This analysis summarizes and reflects on the following research: Armaly, M. T., & Enders, A. M. (2024). Who supports political violence? Perspectives on Politics, 22(2), 427-444. doi:10.1017/S1537592722001086
Talking Points
Among a surveyed U.S. public:
- People who feel like victims (“perceived victimhood”), have authoritarian or populist beliefs, strongly identify with being white, or have military backgrounds are more likely to support violence.
- Other factors like anxiety, feelings of powerlessness, belief in conspiracies, perceived government corruption, racial resentment, and religiosity also contribute to the support for political violence.
- Psychological attitudes, especially those related to feeling unfairly treated and wanting strong, authoritative solutions, are more predictive of support for violence than economic status.
Key Insight for Informing Practice
In a context where perceived victimhood, authoritarianism, and populism are critical predictors of support for political violence in the U.S., local community-driven initiatives that promote inclusivity and address systemic grievances can help reduce feelings of victimhood and lessen intergroup hostility.
Summary
The United States is facing a troubling decline in its democratic values (“democratic backsliding“), with political violence on the rise. A recent survey conducted by the American Enterprise Institute found that one-third of Americans believe that violence may be necessary to protect the “American way of life.” The January 6th Capitol riots are a stark reminder of the potential for political violence, especially with the 2024 elections approaching. This alarming situation prompted Miles T. Armaly and Adam M. Enders to explore why some people in the United States support political violence.
Their study aims to identify individuals more likely to support political violence by examining various psychological, social, and political characteristics. The theoretical framework they employ is based on existing literature on polarization, authoritarianism, populism, and perceived victimhood. The study also references research on the psychological roots of aggression, the role of identity in politics, and the social dynamics of populism.
The authors surveyed 1,002 U.S. adults in February 2021 and looked at 24 factors including psychological traits, political beliefs, and demographic details. The respondents also answered the three following questions about support for political violence, using a scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”:
- It is acceptable to use violence to advance political goals these days.
- Violence is sometimes an acceptable way for Americans to express disagreement with the government.
- Violence is justified if the other side acts violently first.
Through statistical analysis, the authors found that people who feel like victims (“perceived victimhood”), have authoritarian or populist beliefs, strongly identify with being white, or have military backgrounds are more likely to support political violence. Other factors like anxiety, feelings of powerlessness, belief in conspiracies, perceived government corruption, racial resentment, and religiosity also contribute to the support for political violence.
The study found that psychological attitudes, especially those related to feeling unfairly treated and wanting strong, authoritative solutions, are more predictive of support for violence than economic status. They identified two types of victimhood: egocentric victimhood and systemic victimhood. This finding contrasts with previous research, which identified a correlation between economic inequality and political violence across various political and cultural environments.
The authors indeed found that support for political violence, such as the January 6th Capitol riot, can be predicted by a combination of psychological and social factors rather than just political affiliations or support for Trump. They note that “approval of real-world political violence appears to be the product of a toxic blend of partisan attachments and several non-political orientations that encourage violence.”
|
Egocentric victimhood: “the general feeling that one is always settling for less.”
|
|
Systemic victimhood: sentiments about “the [political] system, specifically, working against the individual.” |
|
Democratic backsliding refers to the decline in the quality of democracy, often led by the state, which weakens or eliminates political institutions that support democracy. This process can take different forms, including:
Paraphrased from: Shein, E., & Emmons, C. (2023, December). Paths to democratic resilience in an era of backsliding: A roadmap for the democracy support community. International Foundation for Election Systems. Retrieved September 26, 2024, from https://www.ifes.org/pub/paths-democratic-resilience-era-backsliding/understanding-democratic-backsliding
|
The main argument is that support for political violence is less about actual social conditions and more about individual psychological states and identities. The study challenges the idea that economic or social hardship alone leads to political violence. Essentially, feeling unjustly victimized and believing in strong, authoritative solutions are key predictors of support for violent actions, even without experiencing tangible oppression. The support for political violence and an engagement in a polarized, partisan view of politics reveals a toxic blend that could lead to hostility, disregard for democratic processes, and the incitement of violent action—as witnessed and encapsulated by the January 6th riots.
In sum, this study brings to light how any measures to prevent political violence must address the psychological and identity factors that play into support for violence. Although it is very challenging to predict individual acts of violence, understanding who is likely to support political violence can inform prevention strategies and encourage peaceful political behavior and respect for democratic institutions.
Informing Practice
The sense of victimhood and toxic polarization within our communities suggests the need to look beyond nationwide efforts and strengthen local, community-driven initiatives that foster inclusivity and address systemic grievances. These efforts can mitigate feelings of victimhood and powerlessness. Initiatives that bring together diverse groups to work on common goals can build social cohesion and reduce intergroup hostility.
In his recently published The Pocket Guide for Facing Down a Civil War, John-Paul Lederach, a leading global voice in the peacebuilding community, shares lessons from his decades-long experience in conflict zones worldwide. He emphasizes that while stopping a full-blown civil war requires reducing toxicity among visible political leaders, preventing war requires a web of people who sustain meaningful conversations and relationships across divides. These insights can inform our personal and professional capacities, relationships, networks, organizations, and programmatic work on socio-political issues related to the 2024 election and beyond.
Humanize the Face of Conflict
- Restorative Listening: Emphasizes the importance of listening to understand the grievances and lived experiences of all parties involved. This approach helps acknowledge and address deep-seated grievances that often fuel violence.
- Dignity and Respect: Promotes actions and dialogues that restore dignity and respect to all individuals, especially those who feel marginalized or threatened. This can help reduce the sense of humiliation and dehumanization that often leads to violence.
The Critical Yeast: The Power of the Improbable Few
- Critical Yeast: Focuses on the role of small, committed groups that can act as catalysts for broader social change. These groups can build bridges across divides and foster dialogue and cooperation in their communities.
- Unlikely Relationships: Encourages the formation of relationships between individuals and groups that typically do not interact. These relationships can create a web of connections that resist the spread of violence and promote understanding.
Accompaniment: Learning to Lead from Alongside
- Accompaniment: Advocates for a leadership style that involves walking alongside communities, understanding their struggles, and supporting their efforts to find solutions. This approach fosters trust and collaboration.
- Quality of Presence: Emphasizes the importance of being present and engaged in the community, showing genuine care and commitment to addressing their concerns. This can help build a sense of shared purpose and resilience.
These insights—gleaned from contexts that have struggled with political violence and civil war—can serve as guiding principles that connect the findings of this research to election violence prevention efforts on the ground in the United States. As hard as it may seem to break through the toxicity in our communities and beyond, we should remember the words by the South African anti-apartheid and human rights activist, Desmond Tutu: “My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together.”
Questions Raised
- How can individual and community grievances be channeled into creating positive policy and systemic change?
- How do we expand our communities to include those from varying backgrounds and perspectives?
Continued Reading
Carothers, T., & Hartnett, B. (2024). Misunderstanding democratic backsliding. Journal of Democracy, 35(3), 24–37. https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/misunderstanding-democratic-backsliding/
Lopez, A. (2023, October 25). More Americans say they support political violence ahead of the 2024 election. NPR. Retrieved September 26, 2024, from https://www.npr.org/2023/10/25/1208373493/political-violence-democracy-2024-presidential-election-extremism.
Lederach, J. P. (2024). The pocket guide for facing down a civil war: Surprising ideas from everyday people who shifted the cycles of violence. https://www.johnpaullederach.com/2024/07/pocket-guide/
Mason, L., & Kalmoe, N. (2024, August 8). How to prevent a spiral of political violence in America. Foreign Affairs. Retrieved September 26, 2024, from https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/how-prevent-spiral-political-violence-america.
Merriman, H. (2024). Harnessing Our Power to End (HOPE) Political Violence: 2024 guide. 22nd Century Initiative and the Horizons Project. Retrieved September 26, 2024, from www.endpoliticalviolence.org
Kleinfeld, R. (2021). The rise of political violence in the United States. Journal of Democracy, 32(4), 160-176. https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/the-rise-of-political-violence-in-the-united-states/.
Organizations
Braver Angels: https://braverangels.org
Bridging Divides Initiative: https://bridgingdivides.princeton.edu
The Carter Center (U.S. Elections): https://www.cartercenter.org/peace/democracy/us-elections.html
The Horizons Project: https://horizonsproject.us
Living Room Conversations (Trust in Elections): https://livingroomconversations.org/trust-in-elections-2/
Rural Organizing Project: https://rop.org/
Search for Common Ground (Love Anyway Feasts): https://www.cg-usa.org/initiatives/love-anyway-feasts
Keywords: democracy, white identity, victimhood, political violence, demilitarizing security
Photo credit: renaschild via stock.adobe.com
