Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T18:41:58.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Liberals, Conservatives, and Latin America: How Ideology Divides Americans over Immigration and Foreign Aid

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2022

Peter Hays Gries*
Affiliation:
University of Oklahoma
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Based on an original US survey, this article argues that, on average, US conservatives today feel substantially cooler toward Latin American countries than liberals do. They also desire massively tougher Mexico border policies and much less foreign aid than liberals do. Averages can hide substantial differences within groups, however. Not all liberals and conservatives are alike, and their differences shape attitudes toward Latin America. For instance, our survey reveals that libertarians and economic conservatives oppose foreign aid to places like Haiti out of a belief in the Protestant ethic of self-help and opposition to income redistribution. Communitarians and economic liberals, by contrast, are more supportive of foreign aid to Haiti. Cultural conservatives fear the impact of Mexican immigration on Christian values and a WASP American national identity more than cultural liberals do. But race and racism continue to divide Americans the most consistently in their attitudes and policy preferences toward Latin America. The policy implications of ideologically divided public opinion for US immigration reform are also addressed.

Resumen

Resumen

En base a una encuesta original estadounidense, este artículo sostiene que, en promedio, los conservadores estadounidenses tienen una actitud significativamente más fría hacía los países latinoamericanos que los liberales. Además, desean una política sumamente dura con respecto a las pólizas de la frontera con México y mucho menos ayuda internacional en comparación a los liberales. Sin embargo, los promedios pueden esconder diferencias significativas entre los grupos. Distintos tipos de liberales y conservadores se preocupan por distintos temas, lo cual influye diferencias ideológicas generalizadas. Por ejemplo, nuestra encuesta revela que los libertarios y los conservadores en la economía oponen ayuda internacional a países como Haití basado en la creencia en la ética protestante de auto-ayuda, y en la oposición a la redistributión de ingresos en términos generales. Los comunitarios y los liberales en la economía, por lo contrario, muestran más apoyo a la ayuda internacional a Haití. También, los conservadores culturales temen el impacto de la inmigración Mexicana en los valores cristianos y la identidad nacional estadounidense WASP (white Anglo-Saxon Protestant) más que los liberales. Sin embargo, es el racismo que sigue en polarizar a los estadounidenses de manera consistente en las actitudes y las preferencias políticas hacía América Latina. También se aborda el tema de las implicaciones políticas para la reforma migratoria de la opinión pública dividida ideológicamente.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 by the Latin American Studies Association

