitudes. Measuring populist attitudes with anti-political elitism, I test whether negative view of politicians as a class, and the perception of the “the elite” as acting against the interests of “the people” decrease support for policies for disadvantaged groups, and minorities. Using observational data (ANES 2016, ANES 2020), I demonstrate that individuals with populist attitudes are more likely to oppose race conscious programs and are more likely to have anti-immigrant policy positions, controlling for conventional correlates of policy preferences (such as ideology), equality values, external efficacy, and sense of white relative deprivation.
Populist attitudes indicate grievance against the political elite and the political establishment. How can we explain the association between grievance toward politicians and the political establishment and opposition to policies promoting social and economic equality? Citizens with populist attitudes are arguably more likely to be persuaded by populist politicians. Right wing populist politicians typically use hostile rhetoric towards social groups (racial, ethnic, sexual minorities, immigrants), blaming them for the problems of the country, and for the suffering of “the people”. Moreover, right wing populist governments tend to implement regressive policies on social issues. In the United States, for instance, Donald Trump eliminated certain racially conscious laws and regulations, such as fair housing regulation that aimed to prevent racial segregation in housing, and affirmative action policy guidelines that urged universities to follow a race-conscious approach in admitting new students.
I theorize that exposure to politicians’ negative portrayal of social groups decreases support for policies for disadvantaged social groups. When politicians portray minorities and immigrants negatively and blame them for the suffering of “the people”, those who are exposed to these cues will be more likely to oppose policies that can improve social and economic positions of disadvantaged groups.
I hypothesize that people with higher baseline populist attitudes, and higher sense of white relative deprivation, are more likely to be persuaded by negative portrayal of social groups by the political elite. I expect that negative portrayal of minorities and immigrants are persuasive when voiced by politicians as opposed to when it is voiced by other citizens.
To test this theory, I implement panel survey experiments recruiting respondents from Facebook in the United States and the UK, two countries with high levels of ethnic and racial heterogeneity, and immigration. The panel survey experiments help me test the durability of the effects on policy attitudes.
My research contributes to literature on elite influences on public opinion, by demonstrating that right wing populists’ negative portrayal of social groups might be influencing not only the general feelings and attitudes towards social groups, but also attitudes toward tangible policies that can alleviate systematic inequalities along the axes of race, ethnicity, and nationality. Right wing populist rhetoric on social groups deteriorate support for policies that can create more equitable societies and more stable democracies.

Author

• Aysenur Deger, Syracuse University