Extreme‐Right Voting in Western Europe: The Role of Social‐Cultural and Antiegalitarian Attitudes

Abstract

The joint impact of antiegalitarian attitudes and social-cultural attitudes on citizens'tendency to vote for extreme right-wing political parties was investigated. In the first study, we explored these attitudes in representative samples of seven Western European countries. In a follow-up study, we predicted respondents'likelihood of voting for a Dutch right-wing party on the basis of the measures of social-dominance orientation (as an indicator of antiegalitarian attitudes) and right-wing authoritarianism (as an indicator of social-cultural attitudes). Our findings demonstrated that voting for extreme right-wing parties was associated more consistently with antiegalitarian attitudes than with social-cultural attitudes. Moreover, the effect of antiegalitarian attitudes was partly mediated by migration attitudes (Study 1) and ethnic prejudice (Study 2). We discuss the finding that antiegalitarian attitudes are more strongly related to extreme right-wing voting than social-cultural attitudes.

Broadening the individual differences lens on party support and voting behavior: Cynicism and prejudice as relevant attitudes referring to modern‐day political alignments

“…Indeed, "active" and "antagonistic" expressions of disillusionment (captured by political cynicism) signpost support for anti-establishment (mostly far-right) alternatives. While previous studies have linked either RWA and SDO with far-right voting (Cornelis & Van Hiel, 2015), or political cynicism with far-right voting (Bergh, 2004), our findings indicate that far-right support partly stems from simultaneous higher levels of right-wing attitudes and political cynicism, which are two sides of a coin that cannot be reduced to each other. Importantly also, ethnic prejudice appeared as an influential factor in party affiliation.…”

“…Although only few studies investigated this theoretical claim (Meloen, Van der Linden, & De Witte, ; Van Hiel, ; Van Hiel, Cornelis, Roets, & De Clercq, ), positive correlations of RWA (and SDO) with far‐right support consistently materialized. When both RWA and SDO measures were included as predictors in regression analyses, SDO tended to be a stronger correlate of far‐right support than RWA (Cornelis & Van Hiel, ).…”

The Consequences of Collective Discontent: A New Measure of Zeitgeist Predicts Voting for Extreme Parties

“…Previous research seems to have mainly focused on the influence of psychological factors on voting for a particular type of extreme party (e.g., extreme right). For example, there is a growing literature showing that anti-immigrant attitudes are an important attitudinal explanation for extreme right-wing voting (Cornelis & Van Hiel, 2015;Cutts, Ford, & Goodwin, 2011;Ford & Goodwin, 2010;Green, Sarrasin, Baur, & Fasel, 2016;Ivarsflaten, 2008;Lubbers, Gijsberts, & Scheepers, 2002;Oesch, 2008;Rydgren, 2008). Green and colleagues (2016) for instance showed that the presence of stigmatized immigrants via heightened threat perceptions increased the self-reported probability to vote for a Swiss radical-right party.…”

“…Ivarsflaten (2008) showed that grievances over immigration issues consistently predicted voting for populist right-wing parties in Western Europe, whereas grievances over economic changes or political elitism were important in some countries. Cornelis and Van Hiel (2015) studied the relative importance of antiegalitarian (e.g., social dominance orientation) and sociocultural attitudes (e.g., right-wing authoritarianism) as predictors of voting for extreme-right parties in Western Europe. Their research showed that antiegalitarian attitudes were more strongly associated with and a better predictor of extreme-right voting and that this effect was partly mediated through ethnic prejudice and anti-immigration attitudes.…”

From Stigmatized Immigrants to Radical Right Voting: A Multilevel Study on the Role of Threat and Contact

“…Anti-immigrant stances are one of the main attitudinal explanations of radical right voting (e.g., Cornelis & Van Hiel, 2014;Cutts, Ford, & Goodwin, 2011;Ford & Goodwin, 2010;Ivarsflaten, 2008;Lubbers, Gijsberts, & Scheepers, 2002;Oesch, 2008;Rydgren, 2008). To gain a more finegrained picture of how immigration-related phenomena shape the propensity to vote for a radical right party, the current study examines the interplay of presence of stigmatized immigrants, threat perceptions related to immigration, and intergroup contact as antecedents of radical right voting.…”