People frequently assume that attitudes towards the government’s involvement in the economy differentiate left- from right-wing politics. This paper compares this idea to a version of acceptance of inequality theory, where acceptance of inequality is the principal element of left–right competition, but the specific inequality motivating individuals’ left–right choice may differ. Using multilevel regression models with survey data from the World Values Survey, as well as two case studies, this paper finds that: (a) acceptance of inequality is a better context-independent predictor of left-right self-placements around the world; and (b) in the Netherlands and Denmark, the correlation between acceptance of an inequality (regarding class or immigration) and right-wing self-placement is stronger when the specific issue dimension is salient to citizens. However, the paper finds no equivalent interaction effect for attitudes towards economic statism. The evidence thus supports the view that the left–right dimension concerns acceptance of inequality, rather than economic interventionism.
AchterbergPeterHoutmanDickDerksAnton (2011) Two of a Kind? An empirical investigation of anti-welfarism and economic egalitarianism. Public Opinion Quarterly74(4): 748–760.
2.
AnsellBen W (2019) The Politics of Housing. Annual Review of Political Science22(1): 165–185.
3.
AspelundAnnaLindemanMarjaanaVerkasaloMarkku (2013) Political Conservatism and Left–Right Orientation in 28 Eastern and Western European Countries. Political Psychology34(3): 409–417.
4.
BauerPaul CBarberáPabloAckermannKathrinVenetzAaron (2016) Is the Left–Right Scale a Valid Measure of Ideology?Political Behavior39(3): 553–583.
5.
BenoitKennethLaverMichael (2006) Party Policy in Modern Democracies. New York, NY: Routledge.
6.
BerghJohannesBjørklundTor (2010) The Revival of Group Voting: Explaining the voting preferences of immigrants in Norway. Political Studies59(2): 308–327.
7.
BobbioNorberto (1996) Left and Right. Cambridge: Polity Press.
8.
BorreÖle (1995) Old and New Politics in Denmark. Scandinavian Political Studies18(3): 187–205.
9.
ConversePhilip E (2006) The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics (1964). Critical Review18(1–3): 1–74.
10.
De LangeSarah L (2007) A New Winning Formula? The programmatic appeal of the radical right. Party Politics13(4): 411–435.
11.
De VriesCatherine EHakhverdianArmenLanceeBram (2013) The Dynamics of Voters’ Left/Right Identification: The role of economic and cultural attitudes. Political Science Research and Methods1(2): 223–238.
12.
DownsAnthony (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
13.
EvansGeoffreyHeathAnthonyLalljeeMansur (1996) Measuring Left–Right and Libertarian–Authoritarian Values in the British Electorate. British Journal of Sociology47(1): 93–112.
14.
FreireAndré (2006) Bringing Social Identities Back In: The social anchors of left–right orientation in Western Europe. International Political Science Review27(4): 359–378.
15.
FreireAndré (2015) Left–Right Ideology as a Dimension of Identification and of Competition. Journal of Political Ideologies20(1): 43–68.
16.
FreireAndréKivistikKats (2013) Western and Non-Western Meanings of the Left–Right Divide Across Four Continents. Journal of Political Ideologies18(2): 171–199.
17.
GigerNathalieLefkofridiZoe (2014) Salience-Based Congruence Between Parties & their Voters: The Swiss case. Swiss Political Science Review20(2): 287–304.
18.
Green-PedersenChristofferKrogstrupJesper (2008) Immigration as a Political Issue in Denmark and Sweden. European Journal of Political Research47(5): 610–634.
19.
HansenKasper MøllerStubagerRune (2016) The Danish National Election Study 2015. Copenhagen: Centre for Voting and Parties, University of Copenhagen.
20.
InglehartRonald (1990) Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
21.
JoshiDevin K (2021) A New Conceptualization of the Political Left and Right: One dimension, multiple domains. Canadian Journal of Political Science54(3): 1–21.
22.
JostJohn TGlaserJackKruglanskiArie WSullowayFrank J (2003) Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition. Psychological Bulletin129(3): 339–375.
23.
KitscheltHerbertMansfeldovaZdenkaMarkowskiRadoslawTokaGabor (1999) Post-Communist Party Systems: Competition, Representation, and Inter-Party Cooperation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
24.
LefkofridiZoeWagnerMarkusWillmannJohanna E (2014) Left-Authoritarians and Policy Representation in Western Europe: Electoral choice across ideological dimensions. West European Politics37(1): 65–90.
25.
LipsetSeymour MartinLazarsfeldPaul FelixBartonAllen HLinzJuan (1954) In LindzeyG (ed.) The Handbook of Social Psychology. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1124–1175.
26.
LührmannAnnaTannenbergMarcusLindbergStaffan I (2018) Regimes of the World (RoW): Opening new avenues for the comparative study of political regimes. Politics and Governance6(1): 60–77.
27.
LukesSteven (2003) Epilogue: The Grand Dichotomy of the Twentieth Century. In BallTerenceBellamyRichard (eds) The Cambridge History of Twentieth-Century Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 602–626.
28.
MacIverRobert M (1947) The Web of Government. New York, NY: Macmillan Co.
29.
MalkaArielLelkesYphtachSotoChristopher J (2019) Are Cultural and Economic Conservatism Positively Correlated? A large-scale cross-national test. British Journal of Political Science49(3): 1045–1069.
MiddendorpCees (1989) Models for Predicting the Dutch Vote along the Left–Right and the Libertarianism–Authoritarianism Dimensions. International Political Science Review10(4): 279–308.
32.
NoëlAlainThérienJean-Philippe (2008) Left and Right in Global Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ObingerHerbertSchmittCarinaZohlnhöferReimut (2013) Partisan Politics and Privatization in OECD Countries. Comparative Political Studies47(9): 1294–1323.
35.
SartoriGiovanni (1976) Parties And Party Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36.
ShimJaemin (2020) Left is Right and Right is Left? Partisan difference on social welfare and particularistic benefits in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy36(1): 25–41.
37.
TavitsMargitLetkiNatalia (2009) When Left Is Right: Party ideology and policy in post-communist Europe. American Political Science Review103(4): 555–569.
38.
ThorisdottirHuldaJostJohn TLiviatanIdoShroutPatrick E. (2007) Psychological Needs and Values Underlying Left–Right Political Orientation: Cross-national evidence from Eastern and Western Europe. Public Opinion Quarterly71(2): 175–203.
WeberWiebkeSarisWillem E (2014) The Relationship Between Issues and An Individual’s Left–Right Orientation. Acta Politica50(2): 193–213.
41.
WiesehomeierNina (2010) The Meaning of Left–Right in Latin America: A Comparative View. Notre Dame, IN: Helen Kellogg Institute for International Studies, University of Notre Dame.
42.
WiesehomeierNinaDoyleDavid (2012) Attitudes, Ideological Associations and the Left–Right Divide in Latin America. Journal of Politics in Latin America4(1): 3–33.
43.
WlezienChristopher (2005) On the Salience of Political Issues: The problem with ‘most important problem’. Electoral Studies24(4): 555–579.
ZuellCorneliaScholzEvi (2019) Construct Equivalence of Left–Right Scale Placement in a Cross-National Perspective. International Journal of Sociology49(1): 77–95.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
