A Tale of Two Democrats: How Authoritarianism Divides the Democratic Party

Wronski, Julie; Bankert, Alexa; Amira, Karyn; Johnson, April; Levitan, Lindsey Clark

doi:10.1086/699338

Cited by 18 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Future research is needed to examine how cultural theory might be associated with other factors that may influence partisan attachments such as personality traits or other worldviews. For example, authoritarianism has been shown to be associated with both Republican (Federico and Tagar, ) and Democratic parties (Wronski et al., ). Distinctions and similarities between the hierarch cultural worldview and authoritarianism are an important next step.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Cultural Theory of Partisanship and Policy Attitudes

Nowlin

Rabovsky

2019

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Political parties provide an important function for a public that is generally seen as not consistently ideological by guiding its thinking about policy issues. In this article, we examine whether the four cultural worldviews derived from grid‐group cultural theory—hierarch, egalitarian, individualist, and fatalist—are predictive of partisan attachments and perceptions of climate change risk among the public. Methods Data come from an original survey of the U.S. public conducted in 2011 and 2012. We use regression analysis to examine partisanship and perceived climate change risk; ordered logit to examine party attachment; and mediation analysis to examine the mediating effect of partisanship on cultural worldviews and climate change risk. Results We find that the group‐oriented cultural types (egalitarians and hierarchs) are more likely to have stronger party attachments than the nongroup‐oriented cultural types (individualists and fatalists). In addition, we find that the mediation effect of party is more pronounced among the group‐oriented types than the nongroup oriented. Conclusion Grid‐group cultural theory is predictive of both partisanship and policy attitudes and partisanship mediates the influence of cultural worldviews on climate change risk, particularly for those types with group orientations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Cultural Theory of Partisanship and Policy Attitudes

Nowlin

Rabovsky

2019

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Burgeoning evidence spanning multiple nations, independent research programs, and cultural contexts suggests that LWA exists and has important consequences Conway & McFarland, 2019;Conway et al, in press;Costello et al, 2020;De Regt et al2011;Fasce & Avendaño, 2020;Federico et al, 2017;Frimer et al, 2014;Manson et al, 2020;McFarland et al, 1992McFarland et al, , 1993McFarland et al, , 1996Pentony et al, 2000;Todosijević, 2005;Todosijević & Enyedi, 2008;Van Hiel et al, 2006;Wronski et al, 2018). Indeed, the case for LWA has been bolstered by a recent new wave of research that has sparked a re-emergence of interest in the construct.…”

Section: Is the Myth Of Left-wing Authoritarianism Itself A Myth?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, the case for LWA has been bolstered by a recent new wave of research that has sparked a re-emergence of interest in the construct. This renewed interest is evidenced by the well-attended symposium on LWA at the most recent Society for Personality and Social Psychology Conference and by an increase in recent publications and citations relevant to the topic (e.g., Conway & McFarland, 2019;Conway et al, in press;Costello et al, 2020;Fasce & Avendaño, 2020;Federico et al, 2017;Frimer et al, 2014;Manson, 2020;Proch et al, 2018;Vasilopoulos et al, 2018;Wronski et al, 2018).…”

Section: Is the Myth Of Left-wing Authoritarianism Itself A Myth?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A further, straightforward method for separating out ideology from authoritarianism that has complementary strengths and weaknesses is to perform withinideological group analyses (see Wronski, 2018, for an example). In other words, one way to separate liberal authoritarians from liberal non-authoritarians is to look only at liberals.…”

Section: Study 11: Within-group Validity Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is the Myth of Left-Wing Authoritarianism Itself a Myth?

Lg¹,

Zubrod²,

Chan³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Is left-wing authoritarianism (LWA) closer to a myth or a reality? Twelve studies test the empirical existence and theoretical relevance of LWA. Study 1 reveals that both conservative and liberal Americans identify a large number of left-wing authoritarians in their lives. In Study 2, participants explicitly rate items from a recently-developed LWA measure as valid measurements of authoritarianism. Studies 3-11 show that persons who score high on this same LWA scale possess the traits associated with models of authoritarianism (while controlling for political ideology): LWA is positively related to threat sensitivity across multiple areas, including general ecological threats (Study 3), COVID disease threat (Study 4), Belief in a Dangerous World (Study 5), and Trump threat (Study 6). Further, controlling for ideology, high-LWA persons show more support for restrictive political correctness norms (Study 7), rate African-Americans and Jews more negatively (Studies 8-9), and show more domain-specific dogmatism and attitude strength (Study 10). Study 11 reveals that the majority of the effects from Studies 3-10 hold when looking only within liberals, thus revealing these effects are about liberal authoritarianism. Study 12 uses the World Values Survey to provide evidence of Left-Wing Authoritarianism around the globe. Taken in total, this large array of triangulating evidence from 12 studies comprised of over 8,000 participants from the U.S. and over 66,000 participants world-wide strongly suggests that left-wing authoritarianism is much closer to a reality than a myth.

show abstract

“…Intraparty polarization has become increasingly visible over the last few years in American politics. In the 2016 presidential primaries, both parties saw a record number of contenders, exposing large rifts between moderate candidates, such as Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush, and more extreme ones, like Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump (Noel 2016;Wronski et al 2018). Fierce intraparty competition potentially weakens the nominated presidential candidate and affects policymaking in the twoparty system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polarized we trade? Intraparty polarization and US trade policy

Friedrichs

2021

Int Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research indicates that polarization has led to an increasing dispersion between moderate and more extreme voters within both parties. Intraparty polarization supposedly affects the nature of interparty competition as it creates political space for new political realignments and the rise of anti-establishment candidates. This article examines the extent and impact of intraparty polarization in Congress on US trade policy. Specifically, the article examines whether (and which) trade policy preferences are distributed within and between both parties, as well as how intraparty polarization has influenced the outcome of US trade negotiations. It is theorized that intraparty polarization causes crosscutting legislative coalitions around specific trade policies and political realignments around ideological factions, with consequences for the outcome of trade negotiations. By relying on a unique dataset of congressional letters and co-sponsorship legislation, the article first derives trade policy preferences from members of Congress and computes their ideological means. Two contemporary cases of US trade policy are examined: The Transpacific Partnership Agreement and the US–Mexico–Canada Agreement. Via a structured-focused comparison of both cases, the paper finally assesses under which combinations of preference-based and ideology-based intraparty polarization Congress manages to ratify trade agreements. Findings suggest that both parties are intrinsically polarized between free trade and fair trade preferences yet show variance in their degree of ideology-based intraparty polarization. These findings contribute to existing work on bipartisanship as well as factions in the foreign policy realm, as it shows under which circumstances legislators can build crosscutting coalitions around foreign policies.

show abstract

A Tale of Two Democrats: How Authoritarianism Divides the Democratic Party

Cited by 18 publications

References 17 publications

A Cultural Theory of Partisanship and Policy Attitudes

A Cultural Theory of Partisanship and Policy Attitudes

Is the Myth of Left-Wing Authoritarianism Itself a Myth?

Polarized we trade? Intraparty polarization and US trade policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About