Mens & Maatschappij - Current Issue

Radical right populist voting: Logical choice or blind protest?

This study examines whether people who believe they belong to a lower social class are more inclined to vote for right-wing populist parties (RPPs). Using DPES (NKO) data from 2021, the results of linear regression models show this is indeed the case. This is in line with social marginalization theory, which states that both economic and cultural developments are related to feelings of social marginalization, as proxied by subjective social class, rather than more objective measures. These feelings are likely induced by the populist frame of the good people versus the corrupt elite. What is more, and supporting the winners and losers of globalization hypothesis, people who say they belong to lower social classes are sensitive to RPPs proposed nativist and anti-globalization policies, as the relation between subjective social class and RPP voting is fully explained by a backlash against globalization, which includes anti-immigrant sentiments. A unique contribution of the current study is the incorporation of anti-inequality attitudes, demonstrating that being against income inequality is a prerequisite for people who place themselves in lower social classes to hold anti-globalization attitudes. They are merely relatively disadvantaged because of globalization, not absolutely. As a result of this relative disadvantage, it is especially the inequality due to globalization that is problematic. By explicitly theorizing, testing, and showing the modifying influence of anti-inequality attitudes, this study contributes to the vast literature on support for RPPs.

Move to improve? A longitudinal study on the subjective experience of housing quality after relocation among Dutch people with a migration background and Dutch people without a migration background

This study aims to find out if people with a migration background in the Netherlands experience less improvement in housing quality following relocation compared to those who do not have a migration background. Previous research in other contexts showed that minority groups are less able to reduce environmental pollution when moving compared to the majority population, indicating that they face certain structural constraints and move ‘selectively’. The theoretical propositions of selective migration are tested by focusing on individuals’ perceptions of the physical quality of their homes. This fills a research gap, as studies on perceived housing quality and the benefits of relocation are lacking in The Netherlands, despite housing quality being a crucial aspect of comfort and well-being.

Longitudinal survey data from the LISS panel (Longitudinal Internet Studies for Social Sciences) has been used to examine whether individuals perceive an improvement in their housing quality following relocation. Two-way fixed effect models were estimated to analyse a total of 5,562 participants between 2008 and 2023. Results indicate that people with a migration background as well as people without a migration background experience substantial improvements in housing quality after relocating, with no significant differences between these groups. This finding does not support the selective migration theory. Still, people with a migration background rate their housing quality lower than non-migrants, suggesting a form of structural inequality nevertheless.

Inaugural lecture: Politics, religion and sex. On the importance of a sociological perspective on inclusion, and of inclusion for sociology

Talking about politics, Islam, sexuality, migration, gender-identity and discrimination, Spierings’ inaugural lecture argues that inclusion goes beyond participation, discrimination and intergroup attitudes. To what extent society is inclusive depend also on the willingness of people to change their habits and worldview to accommodate marginalized groups. And to understand how inclusion and exclusion come about, Spierings argues for an intersectional perspective (providing statistical examples), draws attention to how marginalization might lead to empathy, and the larger economic and political process shaping people willingness to change. In his closing, he pleas for a perspective of marginalization and more inclusive (i.e. better) science.

NSC, innocent protest vote or gateway party? – The rise of a centrist anti-establishment party in the Netherlands

Centrist anti-establishment parties (CAPs) are an understudied new type of protest party, described as parties with moderate ideological views that use anti-establishment rhetoric and attract protest voters. This article explores voters’ motivations to vote for NSC, a new CAP that won 20 seats in the 2023 Dutch parliamentary elections. Resulting from 14 interviews with voters, three ideal-types can be deduced. The first type is substantive voters, who were attracted to NSC’s ideas about democratic renewal and good governance. These voters exhibit intellectualism and diplomacy when speaking about politics. The second type is affective voters, who voted for NSC because of party leader Omtzigt’s individual work in exposing political scandals. They speak about politics in an emotional, personal manner. Finally, the third type is volatile voters, who chose to vote for NSC due to positive media coverage of the party. They are more casual and less passionate about NSC than other voters. The study finds that NSC voters are resistant to the ‘protest’ label for themselves as voters and NSC as a party, implying that a rethinking of this label is needed when it comes to CAPs and to ‘protest parties’ in general. Based on the literature on protest parties, the study poses the possibility that CAPs could serve as ‘gateway’ parties to more ‘extreme’ protest parties.