Perceived Lack of Recognition and Divisive Political Efficacy: Fueling Trump Support among Historically Dominant Groups

Introduction: Exploring the Role of Political Efficacy in Democracy

Confident in your politics? New study uncovers a dark side of political efficacy

In political science, it has long been assumed that citizens with high degrees of political efficacy are good for democracy because they are far more likely to be engaged in the processes that democracy requires to be successful: willing to discuss politics, trust government institutions, and participate in elections. All good things, right?

If electoral participation and political discussions are our metrics, then we’ve seen them in spades since the 2016 election. The elections since then have seen record turnout and our airwaves, workplaces, and family holidays have been rent asunder by tumultuous political arguments. So, our democracy must be healthy according to this interpretation of the role of political efficacy.

But, it isn’t, is it?

Our political arguments are not really healthy political discussions, are they? They are impassible partisan divides that mark sharp boundaries between two factions in American political life. A recent study has illustrated the pernicious influence of this sharp political divide.

The Influence of Divisive Political Efficacy: A Recent Study

It turns out that people with high levels of political efficacy not only hold negative views of the opposing party but also become hostile towards them. They’d rather avoid talking to anyone from the other side and may even sever social ties. Talk about burning bridges, huh? No wonder Thanksgiving turns out like it does.

In the study, participants were given a hiring scenario. One applicant had a background in College Democrats, while the other was from College Republicans. Guess who got hired? If the participant leaned left politically, it was the College Democrat. If they leaned right, it was the College Republican. And to top it off, those with high political efficacy thought this discrimination was perfectly fine. Yikes!

This study buggars an interesting question: Could cynical politicians intentionally promote this divisive political efficacy among their base? Maybe they emphasize differences between their base and the rest of society, promote socially divisive issues, and refuse to compromise based on their “ethics.” Food for thought, huh?

The Perception of Social Exclusion: Christian White Men in America

Perceived lack of recognition drives Trump support among historically dominant groups, study suggests

Let’s consider another study concerning the perception of social exclusion by Christian white men in America. I know, no one had to tell us this, right? Trump has been milking white identity grievance politics since Obama spanked him like a common porn star out back of the WHCD in 2011, leaving him with such a deep and abiding narcissistic wound that the only salve would be destroying Western liberal democracies and making the world uninhabitable by seven billion people.

Republicans have been beating the poor-old-me drum of whiny white privilege, trying to flog some kind of political advantage out of the dying carcass of racism since Barry Goldwater and his John Bircher boogeymen. Trump and MAGA have just taken it to its next step in logical evolution.

The way they go on about religious persecution and that’s why they don’t have to bake cakes for gay weddings or teach about evolution or lynchings, you’d think they were some marginalized group being forced to learn the history of the oppressor and do its bidding even though it was all against their own group’s best interest. You know, like making it harder to vote because you live in an area where a lot of Christian white men live. You know like that. Or like not being able to get a home loan to buy a house where a lot people other than Christian white men live. Or not get invited to a job interview because they have a name typical of a Christian white man.

[M]en who felt a strong sense of societal belonging but perceived discrimination against their gender were significantly more likely to support Trump. Similarly, Christians who felt well-integrated into American society yet perceived discrimination against their religious identity were also more likely to support Trump.

Perceived lack of recognition drives Trump support among historically dominant groups, study suggests by Eric W. Dolan in PsyPost on May 12, 2024

The Dominant Demographic: Unseen and Unrepresented?

That’s the deal, though, that’s not happening. Christian white men are the dominate demographic in the country, not a marginalized group. They even identify strongly as American, so why are they so aggrieved?

Their particular subgroup, Christian white men, don’t feel seen or represented in society at large. No one is thinking about their feelings or contributions to our history or success or their opportunities or needs, even though, the entire country and society is literally structured to ensure that Christian white men have every possible advantage at every possible moment.

“However, given that radical right support is often rooted in dominant social subgroups (e.g., white people, men, Christians), they are unlikely marginalized. In the present paper, I test one explanation for why they could feel socially excluded despite their historically dominant position: that they feel unseen with these subgroup backgrounds.”

Peter Luca Versteegen, a PhD candidate in political science at the University of Gothenburg. Perceived lack of recognition drives Trump support among historically dominant groups, study suggests by Eric W. Dolan in PsyPost on May 12, 2024

Creating Divisions: Homogeneity and Artificial Divides

What can we conclude from these studies? Trump and his MAGA buddies are intentionally fueling grievances among their followers to create the perfect breeding ground for radicalization. They want to create an “us vs. them” dynamic.

It’s tough to create that distinction when the dominant group in a culture is homogenous, like white people in America. Back in the ’60s, the hippies helped by dressing scruffily and growing out their hair. But these days? You can’t tell a gay man from a trans man from a cis man, amirite? A Clinton voter looks like a Biden voter looks like a Trump voter. What’s a wannabe authoritarian, hate-mongering populist to do? Create an artificial divide, of course!

The next step is to then convince your followers that they have the right answers. Paint your simplistic black-and-white solutions to complex problems with a thin veneer of truthiness and scapegoat some easily identifiable group like immigrants.

And don’t forget to label anyone who opposes you as a communist, socialist, fascist who hates us for our freedoms. Now, take it up a notch and give your followers permission to emotionally and physically attack your opponents. Let’s bring on the violence and chaos, shall we?

Image Attribution

This image was generated using Poe’s StableDiffusionXL bot using the prompt, Make a political cartoon with tightrope walkers crossing a chasm of political division and partisanship.