Social Class, Economic Inequality, and the Convergence of Policy Preferences: Evidence from 24 Modern Democracies

Abstract

Using data from the World Values Survey and national-level indicators for 24 modern democracies, we assess the influence of social class and economic inequality on preferences for government responsibility. We improve on previous research by using multilevel models that account for differences in attitudes both within (i.e., over time) and across countries. Our findings are consistent with the economic self-interest hypothesis. Specifically, working class individuals, who tend to gain the most from government intervention because of their low and often more precarious economic position, are more likely than others to support government intervention. We also find a positive relationship between national-level income inequality and support for government intervention. As income inequality rises, its social ills tend to be more pervasive, resulting in public opinion becoming more supportive of governments taking responsibility for their citizens. We further demonstrate that inequality moderates the relationship between social class and attitudes. Although the effect of income inequality is positive for all social classes, attitudes across social classes become more similar as inequality rises.

Role of Political Habitus in Shaping Dynamics of Democracy: Insights from Nehruvian and Gandhian Period of Democracy in India

“…Andersen and Curtis (2015) found a pattern of results similar to that shown here, although using a different dependent variable, and interpreted it in the light of the Meltzer-Richard model. They assume that in more unequal countries more people, from different classes, are adversely impacted by inequality and as a consequence, class attitudes become more similar.…”

Political Action in the Age of High‐Economic Inequality: A Multilevel Approach

“…The least financially secure group also had the largest percentage (60%) who agreed that “government should do more for the needy, even if it means more debt,” while only 34% of the most financially secure group concurred. These results align with others that have consistently shown greater income and occupational prestige are associated with higher levels of support for Republican candidates, less support for social welfare, and less support for government intervention (Andersen & Curtis, ; Bartels, ; Brooks & Brady, ; McCarty, Poole, & Rosenthal, ; Stonecash, ; ).…”

“…First, just as self‐interest is a potential mechanism linking SES to political outcomes (e.g., Blekesaune, ; Doherty et al., ; Hasenfeld & Rafferty, ), it should also be considered when understanding the more layered set of relationships between inequality, SES, and political outcomes. For example, Anderson and Curtis () hypothesized that economic self‐interest may lead to higher support for government intervention among those with lower economic standing (because they stand to gain more from the intervention). Critically, they also hypothesized that the context of inequality may moderate the relationship between SES and desire for government intervention: In more equal contexts, those with higher economic standing may be less incentivized to support government intervention (e.g., due to higher taxes) than they would be in a more unequal context (e.g., due to the negative personal consequences that they experience as a result of the inequality).…”

“…The result would be less differentiation in views toward government intervention along the SES spectrum in more (vs. less) unequal contexts. In multilevel models examining both between‐ and within‐country effects of objectively measured inequality, Anderson and Curtis () find support for these hypotheses, suggesting the necessity of considering economic self‐interest as an important mechanism underlying these relationships.…”

“…And, this desire for government intervention under circumstances of high inequality is not unique to the United States. In most countries around the world, greater economic inequalitymeasured objectively using the Gini coefficient-is associated with a greater desire for the government to take responsibility for its citizens (Andersen & Curtis, 2015). Somewhat surprisingly, these broad levels of support for government policies designed to reduce economic inequality seem to be present for both rich and poor citizens and across political parties (Page & Jacobs, 2009).…”