Advertisement

Acta Politica

, Volume 49, Issue 2, pp 123–143 | Cite as

An asymmetric group relation? An investigation into public perceptions of education-based groups and the support for populism

  • Bram Spruyt
Original Article

Abstract

This article attempts to advance the recent discussion in this journal about the alleged growth of a ‘diploma democracy’ by introducing insights from theory of group relations, as well as presenting new empirical data. At the theoretical level, we argue that the relationship between the higher and lower educated should be seen as an asymmetric group relation. Such a relationship is unlikely to result in open educational conflict, without implying the complete absence of frustrations and tensions between groups defined on the obtained educational level. At the empirical level, we report on the results of a survey project in Flanders, allowing us to investigate to what extent the public opinion perceives educational conflict and demonstrate that this perception is consistently related to support for a core element of contemporary populism.

Keywords

education group relations populism 

References

  1. Abercrombie, N. and Turner, B.S. (1978) The dominant ideology thesis. British Journal of Sociology 29 (2): 149–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Achterberg, P. and Houtman, D. (2009) Ideologically illogical? Why do the lower-educated Dutch display so little value coherence? Social Forces 87 (3): 1649–1670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bechhofer, F., Elliott, B. and McCrone, D. (1978) Structure, consciousness and action: A sociological profile of the British middle class. British Journal of Sociology 29 (4): 410–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Betz, H.-G. (1990) Politics of resentment: Right-wing radicalism in West Germany. Comparative Politics 23 (1): 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bonilla-Silva, E.L.A. and Embrick, D.G. (2004) ‘I did not get that job because of a black many’: The story lines and testimonies of color-blind racism. Sociological Forum 19 (4): 555–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P. (1984 [1979]) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bourdieu, P. (1990) Sociology in Question. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Bovens, M. and Wille, A. (2010) The education gap in political participation and its political consequences. Acta Politica 45 (4): 393–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bovens, M. and Wille, A. (2011) Diplomademocratie. Over de spanning tussen meritocratie en democratie. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Uitgeverij Bert Bakker.Google Scholar
  10. Canovan, M. (1984) ‘People’, politicians and populism. Government and Opposition 19 (3): 312–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Canovan, M. (1999) Trust the people! Populism and the two faces of democracy. Political Studies 47 (1): 2–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Centers, R. (1961 [1949]) The Psychology of Social Classes: A Study of Class Consciousness. New York: Russell and Russell.Google Scholar
  13. Claeys, J., Sanctobin, S. and Spruyt, B. (2011) Technisch verslag SNEL 2010 onderzoek. Brussel, Belgium: Onderzoeksgroep TOR.Google Scholar
  14. Cuneo, C.J. (1996) International images of social inequality: A ten-country comparison. In: A. Frizzel and J.H. Pammett (eds.) Social Inequality in Canada. Ottowa, Canada: Carleton, pp. 31–66.Google Scholar
  15. Dekker, P. and Van der Meer, T. (2009) Opleidingsverschillen verder onderzocht. In: P. Dekker, T. Van der Meer, P. Schyns and E. Steenvoorden (eds.) Crisis in aantocht? Den Haag, the Netherlands: SCP, pp. 135–152.Google Scholar
  16. Derks, A. (2001) Individualisme Zonder Verhaal. Brussel, Belgium: VUB Press.Google Scholar
  17. Derks, A. (2006) Populism and the ambivalence of egalitarianism: How do the underprivileged reconcile a right wing party preference with their socio-economic attitudes? World Political Science Review 2 (3): 175–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Diani, M. (1996) Linking mobilization frames and political opportunities: Insights from regional populism. American Sociological Review 61 (6): 1053–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Emler, N. and Frazer, E. (1999) Politics: The education effect. Oxford Review of Education 25 (1–2): 251–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Elchardus, M. and Spruyt, B. (2012) The contemporary contradictions of egalitarianism: An empirical analysis of the relationship between the old and the new left/right alignments. European Political Science Review 4 (2): 217–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gesthuizen, M., De Graaf, P.M. and Kraaykamp, G. (2005) The changing family background of the low-educated in the Netherlands: Socio-economic, cultural, and socio-demographic resources. European Sociological Review 21 (5): 441–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gurin, P., Miller, A.H. and Gurin, G. (1980) Stratum identification and consciousness. Social Psychology Quarterly 43 (1): 30–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hakhverdian, A., van der Brug, W. and de Vries, C. (2012) The emergence of a ‘diploma democracy’? The political education gap in the Netherlands, 1971–2010. Acta Politica 47 (3): 229–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hogg, M.A. (2000) Subjective uncertainty reduction through self-categorization: A motivational theory of social identity processes. European Review of Social Psychology 11 (1): 223–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hogg, M.A., Hohmann, Z.P. and Rivera, J.E. (2008) Why do people join groups? Three motivational accounts from social psychology. