|
?:abstract
|
-
There is a growing concern among experts and policymakers about the increasing elite ideological polarization due to its potential to push the masses to the extremes and exacerbate affective polarization. Are these concerns warranted? This dissertation has 3 standalone articles, each of which contributes to providing an answer to this overarching question. The first empirical chapter (Chapter 2) examines whether elite ideological polarization has increased over time in Western Europe. To do so, it focuses on party polarization (i.e., elite ideological polarization) on three dimensions (the economic, social, and European integration dimensions) simultaneously, as the post-industrialization transformation of the European political space has resulted in multi-dimensional politics that are not always aligned with each other. Additionally, it compares these trends to those based on the traditional left-right dimension. Using mean expert judgments from the Chapel Hill Expert Survey as an indicator of party positions, party polarization is measured based on the average dispersion of parties from the relative center of the political system. This chapter finds a trend towards more party polarization on the left-right, economic, and social dimensions, but not on the European integration dimension. Parties increasingly take more distinct positions from each other on economic and social issues, and the available ideological menu available to citizens has become more diverse over time. Moreover, it shows that party polarization on economic, social, and European integration dimensions moderately correlates with that on traditional left-right dimension while the correlations of party polarization on these dimensions are relatively weak. While left-right acts like a super-issue position that absorbs party positions on other dimensions, they are not necessarily aligned with each other. Having established that elite ideological polarization is on the rise in Western Europe, second empirical chapter (Chapter 3) turns to how the masses react to the increasing elite ideological polarization. Specifically, the question is whether elite ideological polarization leads to mass ideological polarization. When more extreme policy proposals are available to citizens, do they also adopt more extreme policy preferences? This chapter argues that masses become polarized through two mechanisms. Based on social identity theory, in-partisans should follow their party and adopt a more extreme ideological stance, while out-partisans should backlash and move in the opposite direction. Additionally, this chapter argues that whether in-partisans become polarized when their party does so depends on their spatial location relative to the party on the ideological scale. For example, only those who are perfectly aligned with the party or more right-wing than the party should follow the party to the left when it moves in that direction. This chapter tests these expectations in a real-world setting by relying on a quasi-experimental design. It leverages a sudden increase in elite ideological polarization that occurred when the Labour Party in the United Kingdom underwent a sudden position change when Jeremy Corbyn was elected as its new leader. Using British Election Study Internet Panel data, this chapter finds limited evidence that elite polarization leads to mass ideological polarization: Neither in-partisans nor out-partisans became more polarized following the change in the Labour Party’s position. Only a small minority of Labour partisans that were located to the right of the Labour Party followed the party by adopting a more left-wing ideological stance. Moreover, contrary to the expectations, I find that most in- and out-partisans moderated their positions. This chapter discusses the potential reasons for this unexpected effect. The third empirical chapter (Chapter 4) extends the investigation to citizens’ affective reactions. Do the masses become affectively more polarized when elite ideological polarization increases? Relying on the British context, which experienced a surge in elite ideological polarization as a result of both the leftward pivot of the Labour Party and the ongoing Brexit conflict, this chapter finds that an increase in elite ideological polarization leads to higher mass affective polarization, even among out-partisans (i.e., those who identify with the out-party) and those who lack partisan attachment (i.e., independents). The results show that the effect of elite polarization on affective mass polarization is driven more by in-party feelings than out-party feelings. These results suggest that affective polarization is not necessarily a reflection of out-party animosity, but can fluctuate due to changes in in-party enthusiasm. This chapter also finds a bidirectional causal relationship between how citizens perceive elite ideological polarization and how affectively polarized they are. This means that affective polarization is rooted both in identity and ideology. The findings suggest that affective polarization can be tamed to some extent by moderate position-taking by parties, but some levels of affective polarization are inherent in democratic systems. Coming back to whether pundits' concerns about growing ideological polarization is warranted, this dissertation provides a clear but a nuanced answer. Elite ideological polarization has increased in Western Europe. However, increasing elite ideological polarization does not necessarily lead to more ideologically polarized masses although it leads to more affectively polarized masses. To the extent that excessive levels of affective polarization can undermine representative democracies, it may be reasonable for pundits to express concern about rising levels of elite ideological polarization. However, if affective polarization does not pose a threat to representative democracies and does not hinder societal coexistence, then there may not be a need for immediate concern regarding the impact of elite ideological polarization on this phenomenon.
(xsd:string)
|
![[This page as RDF]](https://data.gesis.org/gesiskg/static/rdf-icon.gif){kind=icon}