The Paradox of Well-being: Do Unfavorable Socioeconomic and Sociocultural Contexts Deepen or Dampen Radical Left and Right Voting Among the Less Well-Off?

Abstract

Radical left and right parties are increasingly successful-particularly among the less well-off. We assess the extent to which this negative effect of wellbeing on radical voting is moderated by contextual factors. Our study suggests that less well-off citizens vote for radical parties mainly under favorable aggregate-level circumstances. We distinguish two possible mechanisms underlying this effect-relative deprivation and risk aversion-and find support for relative deprivation only among radical right voters and for risk aversion for both types of radical voters, yet with predictable differences between the radical left and right supporter bases. Economic hardship leads to radical right voting when the socioeconomic circumstances are favorable and to radical left voting when net migration is modest. Our findings suggest a genuine paradox of radicalism: individual economic suffering might foster

Jobs at risk? Task routineness, offshorability, and attitudes toward immigration

“…This kind of polarization might increase political tensions and segmentation within countries even if the majority of the population benefits from economic integration. The most likely beneficiaries are radical right parties, who are the issue owners of sociocultural issues like immigration (Rooduijn andBurgoon, 2018, p. 1747) and whose support base consists of disproportionally big amount of workers in routine occupations.…”

Do Poor Citizens Vote for Redistribution, Against Immigration or Against the Establishment? A Conjoint Experiment in Denmark

“…The years following the Great Recession of the late 2000s have witnessed growing interest in how personal economic difficulties affect political behaviour (Werts et al ; Golder ; Gomez et al ; Grasso & Giugni ; Hochschild ; Evans ; Rooduijn & Burgoon ). However, there is an unfortunate fragmentation in this literature.…”

The effect of income inequality on political polarization: Evidence from European regions, 2002–2014

“…Rooduijn and Burgoon () argue that most of the empirical evidence shows that those at the bottom of the socioeconomic scale are more likely to support radical left or right parties, although radical left voters tend to be higher educated. According to the authors, voters at the bottom of the income distribution might be more likely to vote for radical parties for several reasons.…”

“…On the other hand, since leftist parties are typically more likely to implement policies to help the poor directly, the clientele hypothesis and the issue salience theory predict that an increase in inequality at the bottom of the income distribution would reduce the support for extreme right parties (Coffé et al, 2007). Rooduijn and Burgoon (2017) argue that most of the empirical evidence shows that those at the bottom of the socioeconomic scale are more likely to support radical left or right parties, although radical left voters tend to be higher educated. According to the authors, voters at the bottom of the income distribution might be more likely to vote for radical parties for several reasons.…”

“…Thereby, the findings are not consistent with the hypothesis that low-income or low-skilled individuals are systematically more likely to vote for far right as inequality increases. 8 This result is surprising considering the large body of empirical evidence documenting the fact that low-income and low-skilled individuals are more likely to support radical right parties as inequality increases (Coffé et al, 2007;Rooduijn & Burgoon, 2017). Table 11 investigates this issue further by excluding the interaction terms between the Gini coefficient and age.…”