Impact of Civilizational Populism on Intergroup Emotions, Social Cohesion, and Civility in the UK
Sudeshika Wathtuwa-Durayalage
This study investigates the impact of civilizational populism on intergroup emotions, social cohesion, and civility in the United Kingdom using quantitative analysis of British Social Attitudes Survey (BSA) 2021 data. The findings reveal significant correlations between exposure to populist rhetoric and heightened negative emotions, such as fear and anger, toward ethnoreligious and political minorities (r = 0.56). While political affiliation demonstrates a weaker direct influence (r = 0.14), perceptions of migration as culturally and economically beneficial are strongly associated with higher social cohesion (r = 0.69). Minority groups report elevated levels of exclusion and fear, yet national pride correlates with inclusive attitudes in some cases (r = -0.64, with prejudicial views). Civil society organizations play a critical role in mitigating divisive effects by fostering inclusivity and dialogue. These insights inform strategies to counteract the polarizing impacts of civilizational populism, emphasizing the importance of inclusive narratives and policy interventions to enhance social cohesion in diverse societies. The study's limitations include reliance on secondary data and challenges in establishing causality, highlighting the need for further research using more direct measures of populism and contemporary datasets. Despite these constraints, the findings contribute empirical evidence to the growing literature on the social and emotional consequences of populism, offering a foundation for policies aimed at promoting harmony and reducing polarization in the UK.
Key words: Civilizational populism, intergroup emotions, social cohesion, civility
References
Alba, R., & Foner, N. (2015). Strangers no more: Immigration and the challenges of integration in North America and Western Europe. Princeton University Press.
Bejan, T. (2017). Mere civility: Disagreement and the limits of toleration. Harvard University Press.
Benson, O. (2011). “Civilities and civil rights: Democracy and the public sphere.” Political Studies Review, 9(2), 182–192.
Brubaker, R. (2017). “Why populism?” Theory and Society, 46(5), 357–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-017-9301-7
Calhoun, C. (2000). The virtue of civility: Selected essays on liberalism, tradition, and civil society. Stanford University Press.
Chan, J., To, H. P., & Chan, E. (2006). “Reconsidering social cohesion: Developing a definition and analytical framework for empirical research.” Social Indicators Research, 75(2), 273–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-005-2118-1
Gidron, N., & Hall, P. A. (2017). “The politics of social status: Economic and cultural roots of the populist right.” The British Journal of Sociology, 68(S1), S57–S84.
Hall, E. (2013). The ethics of civility: Civility and citizenship in liberal democratic societies. Princeton University Press.
Hooghe, M., & Stolle, D. (2003). Generating social capital: Civil society and institutions in comparative perspective. Palgrave Macmillan.
Kenny, M. (2020). The politics of English nationhood. Oxford University Press.
Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000). “Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(4), 602–616. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.4.602
Mouffe, C. (2018). For a left populism. Verso.
Mudde, C. (2004). “The populist zeitgeist.” Government and Opposition, 39(4), 541–563. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2004.00135.x
Mudde, C., & Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2017). Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
Müller, J.-W. (2016). What is populism? University of Pennsylvania Press.
Mutz, D. C., & Reeves, B. (2005). “The new videomalaise: Effects of televised incivility on political trust.” American Political Science Review, 99(1), 1–15.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster.
Shils, E. (1997). “Civility and civil society: Good manners between persons and concern for the common good in public affairs.” In: S. H. Britton (Ed.), The virtue of civility, (pp. 1–20). Liberty Fund.
Stanley, B. (2008). “The thin ideology of populism.” Journal of Political Ideologies, 13(1), 95–110.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). “An integrative theory of intergroup conflict.” In: W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). “The social identity theory of intergroup behavior.” In: S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations (2nd ed., pp. 7–24). Nelson-Hall.
UK Data Archive. (2022). British Social Attitudes Survey, 2021 [data collection]. UK Data Service. https://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-9283-1
van Assche, J., Dhont, K., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2019). “The personality–ideology nexus: A review of political orientation and personality across time and cultures.” Current Opinion in Psychology, 34, 88–93.
Vieten, U. M. (2018). Far right hate crimes and the politics of populism: How "hate" gets normalized through political discourse. Palgrave Pivot.
