Space Will Tear Us Apart: Ethnic Identity, Political Geography and Democracy

Burcu Kolcak

How and when does ethnic identity constrain the public’s willingness to safeguard democracy? Existing research demonstrates that citizens' commitment for democratic practices and norms, when framed in abstract terms, does not necessarily translate into their revealed preferences. This becomes evident when citizens are confronted with trade-offs between democratic principles and other considerations, such as ideology, partisanship, and policy preferences. In this paper, I emphasize the centrality of ethnic identity in studying everyday citizens’ commitment to democratic practices and norms. I propose a theoretical framework that elucidates the effect of ethnic identity driven preferences on support for democracy, focusing on three main mechanisms: racialized democratic bias, political geography and racial framing. I study these mechanisms in the context of Turkey, a hybrid authoritarian regime characterized by a dominant ethnic cleavage between an ethnic majority group, Turks, and an ethnic minority group, Kurds. I combine evidence from traditional surveys, a series of original survey experiments at the national and subnational levels, as well as qualitative case evidence. By centering identity politics in explaining toleration of undemocratic practices and norms, this paper aims to demonstrate the limits of the public as a safeguard of democracy when ethnic identity-driven preferences override democratic principles.

How Far for Whom?: Racial Identity and Hard Costs Create Selective Support

Rikio Inouye

This study investigates how racial perceptions influence White Americans' affective responses, sympathy, and willingness to bear costs in support of foreign nations under threat. I deploy an innovative survey experiment, using AI-generated images to manipulate the racial identity — White, Black, Asian, or Arab — of an invaded country.  I hypothesize that affect and support for other countries will not only be shaped by the race of the victim country, but by the costs of that support.  Respondents may express more sympathy toward black countries due to racial paternalism, but will be less generous when support is costlier, in the form of potential casualties.  Preliminary analysis (n=150 White respondents) reveals significant racial distinctions in affect and sympathy. White respondents exhibited warmer feelings toward White countries, with sympathy levels higher for Black countries, irrespective of ethnocentrism. However, respondents were less willing to bear costs in the form of casualties, when the invaded country was Black or Arab. These findings suggest that the way racial identity alters foreign policy preferences depends not only on the perceived race of other countries, but the costliness of the proposed support - a finding with clear and present implications for understanding the role of identity in shaping public support for international interventions and assistance.