'Fousands of voters on the hoof, 'fousands of 'em By Rcmandota - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=62756441

Doesn’t this just test progressive mores? We’ve a finding – published in The Guardian no less as well as Science – that perceived threats to a society or culture make it more authoritarian. There’s even the comment that the strict societal desires of such as the Front National are driven by some – misplaced no doubt – fear of mass immigration and the threat that poses to societal arrangements.

As so often around here this isn’t to say that any part of this argument is correct, nor that it is overall. Rather, let’s assume that it is and see where the logic takes us. Which is, well, if we want a liberal and tolerant society then why would we also have mass immigration?

Here’s the science behind the Brexit vote and Trump’s rise
Michele Gelfand

Well, that’s good, we’d like an explanation for both of those.

My research shows that when people feel threatened they want ‘tighter’ social norms, with profound consequences for politics

OK, sounds reasonable enough. Huddle together like with like when feeling threatened.

My research across hundreds of communities suggests that the fundamental driver of difference is not ideological, financial or geographical – it’s cultural. Behaviour, it turns out, depends a lot on whether the culture in which we live is a “tight” or “loose” one.

Tight cultures have strong norms and little tolerance for deviance, while loose cultures are the opposite.

There’s nothing which seems obviously wrong with this so far at least.

A discovery I and my team published in Science is that the strength of a culture’s norms isn’t random. Though they were separated by miles and, and in some cases centuries, tight cultures as diverse as Sparta and Singapore have something in common: each faced (or faces) a high degree of threat, whether from Mother Nature – disasters, diseases, and food scarcity – or human nature – the chaos caused by invasions and internal conflicts. Strong norms are needed in these contexts to help groups survive. And when we look at loose cultures, from classical Athens to modern New Zealand, we see the opposite pattern: they enjoy the luxury of facing far fewer threats. This safety is used to explore new ideas, accept newcomers, and tolerate a wide range of behaviour. In contexts where there are fewer threats and thus less of a need for coordination, strong norms don’t materialise.

Well, we’re not trying to examine the truth of this, merely the implication if it is true.

Tight-loose differences can explain global patterns of conflict, revolution, terrorism and populism. They operate as a universal faultline, causing cultural cohesion to buckle and rifts to open up. As threats arrive, groups tighten. As they subside, groups loosen. Threats don’t even need to be real. Our experiments show that, as long as people perceive a threat, the perception can be as powerful as objective reality.

Fine, fine. And note that the threat doesn’t have to be real, it just has to be perceived.

Our research confirms that the strongest Trump supporters, as well as the supporters of Marine Le Pen in France, believe their country is threatened, whether by terrorism, illegal immigration, natural disasters or disease. They felt their countries were too loose, and they wanted tighter rules and stricter leaders. Fearful voters also drove the UK’s Brexit decision and the candidacies of far-right or autocratic politicians in Poland, Russia, the Philippines, Austria, Hungary, the Netherlands and Italy.

OK, great. And it’s really not a stretch at all to say that mass immigration is going to be perceived as a threat by some significant portion of the population. Again, note, it doesn’t need to be such a threat – Rotherham hasn’t happened everywhere after all. Perception is what matters here.

Which does leave us with a question really. So, it’s a general presumption of liberals that we’d prefer a liberal and tolerant society, a loose one in this terminology. Which seems to be inconsistent with having the levels of immigration which a significant portion of the population view as a potential threat – again, rightly or wrongly.

So, why is it that the liberals in favour of the loose society also seem to be those so in favour of the immigration which militates against that tolerant and liberal society?

Subscribe to The CT Mailer!

Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
4 Comment threads
2 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
5 Comment authors
Rhoda KlappSpikeBniCSouthernerMrYan Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Rotherham has happened across large swathes of the North. Not everywhere, but many of the places with a high density of the right kind of sky fairy worshippers.


What politicians “perceive” is unknowable. This week we have a politician with a carefully timed perception that a lifetime of trouble in relationships is the fault of a grope by nominee Kavanaugh in high school. What they claim to perceive is clear, and surely a successful claim to the voters of an existential threat to the nation is a precursor to more authoritarian government. (First, easy access to private information — with the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. act of non-authoritarian pussycat G.W. Bush and its Peru-style anonymous anti-terrorism court system — Trump has done nothing comparable.) In general, an effective argument is a… Read more »


It’s like pointing out that the biggest cause of Trump being in power is Obama and Hilary, totally goes over lefties heads


The entire Blame America First coalition lost America in 2016, not just its least likable figureheads. So sweet that Ocasio-Cortez, Liz Warren, and the chick from Boston are back in 2018 to remind us that everything is the fault of the achievers.


The point that Michele Gelfand is drawing here being that unthreatened societies are “loose” or tolerant, but let a threat materialise and they get as tight as a fish’s asshole. I don’t think that Gelfand is aware of what she’s saying.

Rhoda Klapp
Rhoda Klapp

I am bemused by the left’s perception of the authoritarian right, when their entire vision is that of non-voluntary participation in collective effort and of political control of pretty much anything they think is worth taking over for any reason whatsoever. Fairness probably. That’s the thing which justifies taking people’s stuff and forcing them to do what they don’t like.