Does economic inequality motivate support for the populist radical right? Previous studies point in different directions in answer to this question. Some argue that inequality benefits the radical right, while others assert that it instead strengthens parties on the left and undercuts the right. We weigh in on this debate with survey experimental evidence from Sweden. When prompted to think about inequality at the national or local level, respondents on average become less inclined to support the Sweden Democrats, a radical right populist party. These effects are particularly robust and sizable when the matter at hand is local—rather than national—inequality. Furthermore, Sweden Democrat support is weakened most when the local inequality prompt is received by those who are on the radical right ideologically and who express concerns about law and order in society. We argue that to understand inequality’s effects on voter behavior, it is essential to explore the ways people conceptualize it. This study serves as a reminder to consider the day-to-day implications of macro-economic developments, and it provides a tool for communicating with voters in a way that undercuts the appeals of radical right parties.
AfonsoARennwaldL (2018) Social class and the changing welfare State Agenda of radical right parties in Europe. In: Welfare Democracies and Party Politics: Explaining Electoral Dynamics in Times of Changing Welfare Capitalism. Oxford University Press, 171–194.
2.
AlesinaAPerottiR (1996) Income distribution, political instability and investment. European Economic Review40(6): 1203–1228.
3.
BoletD (2021) Drinking alone: local socio-cultural degradation and radical right support—the case of British Pub Closures. Comparative Political Studies54(9): 1653–1692.
4.
BoletD (2022) The janus-faced nature of radical voting: subjective social decline at the roots of radical right and radical left support. Party Politics23: 135406882210854.
5.
BudgeIFarlieD (1983) Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-Three Democracies. London: Allen & Unwin.
6.
BurgoonBvan NoortSRooduijnM, et al. (2019) Positional deprivation and support for radical right and radical left parties. Economic Policy34(9): 49–93.
7.
ButtrickNRShigehiroO (2017) “The psychological consequences of income inequality”. Social and Personality Psychology Compass11(3): 1–12. e12304.
8.
CarejaRElmelund‐PræstekærCBaggesen KlitgaardM, et al. (2016) Direct and indirect welfare chauvinism as party strategies: an analysis of the Danish people’s party. Scandinavian Political Studies39(4): 435–457.
9.
ChouMMoffittBBusbridgeR (2022) The localist turn in populism studies. Swiss Political Science Review28(1): 129–141.
10.
ChueriJ (2023) What distinguishes radical right welfare chauvinism? Excluding different migrant groups from the welfare state. Journal of European Social Policy33(1): 84–100. DOI: 10.1177/09589287221128441.
11.
CofféHHeyndelsBVermeirJ (2007) Fertile grounds for extreme right-wing parties: Explaining the Vlaams Blok’s electoral success. Electoral Studies26(142): 142–155.
12.
ColantoneIStanigP (2018) Global competition and Brexit. American Political Science Review112(2): 201–218.
13.
ColantoneIStanigP (2018) The trade Origins of economic nationalism: Import competition and voting behavior in western Europe. American Journal of Political Science62(4): 936–953.
14.
ConnellBJDorrDCShinAJ (2021) Inequality and the partisan political economy. Representation57: 575–601.
15.
EasterlyW (2007) Inequality does cause underdevelopment: insights from a new instrument. Journal of Development Economics84(2): 755–776.
16.
EganPJMullinM (2012) “Turning personal experience into political attitudes: the effect of local weather on Americans’ perceptions about global warming”. The Journal of Politics74(3): 796–809.
17.
EnglerSWeisstannerD (2021) The threat of social decline: income inequality and radical right support. Journal of European Public Policy28(2): 153–173.
18.
Ennser‐JedenastikL (2018) Welfare chauvinism in populist radical right platforms: the role of redistributive justice principles. Social Policy and Administration52(1): 293–314.
19.
FitzgeraldJ (2018) Close to Home: Local Ties and Voting Radical Right in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20.
FitzgeraldJWolakJ (2016) The roots of trust in local government in western Europe. International Political Science Review37(1): 130–146.
21.
FortunatoDAdamsJ (2015) How voters’ perceptions of junior coalition partners depend on the prime minister’s position. European Journal of Political Research5454(3): 601–621.