Impact of Civilizational Populism on Intergroup Emotions, Social Cohesion, and Civility in the UK
Sudeshika Wathtuwa-Durayalage
This study investigates the impact of civilizational populism on intergroup emotions, social cohesion, and civility in the United Kingdom using quantitative analysis of British Social Attitudes Survey (BSA) 2021 data. The findings reveal significant correlations between exposure to populist rhetoric and heightened negative emotions, such as fear and anger, toward ethnoreligious and political minorities (r = 0.56). While political affiliation demonstrates a weaker direct influence (r = 0.14), perceptions of migration as culturally and economically beneficial are strongly associated with higher social cohesion (r = 0.69). Minority groups report elevated levels of exclusion and fear, yet national pride correlates with inclusive attitudes in some cases (r = -0.64, with prejudicial views). Civil society organizations play a critical role in mitigating divisive effects by fostering inclusivity and dialogue. These insights inform strategies to counteract the polarizing impacts of civilizational populism, emphasizing the importance of inclusive narratives and policy interventions to enhance social cohesion in diverse societies. The study's limitations include reliance on secondary data and challenges in establishing causality, highlighting the need for further research using more direct measures of populism and contemporary datasets. Despite these constraints, the findings contribute empirical evidence to the growing literature on the social and emotional consequences of populism, offering a foundation for policies aimed at promoting harmony and reducing polarization in the UK.
Key words: Civilizational populism, intergroup emotions, social cohesion, civility
References
Alba, R., & Foner, N. (2015). Strangers no more: Immigration and the challenges of integration in North America and Western Europe. Princeton University Press.
Bejan, T. (2017). Mere civility: Disagreement and the limits of toleration. Harvard University Press.
Benson, O. (2011). “Civilities and civil rights: Democracy and the public sphere.” Political Studies Review, 9(2), 182–192.
Brubaker, R. (2017). “Why populism?” Theory and Society, 46(5), 357–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-017-9301-7
Calhoun, C. (2000). The virtue of civility: Selected essays on liberalism, tradition, and civil society. Stanford University Press.
Chan, J., To, H. P., & Chan, E. (2006). “Reconsidering social cohesion: Developing a definition and analytical framework for empirical research.” Social Indicators Research, 75(2), 273–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-005-2118-1
Gidron, N., & Hall, P. A. (2017). “The politics of social status: Economic and cultural roots of the populist right.” The British Journal of Sociology, 68(S1), S57–S84.
Hall, E. (2013). The ethics of civility: Civility and citizenship in liberal democratic societies. Princeton University Press.
Hooghe, M., & Stolle, D. (2003). Generating social capital: Civil society and institutions in comparative perspective. Palgrave Macmillan.
Kenny, M. (2020). The politics of English nationhood. Oxford University Press.
Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000). “Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(4), 602–616. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.4.602
Mouffe, C. (2018). For a left populism. Verso.
Mudde, C. (2004). “The populist zeitgeist.” Government and Opposition, 39(4), 541–563. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2004.00135.x
Mudde, C., & Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2017). Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
Müller, J.-W. (2016). What is populism? University of Pennsylvania Press.
Mutz, D. C., & Reeves, B. (2005). “The new videomalaise: Effects of televised incivility on political trust.” American Political Science Review, 99(1), 1–15.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster.
Shils, E. (1997). “Civility and civil society: Good manners between persons and concern for the common good in public affairs.” In: S. H. Britton (Ed.), The virtue of civility, (pp. 1–20). Liberty Fund.
Stanley, B. (2008). “The thin ideology of populism.” Journal of Political Ideologies, 13(1), 95–110.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). “An integrative theory of intergroup conflict.” In: W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). “The social identity theory of intergroup behavior.” In: S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations (2nd ed., pp. 7–24). Nelson-Hall.
UK Data Archive. (2022). British Social Attitudes Survey, 2021 [data collection]. UK Data Service. https://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-9283-1
van Assche, J., Dhont, K., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2019). “The personality–ideology nexus: A review of political orientation and personality across time and cultures.” Current Opinion in Psychology, 34, 88–93.
Vieten, U. M. (2018). Far right hate crimes and the politics of populism: How "hate" gets normalized through political discourse. Palgrave Pivot.
