Justification of intergroup violence – the role of right-wing authoritarianism and propensity for radical action

Abstract

Economic and political trends of the last decades resulted in a general rise in anti-minority populism in Hungary. Anti-minority sentiments have been manifested in violence primarily against the Roma, but also against other target groups. The aim of the current study is to reveal the social psychological mechanisms of justifying intergroup violence against outgroups representing a symbolic or a physical threat. Considering that right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) can legitimize violence agsainst threatening outgroups, we hypothesized that RWA would be more important in explaining justification of intergroup violence than a general propensity for radical action. We tested our hypothesis using computerassisted personal interviews using a representative sample of 1000 respondents. Using structural equation modelling, we found that RWA was a much stronger predictor of the justification of intergroup violence against both physically and symbolically threatening groups than propensity for radical action. Furthermore, a comparison of the groups also revealed that those who justify violence against symbolically threatening groups were also higher in right-wing authoritarianism. These findings highlight that RWA justifies politically motivated aggression against different target groups in Hungary.

Setting the record straight: System justification and rigidity‐of‐the‐right in contemporary Hungarian politics

“…The relative dearth of intolerance and prejudice expressed by leftists in contemporary Hungary may be surprising to some readers, given the nation's Communist legacy. Nevertheless, our findings are in line with previous research, which shows that right‐wing authoritarianism is a strong predictor of the tendency to justify the use of violence against the Roma, Jews and sexual minorities (as well as banks, politicians and multinational companies) in the contemporary Hungarian context (Bartlett et al, ; Bernát et al, ; Faragó et al, ; Krekó et al, ).…”

“…Studies show that Jobbik supporters are disproportionately male, young and distrusting of democratic institutions, and they tend to reside in the poorest regions of the country, although they are not themselves among the very poorest (Bernát, Juhász, Krekó, & Molnár, ; Hunyady, ; Krekó, Juhász, & Molnár, ). Rightists in Hungary, including Jobbik supporters, express higher levels of ethnocentrism, intolerance, and prejudice, especially directed at Jews and the Roma population, and they tend to see political violence as more justified than other citizens do (Bartlett, Birdwell, Krekó, Benfield, & Gyori, ; Bernát et al, ; Faragó, Kende, & Krekó, ; Krekó et al, ). Taken in conjunction, these findings are not only at odds with the notion that leftists in Eastern Europe are more rigid, authoritarian, and anti‐democratic than their rightist counterparts.…”

Different Conspiracy Theories Have Different Psychological and Social Determinants: Comparison of Three Theories About the Origins of the COVID-19 Virus in a Representative Sample of the UK Population

“…In the Dual Process Motivational Model, for example, Duckitt (2001) theorised that two sets of motivational schemas, threat-control and competition-dominance, are the foundations of RWA and SDO, respectively, and that these dimensions were responsible for distinct forms of prejudice. For instance, while RWA and SDO both predict prejudice towards lower status groups, RWA-based prejudice typically categorises outgroups as dangerous -as threatening to the security and safety of the ingroup -or dissident -as representing a symbolic threat to social norms and cohesion (Shaffer and Duckitt, 2013;Kauff et al 2015;Crowson and Brandes, 2017;Faragó et al 2019). Conversely, SDO-based prejudice typically categorises outgroups as inferior, weak, or undeserving (Duckitt, 2001;Ho et al 2015).…”

Different conspiracy theories have different psychological and social determinants: Comparison of three theories about the origins of the COVID-19 virus in a representative sample of the UK population

“…Of the three explanations for the origin of the coronavirus examined by the present paper, the theory that the coronavirus was a bioweapon developed by China's military is inherently compatible with the world views of those high in RWA. In this theory, China's proliferation of bioweapons presents an external danger in the form of a security threat from a potentially hostile political rival, and a social threat in the form of a deviant or dissident political ideology, communism, which people high in RWA are sensitive to (Kauff et al 2015;Crowson and Brandes, 2017;Faragó et al 2019). It is also compatible with the world view of those high in SDO.…”

“…In the Dual Process Motivational Model, Duckitt (2001) theorised that two sets of motivational schemas, threat-control and competition-dominance, are the foundations of RWA and SDO, respectively, and that these dimensions were responsible for two distinct forms of prejudice. While RWA and SDO both predict prejudice towards lower status groups, RWA-based prejudice typically categorises outgroups as dangerous -as threatening to security and safety -or dissident -as representing a symbolic threat to social norms and cohesion (Shaffer and Duckitt, 2013;Kauff et al 2015;Crowson and Brandes, 2017;Faragó et al 2019). Conversely, SDO-based prejudice typically categorises outgroups as inferior, weak, or undeserving (Duckitt, 2001;Ho et al 2015).…”