This paper benefited from so many great colleagues that commented, criticized and encouraged us, including @freitagmarkus.bsky.social, @alinazumbrunn.bsky.social , @rdassonneville.bsky.social, @rlachat.bsky.social, @dieterstiers.bsky.social, @dafnoukos.bsky.social , @twoeffray.bsky.social ...

Perceptions of disadvantage may erode the attitudinal core of liberal democracy. This makes it easier for authoritarian politicians to undermine democratic institutions and norms. Addressing SGRD has crucial implications for the stability and health of democracy.

Our findings are based on survey and panel data from six European countries that are considered stable democracies. Thus, our study has crucial implication! Perceptions of disadvantage matter! It is not only objective circumstances that undermine citizens support for democracy!

Our analyses offer a nuanced but not optimistic picture. While SGRD does not undermine citizens' preference for democracy as the most preferable regime, it increases their openness to autocratic alternatives. If steadfast democrats are those that reject autocracy, this is not good news!

Furthermore, autocratic alternatives are particularly attractive to individuals suffering from SGRD as these alternatives offer confrontational intergroup relations and performance-driven legitimacy as coping strategies to overcome perceived disadvantages. They seem more attractive than democracy.

In our paper, we argue that subjective group relative deprivation (SGRD) undermines support for democracy. SGRD fuels disaffection with and resentment against the prevailing democratic system as it is unable to fulfil its fundamental pledges. SGRD makes people question the legitimacy of democracy.

Yet, we always wondered whether the effects of relative deprivation also undermine the attitudinal basis of democracy: diffuse support for democracy. If that is the case, relative deprivation does not only strengthen anti-democratic actors, but also democracy's foundation.

We depart from previous research that shows subjective disadvantages to be a driver of radical voting and exclusionary attitudes. Among many other great scholars, both Steffen (tinyurl.com/26nexz2s) and I (tinyurl.com/2s3jv494) had contributed to this line of research.

Steffen Wamsler and I have a new paper in @ejprjournal.bsky.social !

We show that citizens who perceive their in-group to be disadvantaged express lower support for democracy and higher openness towards authoritarian alternatives!

tinyurl.com/y78hj253 @espol-lab.bsky.social @lifbi.bsky.social

Join us tomorrow for a great presentation in the second session of the Comparative Politics Online Series by Annika Lindholm who is presenting her paper «Does inequality bother us, "the people"? The inequality attitudes of populist radical right voter»
@twoeffray.bsky.social