Research on Euroscepticism focuses increasingly on the role of group identities: national identities and attitudes towards multiculturalism. Yet hardly any attention has been paid to the way in which religious intolerance shapes Euroscepticism. We argue that religious intolerance influences not only diffuse Euroscepticism, but also more specifically opposition to enlargement of the European Union with Turkey. To examine the relationship between religious intolerance and Euroscepticism, this article analyses unique data from two representative surveys conducted in Ireland and the Netherlands. Our findings show that religious intolerance is indeed a powerful determinant of attitudes towards the European Union and that it particularly shapes people’s attitudes towards future Turkish enlargement. This study therefore contributes to the literature by demonstrating that social identities are strong determinants of Euroscepticism.
Anderson CJ ( 1998) When in doubt, use proxies: Attitudes toward domestic politics and support forEuropean integration. Comparative Political Studies31(5): 569-601.
2.
Blumer H. ( 1958) Race prejudice as a sense of group position. Pacific Sociological Review1(1): 3-7.
3.
Bogardus ES ( 1925) Measuring social distance. Journal of Applied Sociology9: 299-308.
4.
Boomgaarden HG and Freire A. ( 2009) Religion and euroskepticism. West European Politics32(6): 1240-1265.
5.
Boomgaarden HG, Schuck ART, Elenbaas M. and De Vreese CH ( 2011) Mapping EU attitudes: Conceptual and empirical dimensions of euroscepticism and EU support. European Union Politics17(1).
6.
Breeman G., Lowery D., Poppelaars C., Resodihardjo S., Timmermans A. and De Vries J. ( 2009) Political attention in a coalition system: Analyzing Queen’s speeches in the Netherlands 1947-2006. Acta Politica44: 1-27.
7.
Brinkerhoff MB and Mackie MM ( 1986) The application of social distance to religious research: an exploration. Review of Religious Research28(2): 151-167.
8.
Bruter M. ( 2003) Winning hearts and minds for Europe: the impact of news and symbols on civic and culturalEuropean identity. Comparative Political Studies36(10): 1148-1179.
9.
Carey S. ( 2002) Undivided loyalties: Is national identity an obstacle to European integration?European Union Politics3(4): 387-413.
10.
Casanova J. ( 1994) Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11.
Christin T. and Trechsel AH ( 2002) Joining the EU? Explaining public opinion in Switzerland . European Union Politics3(4): 415-443.
12.
Davis DW ( 2007) Negative Liberty: Public Opinion and the Terrorist Attacks in America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
13.
De Vreese CH and Boomgaarden HG ( 2005) Projecting EU referendums: Fear of immigration and support forEuropean integration. European Union Politics6(1): 59-82.
14.
De Vreese CH, Boomgaarden HG and Semetko HA ( 2008) Hard and soft: Public support for Turkish membership in the EU. European Union Politics9(4): 511-530.
15.
Easton D. ( 1975) A re-assessment of the concept of political support . British Journal of Political Science5: 435-457.
16.
Eichenberg RC and Dalton RJ ( 1993) Europeans and the European Community: the dynamics of public support forEuropean integration. International Organization47: 507-534.
17.
Gabel M. ( 1998a) Public support for European integration: an empirical test of five theories. Journal of Politics60: 333-354.
18.
Gabel M. ( 1998b) Economic integration and mass politics: Market liberalization and public attitudes in theEuropean Union. American Journal of Political Science42: 936-953.
19.
Gabel M. and Whitten GD ( 1997) Economic conditions, economic perceptions and public support forEuropean integration. Political Behavior19: 81-96.
20.
Gibson JL ( 2006) Enigmas of intolerance: Fifty years after Stouffer’s Communism, Conformity, and Civil Liberties. Perspectives on Politics4(1): 21-34.
21.
Golebiowska EA ( 2004) Religious tolerance in Poland. International Journal of Public Opinion Research16(4): 391-416.
22.
Green-Pedersen C. and Krogstrup J. ( 2008) Immigration as a political issue in Denmark and Sweden . European Journal of Political Research47(5): 610-635.
23.
Hagevi M. ( 2002) Religiosity and Swedish public opinion on theEuropean Union. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion41(4): 759-769.
24.
Hooghe L. and Marks M. ( 2004) Does identity or economic rationality drive public opinion on European integration?PS: Political Science and Politics37: 415-420.
25.
Hooghe L. and Marks M. ( 2005) Calculation, community, and cues: Public opinion onEuropean integration. European Union Politics6(4): 421-445.
26.
Hooghe L. and Marks M. ( 2007) Sources of euroscepticism. Acta Politica42: 119-127.
27.
Hooghe L. and Marks M. ( 2009) A postfunctionalist theory of European integration: From permissive consensus to constraining dissensus. British Journal of Political Science39: 1-23.
28.
Huddy L., Khatib N. and Capelos T. ( 2002) The polls-trends: Reactions to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Public Opinion Quarterly66: 418-450.
