Does a Nationalist Card Make for a Weak Hand?

• Author: Stephen Bloom
• Date: 01 March 2012
• DOI: 10.1177/1065912910388187
• Published date: 01 March 2012
• Subject Matter: Articles

Political Research Quarterly

65(1) 166 –178

© 2012 University of Utah

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1065912910388187

http://prq.sagepub.com

XXX10.1177/1065912910388187BloomPolitical Research Quarterly

1Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL, USA

Corresponding Author:

Stephen Bloom, Southern Illinois University, Department of Political

Science, 1000 Faner Drive MC 4501, Carbondale, IL 62901-4501

Email: bloom@siu.edu

Does a Nationalist Card Make

for a Weak Hand? Economic

Decline and Shared Pain

Stephen Bloom1

Abstract

This article tests theories of group threat, competition, contact, and shared pain. The author argues that economic

downturns undermine rather than increase support for prejudice. The absolute pain of a recession is felt by all groups

in society, even if the relative costs are often distributed unevenly across groups. While nationalists can scapegoat

minorities for economic woes, competing elites have incentives to adopt economic frames that focus on individual

suffering. Empirical support comes from a subnational research design that includes quantitative data from Latvia’s 565

localities and from a qualitative analysis of the framing techniques adopted by Latvian political parties.

Keywords

prejudice, nationalism, ethnic politics, framing, group threat, contact, competition, shared pain.

Long-standing debates persist in the social sciences over

the effects that increased contact and worsening eco-

nomic conditions have on intergroup relations. The contact

hypothesis points to possible beneficial outcomes from

the mixing of diverse individuals (Allport 1956; Forbes

1997). Group threat theory, however, suggests the oppo-

site (Quillian 1995). As the minority presence rises, a cor-

responding reaction from the majority population is likely

to build. Group threat scholars also claim that worsening

economic conditions favor politicians who scapegoat

minorities for economic problems (Blumer 1958). Finally,

competition theorists contend that it is the combination of

large minority populations and hard economic times that

fuels ethnic mobilization and conflict, as groups compete

for scarce jobs and services (Olzak 1992).

Two main research designs have been adopted to test

aspects of group threat, competition, and contact. First,

survey research has been used to explain levels of preju-

dice and the extent of out-group contact. Second, multi-

level research techniques that combine individual-level

survey responses with country-level or regional data have

been employed. The goal of such research is to incorpo-

rate more concrete measures of the contextual factors that

affect prejudice than can be gained from survey questions

alone. Most of the empirical work has been conducted on

race relations in the United States (Sears and Kinder

1985; Fossett and Kiecolt 1989) and anti-immigrant poli-

tics in Western Europe (Quillian 1995; McLaren 2003).

Existing studies have produced contradictory findings.

Starting with the pioneering work of V. O. Key, Jr. (1949),

students of American racial politics have found that prej-

udice among white Americans rises together with the

black population (Glaser 1994; Taylor 1998). McLaren

(2003), on the other hand, demonstrates some support for

the contact hypothesis in Western Europe, suggesting

that individuals without minority friends are more likely

to hold prejudiced views. Jackman and Volpert (1996)

find that higher rates of unemployment strengthened the

vote for European extreme right parties. Schissel, Wanner,

and Frideres (1989), however, suggest a weak link between

unemployment and anti-immigrant sentiment across

Canadian cities.

In this article, I propose an alterative subnational

research design to test theories of group threat, competi-

tion, and contact. There are a number of reasons why this

alternative research design provides a better method to test

these competing theories. First, the use of subnational data

from one country offers more control over potential lurk-

ing historical or cultural explanations, which are routinely

raised with respect to cross-national research (R. Snyder

2001). Second, disaggregated data provide more variance

on key independent variables of interest than the country-

level or regional data found in cross-national or multilevel