Dylan Selterman, PhD :
Many liberal commentators have asserted that a key reason why legions of Americans have supported former President Donald Trump and right-wing policies on issues like policing or immigration is because they are motivated by various forms of prejudice, including racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, and White nationalism. It’s an intuitive idea given Trump’s overt displays of personal bigotry and certainly this sentiment holds true for some of his supporters-notably those who organized the violent protests in Charlottesville in 2017.
But as I wrote in a previous post, there is good reason to be skeptical toward the idea that the average Trump-voting Republican is a White supremacist or that nefarious prejudices are their primary motivator. We can see clear evidence of Republican support for liberal ideas, as well as ambivalent attitudes toward Trump himself. Furthermore, voting trend data shows an increasing number of Black, Indigenous, and people of color supporting Trump in 2020 compared to 2016, while White voters shifted away from Trump. Many conservative voters were drawn to him for non-racist reasons (e.g., economic growth), and it may be the case that attitudes on issues such as immigration are similarly nuanced. For instance, conservatives may be reticent to support or welcome migrants, but for reasons that don’t have to do with racial prejudice.
This idea is further explored in a recently published study by Richard Hanania. The study aimed to test competing variables that would play a role in a person’s attitudes toward migrants. Hanania suggests that some White conservatives may have anti-immigrant sentiment that is motivated by hostile racism, accentuated by our former president’s pledge to build a wall on the Mexican border and to shut down Muslim migration from other nations as well. But alternatively, conservatives may feel anti-immigrant sentiment because they view migrants as politically liberal and are concerned that upon arrival, those migrants will support the Democratic Party. Hanania notes that alongside prejudice toward racial or ethnic outgroups, hyper-partisan political anger is a powerful social force that should be incorporated into this context. In addition, conservatives have also shown a strong preference for welcoming migrants who are highly skilled and thus have greater potential to positively contribute to the economy and culture.
On its face, the results challenge the notion that anti-immigrant sentiment among conservatives is motivated by White nationalism. Rather, conservatives seem to be very concerned that liberal-leaning migrants would change the balance of political power in America, which would be more beneficial to the Democratic party. In addition, conservatives were also much more supportive of migrants who are highly skilled and thus more likely to positively contribute to the American economy.
Of course, this is a single study, and it would also be interesting for future studies to examine whether these results generalize to other contexts, including attitudes toward migrants from Muslim-majority countries, African, or Asian countries. It is also possible that even if Americans don’t perceive much difference between White Ukrainian immigrants and Hispanic Venezuelan immigrants, they would show a preference for White immigrants from other parts of the world (e.g., Canada, Scandinavia).
This is connected to the phenomenon of emotional polarization, the degree to which Americans literally hate other people simply for belonging to a rival political party. As I wrote in a previous post, people are increasingly likely to describe political rivals as “immoral,” “unpatriotic,” and even “sub-human,” even though these extremely negative attitudes are largely based on misunderstandings. Referring to racial/ethnic/religious groups in these terms is socially unacceptable and would often result in the speaker being ostracized but making such statements about rival political parties is quite common and widely tolerated. Put another way, it’s socially normal to hate and discriminate against others based merely on their political affiliation. But it shouldn’t be.
Even if it’s true that partisan prejudice is visible on the political left and the right, it is by no means symmetric. Donald Trump repeatedly made egregious false claims equating liberalism with socialism or communism, and stated that the Democratic Party is part of a “radical left” movement that is a fundamental threat to the American way of life. Trump also callously suggested that a high COVID-19 death toll was less concerning in “blue states” that didn’t vote for him. Trump and his ardent followers are so hateful toward liberals that they consider people’s lives and health to be worth less if they’re from a state like New York compared to North Dakota, which is ironic considering that Trump is from New York himself. While these sentiments are abhorrent, it’s worth taking them seriously, since they reflect a broad trend of lies and demonization toward people based on how they voted. By contrast, Joe Biden has made significant gestures to incorporate liberal and conservative Americans into his coalition. It remains to be seen whether this strategy will be successful.
In sum, I think that liberals are correct to describe American politics as “tribal,” but I question the idea that right-wing tribalism clearly and wholly coincides with racial animus or White nationalism. The scientific evidence instead supports a different conclusion: People are overtly bigoted based on party affiliation. This is a deep problem in our culture that warrants careful attention and creative solutions if we’re going to have a functioning, peaceful society.
(Dylan Selterman is a Senior Lecturer in the Psychology Department at the University of Maryland).
