Advertisement

French Politics

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 233–268 | Cite as

‘Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose’: The evolution and the structure of attitudes toward economic liberalism in France between 1990 and 2008

  • Adrien DegeorgesEmail author
  • Frédéric Gonthier
Research Article

Abstract

Many findings have documented the movements of aggregate public opinion on economic liberalism over time. By combining a series of EVS items, we point out that the French grew more skeptical of market capitalism well before the beginning of the Great Recession, and that all income and ideological groups have moved in parallel between 1990 and 2008. Yet by examining the extent to which individual-level differences can mirror the dynamics of politics and inequalities, we show that income does not influence statist attitudes equally on the right and on the left. Ideology thus appears to be a good predictor of attitudes toward economic liberalism and a powerful moderator of the influence of income. Finally, we suggest that the coexistence of different attitude dimensions might explain why the public's demand for redistribution has often been disconnected from election outcomes in France.

Keywords

economic liberalism welfare attitudes economic inequality policy mood parallel publics multiple correspondence analysis 

References

  1. Arts, W. and Gelissen, J. (2001) Welfare states, solidarity and justice principles: Does the type really matters? Acta Sociologica 44 (4): 283–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benzécri, J.-P. (1973) L’Analyse des Données. Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
  3. Bourdieu, P. (1984) Questions de sociologie. Paris: Les éditions de minuit.Google Scholar
  4. Braudel, F. (1986) Civilisation matérielle, économie et capitalisme. (Tome 2) Les jeux de l’échange. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
  5. Bréchon, P. and Galland, O. (eds.) (2010) Individualisation et individualisme. In: L’individualisation des valeurs. Paris: Armand Colin, pp. 13–30.Google Scholar
  6. Campbell, A., Converse, P.E., Miller, W.E. and Stokes, D.E. (1960) The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Cautrès, B. and Mayer, N. (2010) Analyse multidimensionnelle de la classe sociale et de ses effets. In: D. Boy, B. Cautrèsand and N. Sauger (eds.) Les Français, des Européens comme les autres? Paris: Presses de Sciences Po, pp. 153–179.Google Scholar
  8. Champagne, P. (1990) Faire l’opinion. Le nouveau jeu politique. Paris: Les éditions de minuit.Google Scholar
  9. Chanvril, F. (2009) How to deal with scales from 0 to 10 in Geometric Data Analysis? The case of the European Social Survey. Paper presented at the ESRA Conference; 30 June, Warsaw, Poland.Google Scholar
  10. Chiche, J., Le Roux, B., Perrineau, P. and Rouanet, H. (2000) L’espace politique des électeurs français à la fin des années 1990. Revue française de science politique 50 (3): 463–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cibois, P. (1983) L’analyse de données en sociologie. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  12. Converse, P.E. and Pierce, R. (1986) Political Representation in France. Cambridge, MA: Belknap, Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cotis, J.-P. (eds.) (2009) Partage de la valeur ajoutée, partage des profits et écarts de rémunérations en France. Paris: INSEE.Google Scholar
  14. Dargent, C. (2006) Attitudes morales, attitudes économiques et orientation politique en Europe. Revue française de sociologie 47 (3): 785–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dargent, C. and Gonthier, F. (2010) Attitudes économiques: la double déroute du libéralisme? In: P. Bréchon and O. Galland (eds.) L’individualisation des valeurs. Paris: Armand Colin, pp. 83–101.Google Scholar
  16. Denord, F. (2007) Néo-libéralisme version française. Histoire d’une idéologie politique. Paris: Demopolis.Google Scholar
  17. Dubar, C. (1991) La socialisation. Construction des identités sociales et professionnelles. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar
  18. Dubet, F., Caillet, V., Cortéséro, R., Mélo, D. and Rault, F. (2006) Injustices. L’expérience des inégalités au travail. Paris: Le Seuil.Google Scholar
  19. Duru-Bellat, M. (2009) Le mérite contre la justice. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.Google Scholar
  20. Enns, P.K. and Kellstedt, P.M. (2008) Policy mood and political sophistication: Why everybody moves mood. British Journal of Political Science 38 (3): 433–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Erikson, R.S., MacKuen, M.B. and Stimson, J.A. (2002) The Macro Polity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Esping Andersen, G. (1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press & Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Feldman, S. (1988) Structure and consistency in public opinion: The role of core beliefs and values. American Journal of Political Science 32 (2): 416–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fleury, C. and Lewis-Beck, M.S. (1993) Anchoring the French voter: Ideology versus party. The Journal of Politics 55 (4): 1100–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gonthier, F. (2011) Quel rôle de l’Etat? Lutte contre les inégalités et intervention dans l’économie. In: M. Forsé and O. Galland (eds.) Les Français face aux inégalités et à la justice sociale. Paris: Armand Colin, pp. 234–244.Google Scholar