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 2 (3): 1269–1280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jackman, M.R. (1994) The Velvet Glove: Paternalism and Conflict in Gender, Class, and Race Relations. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  27. Jackman, M.R. and Muha, M.J. (1984) Education and intergroup attitudes: Moral enlightenment, superficial democratic commitment, or ideological refinement? American Sociological Review 49 (6): 751–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jackson, J.W. (1993) Realistic group conflict theory: A review and evaluation of the theoretical and empirical literature. The Psychological Record 43 (3): 395–413.Google Scholar
  29. Jagers, J. and Walgrave, S. (2007) Populism as political communications style: An empirical study of political parties’ discourse in Belgium. European Journal of Political Research 46 (3): 319–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jansen, R.S. (2011) Populist mobilization: A new theoretical approach to populism. Sociological Theory 29 (2): 75–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lucardie, P. (2010) Tussen establishment en extremisme: Populistische partijen in Nederland en Vlaanderen. Res Publica 52 (2): 149–172.Google Scholar
  32. Mény, Y. and Surel, Y. (2002) Democracies and the Populist Challenge. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mudde, C. (2004) The populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition 39 (4): 541–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Panizza, F. (2005) Introduction: Populism and the mirror of democracy. In: F. Panizza (ed.) Populism and the Mirror of Democracy. London: Verso, pp. 1–31.Google Scholar
  35. Pasquino, G. (2008) Populism and democracy. In: D. Albertazzi and D. McDonnell (eds.) Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 15–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Quintelier, E. (2007) Differences in political participation between young and old people. Contemporary Politics 13 (2): 165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ridder, J.D. and Dekker, P. (2011) Opvattingen over sociale mobiliteit en opleidingsverschillen. Den Haag, the Netherlands: Raad voor Maatschappelijke Ontwikkeling.Google Scholar
  38. Rooduijn, M., de Lange, S. and Van Der Brug, W. (2012) A populist Zeitgeist? Programmic contagion by populist parties in Western Europe. Party Politics, in press. doi: 10.1177/1354068811436065.Google Scholar
  39. Solga, H. (2002) ‘Stigmatization by negative selection’: Explaining less-educated people’s decreasing employment opportunities. European Sociological Review 18 (2): 159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Spruyt, B. (2012) Ongeschoold maakt onbemind: Een thematische inhoudsanalyse van de voorstelling van laag- en hooggeschoolden in twee Vlaamse kranten. Tijdschrift voor Communicatiewetenschap 40 (3): 251–270.Google Scholar
  41. Stanley, B. (2008) The thin ideology of populism. Journal of Political Ideologies 13 (1): 95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stubager, R. (2009) Education-based group identity and consciousness in the authoritarian-libertarian value conflict. European Journal of Political Research 48 (2): 204–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Taggart, P. (2002) Populism and the pathology of representative politics. In: Y. Mény and Y. Surel (eds.) Democracies and the Populist Challenge. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 62–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C. (1986) The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In: S. Worchel and W.G. Austin (eds.) Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Chicago, IL: Nelson Hall, pp. 7–24.Google Scholar
  45. Waterborg, J., Lucas, K. and Lindeboom, G.-J. (2012) Tensions between meritocracy and democracy? A reply to the diploma democracy thesis. Acta Politica 47 (3): 248–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wiles, P. (1969) A syndrome, not a doctrine: Some elementary theses on populism. In: G. Ionesco and E. Gellner (eds.) Populism. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, pp. 166–179.Google Scholar
  47. Zinn, H. (1968) Disobedience and Democracy: Nine Fallacies on Law and Order. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bram Spruyt
    • 1
  1. 1.Sociology, Research Group TOR, Vrije Universiteit BrusselBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations