,
15 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
Another really great thread, thanks @davidch30 - will respond below (might be a little while as have to head out shortly)
1. Alesina working paper - hadn't seen this, just skimmed it. Fits with work I've done that oppo to imm creates issues for welfare support. I do 100% agree that's a big issue, indeed I've written on it and plan to do so again at length in future (book project planned)
2. Re: distribution of anti-imm views. I think you've misunderstood my views on this (limits of twitter) - My point is that oppo to imm, like oppo to outgroups generally, shows a strong demographic profile. *Much* higher among low ed whites & those growing up pre-imm
3. Both exposure to higher education and socialisation in higher diversity environments are associated with lower hostility to migrants & migrant origin minorities. That's a v established finding in the literature. So while I agree conflict between ingroups & outgroups perennial
I don't agree that the terms of that conflict are fixed over the long run. Who people see as "us" and as "them" changes. Education shifts this. Early life experience shifts this. Prevalent social values influence this too.
4. Re: norms influencing behaviour positively, see my AJPS paper with Elisabeth Ivarsflaten and Scott Blinder - we find norms can break the link between anti-imm views & rad rt support when rad rt seen as illegitimate
See also the BJPS paper by Harteveldt and Ivarsflaten which shows internalisation of social norms is a big reason women are consistently less willing to support rad rt despite similar views of immigrants
As for the point about “not crushing the far right”, I’m not really sure there’s any evidence that soc Dems adopting anti-imm strategies has worked anywhere in as a strat to crush the far right. Even in best base scenarios like DK all it does is reduce far rt to LT avg vote.
I find it puzzling that you think the mere presence of far right will harm anti-prejudice norms but that the active legitimation of far rt views by soc dems would not. There’s lots of literature showing voters take cues from parties they like. Why wouldn’t soc dem voters do so?
I think you misunderstand the role of demography in all of this also. It’s not just about LT evolution. It’s about soc dem coalitions right now. Immigrant origin minorities are v strong soc dem constituency in most European countries. Courting rad rt antagonises then.
That problem gets bigger over time due to LT demographic shifts but it’s already a big issue for most large SD parties where both imm origin minorities and socially liberal graduates are *already* v substantial parts of their election total coalitions
As for your second point in the final three, I don’t think anything you’ve cited shows evidence of a strong link between migration *levels* and redistribution support. We have lots of evidence re migration *attitudes* and redist - but mig atts have little rel to mig levels
People who dislike imms dislike them regardless of imm levels - IMO that’s because such dislike is an expression of more generalised ethnocentric worldview. In a way that makes the soc dem dilemma worse because restricting imm won’t eliminate it
As for point 3 I absolutely agree these will be big & enduring issues for diversifying, migration receiving societies. But I think there is more potential for public opinion to adapt (albeit slowly, generationally) and I think parties are not passive actors in this.
Finally, I think it’s worth highlighting that my views are probably closer to yours than this exchange might suggest! I absolutely agree that v liberal imm policies pose risks to soc dems and have written frequently on need for greater attention to these