  26. Greenacre, M.J. and Pardo, R. (2006) Subset correspondence analysis: Visualizing relationships among a selected set of response categories from a questionnaire survey. Sociological Methods and Research 35 (2): 193–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Haegel, F. (1990) Le lien partisan. In: D. Boy and N. Mayer (eds.) L’électeur français en questions. Paris: Presses de la Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques.Google Scholar
  28. Hasenfeld, Y. and Rafferty, J.A. (1989) The determinants of public attitudes toward the welfare state. Social Forces 67 (4): 1027–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jennings, M.K. and Niemi, R.G. (1968) The transmission of political values from parent to child. American Political Science Review 62 (1): 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jobert, B. (ed.) (1994) Le tournant néo-libéral en Europe. Idées et recettes dans les pratiques gouvernementales. Paris, France: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  31. Kelly, N.J. and Enns, P.K. (2010) Inequality and the dynamics of public opinion: The self-reinforcing link between economic inequality and mass preferences. The American Journal of Political Science 54 (4): 855–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. La confiance dans tous ses états : les dimensions économiques, institutionnelles, sociétales et individuelles de la confiance. (2011) Cahiers du CEVIPOF, (54). Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.Google Scholar
  33. Landais, C. (2008) Top incomes in France (1998–2006): Booming inequalities? Paris School of Economics, http://www.stanford.edu/~landais/cgi-bin/Articles/topincomes.pdf, accessed 25 January 2011.
  34. Lebaron, F. (2010) La crise de la croyance économique. Bellecombe-en-Bauges, France: Le Croquant.Google Scholar
  35. Le Roux, B. and Rouanet, H. (2004) Geometric Data Analysis. From Correspondence Analysis to Structured Data Analysis. Dordrecht, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  36. Le Roux, B. and Rouanet, H. (2009) Multiple Correspondence Analysis. Quantitative Application in the Social Sciences. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  37. Mayer, N. (2002) Ces Français qui votent Le Pen. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
  38. Michelat, G. and Simon, M. (1977) Religion, class and politics. Comparative Politics 10 (1): 159–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Michelat, G. and Simon, M. (2011) Inquiétudes, dynamiques idéologiques, attitudes politiques: quoi de neuf? In TNS-Sofres. L’état de l’opinion 2011. Paris: Seuil, pp. 137–164.Google Scholar
  40. Page, B. and Shapiro, B. (1992) The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans’ Policy Preferences. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Percheron, A. (1977) Ideological proximity among French children: Problems of definition and measurement. European Journal of Political Research 5 (1): 53–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Polanyi, K. (1944) The Great Transformation. New York: Rinehart.Google Scholar
  43. Schweisguth, E. (2007) Le trompe-l’œil de la droitisation. Revue française de science politique 57 (3): 393–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schweisguth, E. (2010) Changement des valeurs et changements politiques. In: P. Bréchon and O. Galland (eds.) L’individualisation des valeurs. Paris: Armand Colin, pp. 177–196.Google Scholar
  45. Sears, D.O., Hensler, C.P. and Speer, L.K. (1979) Whites’ opposition to ‘busing’: Self-interest or symbolic politics? American Political Science Review 73 (2): 369–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Soroka, S.N. and Wlezien, C. (2008) On the limits to inequality in representation. PS: Political Science & Politics 41 (2): 319–327.Google Scholar
  47. Stimson, J.A. (1999) Public Opinion in America. Moods, Cycles and Swings. Oxford, UK: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  48. Stimson, J.A., Tiberj, V. and Thiébaut, C. (2010) Le mood, un nouvel instrument au service de l’analyse dynamique des opinions. Application aux évolutions de la xénophobie en France (1990–2009). Revue française de science politique 60 (5): 901–926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Svallfors, S. (1997) Worlds of welfare and attitudes to redistribution: A comparison of Eight Western nations. European Sociological Review 13 (3): 233–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tiberj, V. (2011) Les valeurs sociales et économiques de l’électorat. 18 November, https://sites.google.com/a/iepg.fr/trielec/resultats-analyses/enquetes-pre-electorales/vague-2---october-2011/lesvaleurssocialeseteconomiquesdel%E2%80%99electorat, accessed 25 January 2011.
  51. Ura, J.D. and Ellis, C.R. (2008) Income, preferences, and the dynamics of policy responsiveness. PS: Political Science & Politics 41 (4): 785–794.Google Scholar
  52. Van der Waal, J., Achterberg, P., Houtman, D., de Koster, W. and Manevska, K. (2010) ‘Some are more equal than others’: Economic egalitarianism and welfare chauvinism in the Netherlands. Journal of European Social Policy 20 (4): 350–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zaller, J.R. (1992) The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre d’etudes europeennes de sciences PoParisFrance
  2. 2.Institut d’Etudes Politiques de GrenobleSaint-Martin-d’HèresFrance

Personalised recommendations