Jackman M. ( 1977) Prejudice, tolerance, and attitudes toward ethnic groups . Social Science Research6(2): 145-169.
31.
Jacoby WG ( 1991) Data Theory and Dimensional Analysis. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
32.
Kentmen C. ( 2008) Determinants of support for EU membership in Turkey. Islamic attachments, utilitarian considerations and national identity. European Union Politics9(4): 487-510.
33.
Koenig T., Mihelj S., Downey J. and Bek MG ( 2006) Media framing of the issue of Turkish accession to the EU. A European or national process? Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research19(2): 149-169.
34.
Kopecky P. and Mudde C. ( 2002) The two sides of euroscepticism: Party positions on European integration in East Central Europe. European Union Politics3(3): 297-326.
35.
Kriesi H., Grande E., Lachat R., Dolezal M., Bornschier S. and Frey T. ( 2008) West European Politics in the Age of Globalization . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36.
McClosky H. and Brill A. ( 1983) Dimensions of Tolerance: What Americans Think about Civil Liberties. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
37.
McLaren LM ( 2002) Public support for the European Union: Cost/benefit analysis or perceived cultural threat? Journal of Politics64(2): 551-566.
38.
McLaren LM ( 2003) Anti-immigrant prejudice in Europe: Contact, threat perception, and preferences for the exclusion of Migrants. Social Forces81(3): 909-936.
39.
McLaren LM ( 2004) Opposition to European integration and fear of low of national identity: Debunking a basic assumption regarding hostility to the integration project. European Journal of Political Research43: 895-911.
40.
McLaren LM ( 2006) Identity, Interests and Attitudes to European Integration . Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan .
41.
McLaren LM ( 2007) Explaining opposition to Turkish membership of the EU . European Union Politics8(2): 251-278.
42.
Mokken RJ ( 1971) A Theory and Procedure of Scale Analysis with Applications in Political Research. The Hague: Mouton.
43.
Nelsen BF, Guth JL and Fraser CR ( 2001) Does religion matter? Christianity and public support for theEuropean Union. European Union Politics2: 191.
44.
Prothro JW and Grigg CM ( 1960) Fundamental principles of democracy: Bases of agreement and disagreement. Journal of Politics22: 276-294.
45.
Quillian L. ( 1995) Prejudice as a response to perceived group threat: Population composition and anti-immigrant and racial prejudice in Europe. American Sociological Review60: 586-611.
46.
Scheuer A. and Van der Brug W. ( 2007) Locating support for European integration. In: Van der Brug W and Van der Eijk C (eds) European Elections and Domestic Politics: Lessons from the Past and Scenarios for the Future. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
47.
Sijtsma K., Debets P. and Molenaar IW ( 1990) Mokken scale analysis for polychotomous items: Theory, a computer program and an empirical application. Quality & Quantity24: 173-188.
48.
Sniderman PM and Hagendoorn L. ( 2007) When Ways of Life Collide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
49.
Sniderman PM, Tetlock PE, Glaser JM, Green DP and Hout M. ( 1989) Principled tolerance and theAmerican mass public. British Journal of Political Science19(1): 25-45.
50.
Stephan WG and Stephan C. ( 1993) Cognition and affect in stereotyping: Parallel interactive networks. In: Mackie DM and Hamilton DL (eds) Affect, Cognition and Stereotyping: Interactive Processes in Group Perception. Orlando, FL : Academic Press.
51.
Stephan WG and Stephan C. ( 1996) Predicting prejudice. International Journal of Intercultural Relations20: 1-12.
52.
Stouffer SC ( 1955) Communism, Conformity and Civil Liberties. New York: Doubleday.
53.
Sullivan JL, Pierson J. and Marcus JE ( 1993) Political Tolerance and American Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
54.
Tajfel H. and Turner JC ( 1979) An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: Austin WG and Worchel S (eds) The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations . Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole , 33-47.
55.
Turner JC ( 1999) Some current issues in research on social identity and self-categorization theories. In: Ellemers N, Spears R and Doosje B (eds) Social Identity: Context, Commitment, Content . Oxford: Blackwell, 6-34.
56.
Van der Brug W. and Van Spanje J. ( 2009) Immigration, Europe, and the new cultural dimension . European Journal of Political Research48(3): 309-334.
57.
Van der Brug W., Hobolt SB and De Vreese CH ( 2009) Religion and party choice in Europe. West European Politics32(6): 1266-1283.
58.
Velasco Gonzalez K., Verkuyten M., Weesie J. and Poppe E. ( 2008) Prejudice towards Muslims in The Netherlands: Testing integrated threat theory. British Journal of Social Psychology47: 667-685.
59.
Vliegenthart R. and Boomgaarden HG ( 2007) Real-world indicators and the coverage of immigration and minorities’ integration in Dutch newspapers. European Journal of Communication22(3): 293-314.
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.
