Professors Nella Van Dyke, Kyle Dodson, and Paul Almeida, along with UC Merced sociology undergraduate student Jaqueline Novoa, have published a new article in American Behavioral Scientist. The study examines the influence of radical rightwing movements on congressional actions in the context of the 2020 U.S. presidential election certification. From the article:
At times, radicalized rightwing movements may influence political institutions to the point of weakening core democratic practices and promoting the tools of autocrats. We advance a theory of social movement partyism, arguing that formal political parties and social movements may forge an alliance through a relational opportunity-mobilization exchange, whereby the party provides political opportunities to the movement and the movement offers a highly energized base of support. In this environment, elected officials will be moved to take action in the electoral arena consistent with movement goals. We use a quantitative dataset at the House District level to examine the impact of the hate movement on members of Congress voting to object to certifying the presidential election results on January 6, 2021, net of a host of individual and social contextual variables. We find Congress members from districts with high levels of hate movement organizations, especially those formed in the Trump era, were more likely to object to the election results. We provide a reliability check using a model looking at additional measures of anti-democratic activity and autocratic tools. Our results provide strong support for our contention that social movement partyism involving an extremist movement influenced recent anti-democratic and authoritarian actions on the part of elected officials in the United States.
Read the full article, titled "Social Movement Partyism and Congressional Opposition to Certifying the 2020 Presidential Election Results in the United States" here.
