The New Racial Spillover: Donald Trump, Racial Attitudes, and Public Opinion Toward Accountability for Perpetrators and Planners of the January 6 Capitol Attack

IF 0.8 4区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Jesse H Rhodes, Tatishe M. Nteta
{"title":"The New Racial Spillover: Donald Trump, Racial Attitudes, and Public Opinion Toward Accountability for Perpetrators and Planners of the January 6 Capitol Attack","authors":"Jesse H Rhodes, Tatishe M. Nteta","doi":"10.1093/psquar/qqae010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Since the violent January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, federal authorities have sought to hold participants and organizers accountable for their assault on American democracy. Troublingly, however, a substantial fraction of the public opposes the prosecution of participants in the assault on the Capitol and rejects charging former president Trump with crimes relating to the planning and execution of the attack. Why does a substantial fraction of the American public oppose accountability for perpetrators of the January 6 attack? In this article, we argue that racial attitudes play a central role in determining individuals' attitudes toward accountability for the Capitol attack. Elaborating on the theory of “racial spillover,” we argue that former president Trump's frequent use of racial rhetoric—which established a racialized identity and cemented a close relationship between negative racial attitudes and support for his presidency among members of the mass public—created conditions in which these attitudes were likely to “spill over” into the ostensibly non-racialized domain of attitudes toward holding perpetrators, planners, and inciters accountable for the attack. Because attitudes toward accountability for the Capitol attack are inextricable from Trump's racialized persona, we hypothesize that negative racial attitudes should be associated with increased opposition to accountability for those responsible for the attack. Using data from four original, nationally representative surveys fielded between 2021 and 2023, we find strong evidence for our racial spillover hypothesis and show that individuals with more negative racial attitudes are more opposed to accountability for those responsible for the Capitol attack.","PeriodicalId":51491,"journal":{"name":"Political Science Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Science Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/psquar/qqae010","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since the violent January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, federal authorities have sought to hold participants and organizers accountable for their assault on American democracy. Troublingly, however, a substantial fraction of the public opposes the prosecution of participants in the assault on the Capitol and rejects charging former president Trump with crimes relating to the planning and execution of the attack. Why does a substantial fraction of the American public oppose accountability for perpetrators of the January 6 attack? In this article, we argue that racial attitudes play a central role in determining individuals' attitudes toward accountability for the Capitol attack. Elaborating on the theory of “racial spillover,” we argue that former president Trump's frequent use of racial rhetoric—which established a racialized identity and cemented a close relationship between negative racial attitudes and support for his presidency among members of the mass public—created conditions in which these attitudes were likely to “spill over” into the ostensibly non-racialized domain of attitudes toward holding perpetrators, planners, and inciters accountable for the attack. Because attitudes toward accountability for the Capitol attack are inextricable from Trump's racialized persona, we hypothesize that negative racial attitudes should be associated with increased opposition to accountability for those responsible for the attack. Using data from four original, nationally representative surveys fielded between 2021 and 2023, we find strong evidence for our racial spillover hypothesis and show that individuals with more negative racial attitudes are more opposed to accountability for those responsible for the Capitol attack.
新的种族蔓延:唐纳德-特朗普、种族态度以及公众舆论对 1 月 6 日国会大厦袭击事件肇事者和策划者问责的态度
自 1 月 6 日对美国国会大厦的暴力袭击发生以来,联邦当局一直在寻求追究参与者和组织者对其攻击美国民主的责任。然而,令人不安的是,相当一部分公众反对起诉袭击国会大厦事件的参与者,反对指控前总统特朗普犯有与策划和实施袭击有关的罪行。为什么相当一部分美国公众反对追究 1 月 6 日袭击事件肇事者的责任?在本文中,我们认为种族态度在决定个人对国会大厦袭击事件的问责态度方面发挥了核心作用。在阐述 "种族溢出 "理论时,我们认为,前总统特朗普频繁使用种族言论--这确立了种族化身份,并巩固了负面种族态度与大众对其总统职位支持之间的密切关系--创造了条件,使这些态度有可能 "溢出 "到表面上非种族化的领域,即对追究袭击事件实施者、策划者和煽动者责任的态度。由于对国会大厦袭击事件问责的态度与特朗普的种族化形象密不可分,我们假设,负面的种族态度应与反对追究袭击事件责任人的责任相关联。利用 2021 年至 2023 年期间进行的四次具有全国代表性的原创调查数据,我们发现了种族溢出假设的有力证据,并表明具有更多负面种族态度的个人更反对追究国会大厦袭击事件责任人的责任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Political Science Quarterly
Political Science Quarterly POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: Published continuously since 1886, Political Science Quarterly or PSQ is the most widely read and accessible scholarly journal covering government, politics and policy. A nonpartisan journal, PSQ is edited for both political scientists and general readers with a keen interest in public and foreign affairs. Each article is based on objective evidence and is fully refereed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信