IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v103y2022i4p773-788.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The new culture wars: Why critical race theory matters more than cancel culture

Author

Listed:
  • Eric Kaufmann

Abstract

Background A set of ‘New Culture Wars’ over questions of majority identity protection and free speech have become important in American politics, but have not received attention from empirical political science Objective Compare the relative size of partisan differences on issues of ‘Cancel Culture’ and ‘Critical Race Theory’. Method Logistic regression models using attitudes toward real‐world Cancel Culture and Critical Race Theory examples to predict partisanship. Results Data show that Republican voters are no more likely to fear career consequences or dismissal for speech than Democrats. Republicans are also more opposed to teaching critical perspectives on race and history in schools than they are to employees being fired for dissenting speech within organizations. Strong white identifiers are both more opposed to diversity training which emphasizes white racism and less opposed to firing people for disputed cases of racist or sexist speech. Conclusion Due to the distinctive moral foundations of conservative voters, this paper argues that perceived attacks on white and American identity are a more powerful source of grievance for Republican voters than concerns over freedom of expression. It is hypothesized that the conservative moral foundation of group loyalty helps to explain these findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric Kaufmann, 2022. "The new culture wars: Why critical race theory matters more than cancel culture," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 103(4), pages 773-788, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:103:y:2022:i:4:p:773-788
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.13156
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13156
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.13156?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reny, Tyler T. & Newman, Benjamin J., 2021. "The Opinion-Mobilizing Effect of Social Protest against Police Violence: Evidence from the 2020 George Floyd Protests," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 115(4), pages 1499-1507, November.
    2. Thomas M. Carsey & Geoffrey C. Layman, 2006. "Changing Sides or Changing Minds? Party Identification and Policy Preferences in the American Electorate," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(2), pages 464-477, April.
    3. Liesbet Hooghe, 2007. "What Drives Euroskepticism?," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(1), pages 5-12, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kehrberg Jason, 2020. "Authoritarianism, Prejudice, and Support for Welfare Chauvinism in the United States," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 195-212, December.
    2. Kevin Deegan-Krause & Zsolt Enyedi, 2010. "Agency and the Structure of Party Competition: Alignment, Stability and the Role of Political Elites," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 9, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    3. Arifovic, Jasmina & Eaton, B. Curtis & Walker, Graeme, 2015. "The coevolution of beliefs and networks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 46-63.
    4. Christos Mavridis & Orestis Troumpounis & Maurizio Zanardi, 2022. "Protests and Police Militarization," School of Economics Discussion Papers 0122, School of Economics, University of Surrey.
    5. Yarrow Dunham & Antonio A. Arechar & David G. Rand, 2019. "From foe to friend and back again: The temporal dynamics of intra-party bias in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(3), pages 373-380, May.
    6. Charlotte Cavaillé & Karine van Der Straeten & Daniel L. Chen, 2023. "Willingness to Say? Optimal Survey Design for Prediction," Working Papers hal-04062637, HAL.
    7. Elizabeth U. Cascio & Na'ama Shenhav, 2020. "A Century of the American Woman Voter: Sex Gaps in Political Participation, Preferences, and Partisanship since Women's Enfranchisement," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 24-48, Spring.
    8. Shyam Gouri Suresh & Scott Jeffrey, 2017. "The Consequences of Social Pressures on Partisan Opinion Dynamics," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 43(2), pages 242-259, March.
    9. John E. Jackson & Bogdan W. Mach & Jennifer L. Miller-Gonzalez, 2011. "Buying support and regime change: the evolution of Polish attitudes towards the EU and voting between accession and 2008," European Union Politics, , vol. 12(2), pages 147-167, June.
    10. Iuliana-Lacramioara TINCU, 2017. "Public Support For The European Union In The Current Context: Preliminary Remarks," CrossCultural Management Journal, Fundația Română pentru Inteligența Afacerii, Editorial Department, issue 2, pages 155-159, December.
    11. Brian Burgoon, 2013. "Inequality and anti-globalization backlash by political parties," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(3), pages 408-435, September.
    12. IGARASHI Akira & MIWA Hirofumi & ONO Yoshikuni, 2022. "How Do Racial Cues Affect Attitudes toward Immigrants in a Racially Homogeneous Country? Evidence from a survey experiment in Japan," Discussion papers 22091, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    13. Stephen Wu, 2018. "The Effects of Cueing and Framing on Youth Attitudes towards Gun Control and Gun Rights," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-18, February.
    14. Michael Peress, 2013. "Candidate positioning and responsiveness to constituent opinion in the U.S. House of Representatives," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 77-94, July.
    15. Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde & João V. Ferreira, 2020. "Conflicted voters: A spatial voting model with multiple party identifications," Post-Print hal-02909682, HAL.
    16. Alan S. Gerber & Gregory A. Huber & Ebonya Washington, 2009. "Party Affiliation, Partisanship, and Political Beliefs: A Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 15365, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:3:p:373-380 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Ferdik, Frank & Frogge, George & Cooney, Mikaela, 2022. "Exploring further determinants of citizen satisfaction with the police: The role of strain," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    19. Paul Goren & Christopher M. Federico & Miki Caul Kittilson, 2009. "Source Cues, Partisan Identities, and Political Value Expression," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(4), pages 805-820, October.
    20. Mirko Seithe & Lena Calahorrano, 2014. "Analysing Party Preferences Using Google Trends," CESifo Working Paper Series 4631, CESifo.
    21. Shyam Gouri Suresh & Scott Jeffrey, 2017. "The Consequences of Social Pressures on Partisan Opinion Dynamics," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 43(2), pages 242-259, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:103:y:2022:i:4:p:773-788. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.