Affective Polarization and Democratic Satisfaction in Parliamentary Democracies

• In Event: The Causes and Consequences of Polarized Politics

Abstract

The onset of partisanship as a social group identity, known as affective polarization, has been well documented in the American two-party political system and has recently found empirical traction in multiparty contexts. However, within this budding literature, little attention has been devoted to examining how the distinct features of diverse political landscapes shape affective polarization and its attitudinal consequences. To address this gap, I examine how the electoral and political party landscapes of parliamentary democracies condition the relationship between affective polarization and democratic satisfaction. In so doing, I test two contrasting theoretical premises, Partisan Enmity, which contends the affectively polarized perceive democracy as coerced cohabitation with negatively perceived out-partisans, and Means-to-an-End, which asserts that the affectively polarized view democracy as means to elevate the in-group to positions of power. Using the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES), my analysis suggests that the highly affectively polarized in parliamentary democracies view democracy in purely utilitarian terms by displaying a greater propensity for democratic satisfaction than their less affectively polarized counterparts, and more so when the in-party finds itself devoid of positions of power. The difference in predicted democratic satisfaction between a typical individual and a highly affectively polarized individual is approximately equivalent to moving from the category “not very satisfied” to “fairly satisfied” on a 4-point Likert scale. By accounting for the political party landscape and the electoral context, my work has implications for scholars seeking to examine additional behavioral and attitudinal consequences of affective polarization across multiparty contexts.

Author

• Ian Delabie, University of Pittsburgh