Impact of Civilizational Populism on Intergroup Emotions, Social Cohesion, and Civility in the UK
Sudeshika Wathtuwa-Durayalage
This study investigates the impact of civilizational populism on intergroup emotions, social cohesion, and civility in the United Kingdom using quantitative analysis of British Social Attitudes Survey (BSA) 2021 data. The findings reveal significant correlations between exposure to populist rhetoric and heightened negative emotions, such as fear and anger, toward ethnoreligious and political minorities (r = 0.56). While political affiliation demonstrates a weaker direct influence (r = 0.14), perceptions of migration as culturally and economically beneficial are strongly associated with higher social cohesion (r = 0.69). Minority groups report elevated levels of exclusion and fear, yet national pride correlates with inclusive attitudes in some cases (r = -0.64, with prejudicial views). Civil society organizations play a critical role in mitigating divisive effects by fostering inclusivity and dialogue. These insights inform strategies to counteract the polarizing impacts of civilizational populism, emphasizing the importance of inclusive narratives and policy interventions to enhance social cohesion in diverse societies. The study's limitations include reliance on secondary data and challenges in establishing causality, highlighting the need for further research using more direct measures of populism and contemporary datasets. Despite these constraints, the findings contribute empirical evidence to the growing literature on the social and emotional consequences of populism, offering a foundation for policies aimed at promoting harmony and reducing polarization in the UK.
Key words: Civilizational populism, intergroup emotions, social cohesion, civility
References
Alba, R., & Foner, N. (2015). Strangers no more: Immigration and the challenges of integration in North America and Western Europe. Princeton University Press.
Bejan, T. (2017). Mere civility: Disagreement and the limits of toleration. Harvard University Press.
Benson, O. (2011). “Civilities and civil rights: Democracy and the public sphere.” Political Studies Review, 9(2), 182–192.
Brubaker, R. (2017). “Why populism?” Theory and Society, 46(5), 357–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-017-9301-7
Calhoun, C. (2000). The virtue of civility: Selected essays on liberalism, tradition, and civil society. Stanford University Press.
Chan, J., To, H. P., & Chan, E. (2006). “Reconsidering social cohesion: Developing a definition and analytical framework for empirical research.” Social Indicators Research, 75(2), 273–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-005-2118-1
Gidron, N., & Hall, P. A. (2017). “The politics of social status: Economic and cultural roots of the populist right.” The British Journal of Sociology, 68(S1), S57–S84.
Hall, E. (2013). The ethics of civility: Civility and citizenship in liberal democratic societies. Princeton University Press.
Hooghe, M., & Stolle, D. (2003). Generating social capital: Civil society and institutions in comparative perspective. Palgrave Macmillan.
Kenny, M. (2020). The politics of English nationhood. Oxford University Press.
Mackie, D. M., Devos, T., & Smith, E. R. (2000). “Intergroup emotions: Explaining offensive action tendencies in an intergroup context.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(4), 602–616. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.4.602
Mouffe, C. (2018). For a left populism. Verso.
Mudde, C. (2004). “The populist zeitgeist.” Government and Opposition, 39(4), 541–563. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2004.00135.x
Mudde, C., & Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2017). Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
Müller, J.-W. (2016). What is populism? University of Pennsylvania Press.
Mutz, D. C., & Reeves, B. (2005). “The new videomalaise: Effects of televised incivility on political trust.” American Political Science Review, 99(1), 1–15.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster.
Shils, E. (1997). “Civility and civil society: Good manners between persons and concern for the common good in public affairs.” In: S. H. Britton (Ed.), The virtue of civility, (pp. 1–20). Liberty Fund.
Stanley, B. (2008). “The thin ideology of populism.” Journal of Political Ideologies, 13(1), 95–110.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). “An integrative theory of intergroup conflict.” In: W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). “The social identity theory of intergroup behavior.” In: S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations (2nd ed., pp. 7–24). Nelson-Hall.
UK Data Archive. (2022). British Social Attitudes Survey, 2021 [data collection]. UK Data Service. https://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-9283-1
van Assche, J., Dhont, K., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2019). “The personality–ideology nexus: A review of political orientation and personality across time and cultures.” Current Opinion in Psychology, 34, 88–93.
Vieten, U. M. (2018). Far right hate crimes and the politics of populism: How "hate" gets normalized through political discourse. Palgrave Pivot.