22.
GidronNHallPA (2019) Populism as a problem of social integration. Comparative Political Studies53(7): 1027–1059.
23.
HanKJ (2016) Income inequality and voting for radical right-wing parties. Electoral Studies42(1): 54–64.
24.
HarteveldEVan Der BrugWDe LangeS, et al. (2021) Multiple roots of the populist radical right: support for the Dutch PVV in cities and the countryside. European Journal of Political Research1: 1475–6765. 12452.
25.
HörnqvistM (2016) Riots in the welfare state: the contours of a modern-day moral economy. European Journal of Criminology13(5): 573–589.
26.
HsiehC-CPughMD (1993) Poverty, income inequality, and violent crime: a meta-analysis of recent aggregate data studies. Criminal Justice Review18(2): 182–202.
27.
JaySBatruchAJettenJ, et al. (2019) Economic inequality and the rise of far-right populism: a social psychological analysis. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology29(5): 418–428.
28.
JesuitDParadowskiPMahlerV (2009) Electoral support for extreme right-wing parties: A sub-national analysis of western European elections. Electoral Studies28(2): 279–290.
29.
LippsJSchraffD (2021) Regional inequality and institutional trust in Europe. European Journal of Political Research60(4): 892–913.
30.
MunisBKBurkeR (2023) Talk local to Me: Assessing the heterogenous effects of Localistic appeals. American Politics Research51(5): 655–669.
31.
NorrisPInglehartR (2019) Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism. Cambridge University Press.
PontussonJRuedaD (2010) The politics of inequality: voter mobilization and left parties in advanced industrial states. Comparative Political Studies43: 675–705.
34.
ReevesAGimpelJG (2012) Ecologies of unease: Geographic context and national economic evaluations. Political Behavior34: 507–534.
35.
RooduijnMBurgoonB (2018) The Paradox of well-being: do unfavorable socioeconomic and Sociocultural contexts deepen or Dampen radical left and right voting among the less well-off?Comparative Political Studies51(13): 1720–1753.
36.
RöthLHannaS (2020) “Greens in government: the distributive policies of a culturally progressive force”. West European Politics0(0): 1–29.
37.
RuedaD (2018) Food comes first, then morals: redistribution preferences, parochial altruism, and immigration in Western Europe. The Journal of Politics80(1): 225–239.
38.
RuedaDStegmuellerD (2016) The Externalities of inequality: fear of crime and preferences for redistribution in western Europe. American Journal of Political Science60(2): 472–489.
39.
SandsML (2017) Exposure to inequality affects support for redistribution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences114(4): 663–668.
40.
SandsMLDanielDK (2020) “Local exposure to inequality raises support of people of low wealth for taxing the wealthy. Nature586(7828): 257–261.
41.
ScheepersDEllemersN (2019) Status stress: Explaining defensiveness to the resolution of status inequality in members of dominant groups. In: JettenJPetersK (eds) The Social Psychology of Inequality, 294–316. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-28856-3.
42.
SchraffDPontussonJ (2024) Falling behind Whom? Economic Geographies of right-wing populism in Europe. Journal of European Public Policy31(6): 1591–1619.
43.
SeebergHB (2017) How stable is political parties’ issue ownership? A Cross-time, Cross-national analysis. Political Studies65(2): 475–492.
44.
StoetzerLFGieseckeJKlüverH (2023) How does income inequality affect the support for populist parties?Journal of European Public Policy30(1): 1–20.
45.
StrebelMASchakelAH (2024) When do subnational jurisdictional mergers impact voting?Political Geography108: 103033.
46.
TherbornG (2020) Sweden’s turn to economic inequality, 1982–2019. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics52: 159–166.
47.
VasilopoulosPMcAvayHBrouardS (2022) Residential context and voting for the far right: the impact of immigration and Unemployment on the 2017 French Presidential election. Political Behavior44(4): 1703–1730.
48.
VauclairC-MBratanovaB (2017) Income inequality and fear of crime across the European region. European Journal of Criminology14(2): 221–241.
49.
WinklerH (2019) The effect of income inequality on political polarization: evidence from European regions, 2002–2014. Economics & Politics31: 137–162.
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.
