The Political Psychology of Inequality and Why It Matters for Populism

Abstract

Integrating research from political science, psychology, and related fields, this article analyzes the complex web of relationships and pathways connecting economic inequality to populism. What emerges is an original theoretical framework for understanding populist support, which distinguishes between levels of analysis and considers how economic and cultural influences interact (rather than placing them at odds). It also emphasizes the important distinction between reality and perception and its role in understanding how citizens react differently to the same macrolevel trends and environmental threats. Careful analysis of the existing scholarship suggests that economic stratification exerts an indirect influence on populist support. Inequality likely shapes populist beliefs through macrolevel mediators such as economic dysfunction, rising political polarization, and a decline in the quality of government. Also, several potential individual-level influences mediate the relationship, including heightened sense of intergroup threat, political distrust, status anxiety, and perceptions of system unfairness. This article’s theoretical framework also explores how community environment and relevant personality characteristics like right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation may moderate important associations.

Power-differentiated emotions of populist support: Regional anger and classed fear in Duterte’s Philippines.

“…This work affirms that attention to social inequalities may reframe and advance recent debates about populist emotions (Jost, 2019; Oxendine, 2019; Salmela et al, 2017). Whereas various social psychological theories offer insightful explanations for emotional amplification across different axes of inequality (Hirschberger et al, 2016; Staerklé et al, 2018), we provide evidence that an overarching lens of power may locate these dynamics within specific structural relations salient to unique political and cultural settings.…”

“…However, many past studies rely on individual models of emotion, implicitly eliding the unequal structural contexts that embed political affect (Oxendine, 2019). In contrast, critical scholarship on power highlights how emotions do not arise solely from individual responses to external stimuli (Hutchison, 2016).…”

Economic Distress and Populism: Examining the Role of Identity Threat and Feelings of Social Exclusion

“…Recent evidence from social and political sciences has highlighted the idea that economic distress fuels populism (Oxendine, 2019; Rhodes‐Purdy et al, 2021). This hypothesis was confirmed in Study 1 and in Study 2.…”

“…Evidence at both macro and individual levels has linked the increase of populism in liberal democracies to both economic and cultural crises (Corbet & Larkin, 2019; Inglehart & Norris, 2016; Oxendine, 2019; Rhodes‐Purdy et al, 2021). Economic distress and cultural backlash have thus emerged as key factors contributing to increased support for populist beliefs and politicians throughout the last decade.…”

The social psychology of economic inequality

“…Inequality is also associated with an increase in nationalism and class identification among the poor (Andersen and Curtis 2012;Carvacho and Álvarez 2019;Shayo 2009;Solt 2011), which in turn is associated with lower acceptance of within-nation diversity, which can render right-wing populist political rhetoric more attractive (Jay et al 2019). Indeed, inequality can, in contexts where historical narratives frame inequality as illegitimate, fuel collective protests and uprisings Justino and Martorano 2016), and may fuel political polarization (Han 2015) and populism (Oxendine 2019). The negative association between inequality and well-being in developed nations therefore seems to exist because economic inequality erodes people's positive perceptions of themselves, others, and society at large, with consequences for their well-being, social relations, and behaviours.…”