References

Altemeyer, Robert 1996 The Authoritarian Specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Rivers, Douglas 2013Cooperative Survey Research.” Annual Review of Political Science 16:307329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, Bill, Cushing, with Robert G. 2008 The Big Sort: Why The Clustering of Like-Minded America Is Tearing Us Apart. New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Phillip, Miller, Warren, and Stokes, Donald 1960 The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Chicago Council on Global Affairs 2010 Constrained Internationalism: Adapting to New Realities. Chicago: Chicago Council on Global Affairs.Google Scholar
Chicago Council on Global Affairs 2012 Foreign Policy in the New Millennium. Chicago: Chicago Council on Global Affairs.Google Scholar
Converse, Phillip E. 1964The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics.” In Ideology and Discontent, edited by Apter, David E., 206261. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Duckitt, John, Bizumic, Boris, Krauss, Stephen W., and Heled, Edna 2010A Tripartite Approach to Right-Wing Authoritarianism: The Authoritarianism-Conservatism-Traditionalism Model.” Political Psychology 31 (5): 685715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duckitt, John, and Sibley, Chris G. 2007Right Wing Authoritarianism, Social Dominance Orientation and the Dimensions of Generalized Prejudice.” European Journal of Personality 21 (2): 113130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, Stanley, and Johnston, Christopher 2014Understanding the Determinants of Political Ideology: Implications of Structural Complexity.” Political Psychology 35 (3): 337358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 2009 Disconnect: The Breakdown of Representation in American Politics. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P., Abrams, Samuel J., and Pope, Jeremy C. 2011 Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America. 3rd ed. Boston: Longman.Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan T. 2012 Envy Up, Scorn Down: How Status Divides Us. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Fuchs, Lawrence H. 1990 The American Kaleidoscope: Race, Ethnicity and Civic Culture. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
GOP, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus 2012Republican Platform: We Believe in America.” https://cdn.gop.com/docs/2012GOPPlatform.pdf.Google Scholar
Graham, Jesse, Haidt, Jonathan, and Nosek, Brian 2009Liberals and Conservatives Rely on Different Sets of Moral Foundations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96 (5): 10291046.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gries, Peter H. 2014aRed China and the ‘Yellow Peril’: How Ideology Divides Americans over China.” Journal of East Asian Studies 14:317346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Peter H. 2014b The Politics of American Foreign Policy: How Ideology Divides Liberals and Conservatives over Foreign Affairs. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Peter H. 2015How Ideology Divides American Liberals and Conservatives over Israel.” Political Science Quarterly 130 (1): 5178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Peter H. 2016Does Ideology Matter?Social Science Quarterly. DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12276.Google Scholar
Hayes, Andrew F. 2013 Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Holden, Robert H., and Zolov, Eric, eds. 2011 Latin America and the United States: A Documentary History. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hunt, Michael H. 2009 Ideology and U.S. Foreign Policy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Huntington, Samuel P. 2004 Who Are We? The Challenges to America's National Identity. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Jost, John T. 2006The End of the End of Ideology.” American Psychologist 61 (7): 651670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kohut, Andrew, and Stokes, Bruce 2006 America against the World: How We Are Different and Why We Are Disliked. New York: Times Books.Google Scholar
Luck, Edward C. 1999 Mixed Messages: American Politics and International Organization, 1919–1999. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
McIntyre, Michelle 2007The Abortion/Illegal Immigration Link: Not What You May Think.” Reagan Wing blog, February 5.Google Scholar
Mehrabian, Albert 1996Relations among Political Attitudes, Personality, and Psychopathology Assessed with New Measures of Libertarianism and Conservatism.” Basic and Applied Social Psychology 18 (4): 469491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noer, Thomas 2003Segregationists and the World: The Foreign Policy of the White Resistance.” In Windows on Freedom: Race, Civil Rights, and Foreign Affairs, 1945–1988, edited by Plummer, Brenda Gayle, 141162. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
O'Neil, Shannon K. 2013 Two Nations Indivisible: Mexico, the United States, and the Road Ahead. New York: Oxford.Google Scholar
O'Reilly, Bill 2006 Culture Warrior. New York: Broadway Books.Google Scholar
Osterlind, Steven J. 2006 Modern Measurement: Theory, Principles and Applications of Mental Appraisal. New York: Pearson.Google Scholar
Page, Benjamin, Bouton, with Marshall 2006 The Foreign Policy Disconnect: What Americans Want from Our Leaders but Don't Get. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, Susan 2014 “GOP Senator Warns of Violence after Immigration Order.” USA Today, Nov. 20.Google Scholar
Paul, Ron 2008 The Revolution: A Manifesto. New York: Grand Central Publishing.Google Scholar
Phillips-Fein, Kim 2009 Invisible Hands: The Making of the Conservative Movement from the New Deal to Reagan. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Rathbun, Brian C. 2012 Trust in International Cooperation: The Creation of International Security Institutions and the Domestic Politics of American Multilateralism. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rucker, Derek D., Preacher, Kristopher J., Tormala, Zakary L., and Petty, Richard E. 2011Mediation Analysis in Social Psychology: Current Practices and New Recommendations.” Social and Personality Psychology Compass 5 (6): 359371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidanius, Jim, and Pratto, Felicia 1999 Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silver, Nate 2012As Swing Districts Dwindle, Can a Divided House Stand?” FiveThirtyEight Blog, December 27.Google Scholar
Treier, Shawn, and Hillygus, D. Sunshine 2009The Nature of Political Ideology in the Contemporary Electorate.” Public Opinion Quarterly 73 (4): 679703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weeks, Gregory B., and Weeks, John R. 2009 Irresistible Forces: Latin American Migration to the United States and Its Effects on the South. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
Wood, Thomas, and Oliver, Eric 2012Toward a More Reliable Implementation of Ideology in Measures of Public Opinion.” Public Opinion Quarterly 76 (4): 636662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar