The Impact of Affective Polarization on Preferences for Redistributive Policies: Evidence from Cross-National Survey Data

This study examines the impact of affective polarization on democratic resilience by analyzing its influence on redistributive policy preferences. While prior research explores links between economic inequality and polarization, less attention has been given to how affective polarization shapes public support for social welfare policies. This study argues that as affective polarization intensifies, it weakens collective notions of fairness and solidarity, reducing support for redistributive policies such as progressive taxation and social welfare programs. Heightened partisan divisions may lead individuals to prioritize in-group members when considering access to state resources, reinforcing exclusionary economic attitudes and contributing to democratic erosion. Additionally, this study contends that the relationship between affective polarization and preferences for redistribution is contingent on individuals' support for democracy, as stronger democratic commitment may mitigate the negative effects of polarization on redistributive attitudes. Using cross-national data from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES), this paper empirically tests these hypotheses at both the individual and aggregate levels for the period between 1996 and 2023 for advanced economically democratic countries. By exploring how affective polarization interacts with perceptions of fairness and economic hardship, this study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the mechanisms linking emotional biases, ideological context, and policy preferences—particularly in polarized and economically strained environments. Furthermore, by examining the interaction effects between affective polarization, democratic support, and redistributive preferences, this study offers an empirical contribution to the study of democratic erosion, shedding light on the conditions under which polarization exacerbates or mitigates threats to democratic governance.