Political Polarization and Human Rights Violations

Year 2024, , 1 - 17, 11.06.2024

Adil Yıldız

https://doi.org/10.26650/hupej.2024.10.1.1436810

Abstract

Building on the extant literature, this study contends that higher political polarization, wherein opposing individuals or groups engage in hostile interactions over political differences, promotes vilification and a dehumanizing discourse. This in turn leads to an antagonistic and perilous political environment, putting human rights at risk. In such an environment, governments become better capable of prioritizing their political agenda over the rights of particular opposition groups, as these governments are also often supported by their polarized (i.e., entrenched) constituent base. To provide practical insights, this study illustrates Türkiye and Brazil as case examples, as both countries have experienced recent increases in political polarization with potential implications for the erosion of human rights due to a climate of hostility. The study tests the potential relationship between political polarization and human rights violations by employing time-series and cross-national data from the Varieties of Democracy Project (V-Dem) and the CIRI Human Rights Data Project, encompassing over 4,250 observations across more than 165 countries from 1981-2011. Additionally, the study utilizes the recent Human Rights Measurement Initiative (HRMI)’s Physical Integrity Rights Index, which provides data from 2017-2023. Both analyses reveal statistically significant correlations between increased political polarization and reduced respect for human rights. An upward change in political polarization results in lower levels of physical integrity rights. These findings imply that political polarization should be recognized as a serious factor contributing to the potential risks of human rights violations.

Keywords

Political polarization, Human rights, Physical integrity rights, Human rights violations, Human rightsabuses

References

• Amini, S., DeLgado, M.S., Henderson, D.J. & Parmeter, C.F. (2012). Fixed vs Random: The Hausman Test Four Decades Later. In BaLtagi, B.H., Carter HiLL, R., Newey, W.K. & White, H.L. (Eds.) Essays in Honor of Jerry Hausman (Advances in Econometrics, VoL. 29), EmeraLd Group PubLishing Limited, BingLey, pp. 479-513. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0731-9053(2012)0000029021 google scholar
• Aydın Düzgit, S. (2019). The IsLamist-SecuLarist divide and Türkiye’s descent into severe poLarization. In T. Carothers & A. O’Donohue (Eds.), Democracies Divided: The Global Challenge of Political Polarization (pp. 17-37). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. google scholar
• Bae, J. (2022). Human Rights Versus NationaL Security in PubLic Opinion on Foreign Affairs South Korea Views of North Korea 2008-2019. KDI School of Pub Policy & Management Paper. google scholar
• Barberâ, P. (2020). SoclaL medla, echo chambers, and poLiticaL poLarization. Social media and democracy: The State of the field, prospects for reform,34. google scholar
• BeLL, A., & Jones, K. (2015). ExpLaining fixed effects: Random effects modeLing of time-series cross-sectionaL and paneL data. Political Science Research and Methods, 3(1), 133-153. google scholar
• “BouLos, G. (2022, September 16). Brazil is suffering a wave of violence. it’s Bolsonaro’s fault. Time. https://time.com/6214070/boLsonaro-poLiticaL-vioLence-braziL-eLection/ google scholar
• Broockman, D. E., KaLLa, J. L., & Westwood, S. J. (2023). Does affective poLarization undermine democratic norms or accountabiLity? Maybe not. American Journal of Political Science, 67(3), 808-828. google scholar
• Brook, A. M., CLay, K. C., & RandoLph, S. (2020). Human rights data for everyone: Introducing the human rights measurement initiative (HRMI). Journal of Human Rights, 19(1), 67-82. google scholar
• Bruneau, E., KteiLy, N., & Laustsen, L. (2018). The unique effects of bLatant dehumanization on attitudes and behavior towards MusLim refugees during the European ‘refugee crisis’ across four countries. European Journal of Social Psychology, 48(5), 645-662. google scholar
• Buyse, A. (2018). Squeezing civic space: restrictions on civiL society organizations and the Linkages with human rights, The International Journal of Human Rights, 22:8, 966-988, DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2018.1492916 google scholar
• Carlin, R. E., & Love, G. J. (2013). The politics of interpersonal trust and reciprocity: An experimental approach. Political Behavior, 35, 43-63. google scholar
• Cassese, E. C. (2021). Partisan dehumanization in American poLitics. Political Behavior, 43, 29-50. google scholar
• CingraneLLi, D. L., & Richards, D. L. (1999). Measuring human rights, 1945-1998. Human Rights Quarterly, 21(2), 410-461. google scholar
• CingraneLLi, D. L., & Richards, D. L. (2012). The CIRI human rights dataset. In Human Rights in the United States (pp. 107-128). Springer,Dordrecht. google scholar
• CLay, K. C., Bakker, R., Brook, A. M., HiLL Jr, D. W., & Murdie, A. (2020). Using practitioner surveys to measure human rights: The Human Rights Measurement Initiative’s civiL and poLiticaL rights metrics. Journal of peace research, 57(6), 715-727. google scholar
• CLay, K. C., Rains, M., Brook, A.-M., Kehoe-Rowden, T., Singh, P., LaVeLLe, M., Parker, A., & RandoLph, S. (2023). HRMI 2023 AnnuaL Survey & PeopLe Data Report (Version 2023.7.5). Retrieved from https://humanrightsmeasurement.org/methodoLogy-handbook/. google scholar
• Combs, A., Tierney, G., Guay, B., Merhout, F., BaiL, C. A., HiLLygus, D. S., & VoLfovsky, A. (2023). Reducing poLiticaL poLarization in the United google scholar
• States with a mobiLe chat pLatform. Nature human behaviour, 7(9), 1454-1461. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01655-0 google scholar
• Coppedge, M., Gerring, J., Knutsen, C. H., Lindberg, S. I., TeoreLL, J., ALizada, N., ... & ZibLatt, D. (2021). V-Dem Codebook vll.1. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Project. google scholar
• CordeLL, C., Finan, F., Kramon, E., & Robinson, A. (2022). Elections, violence, and human rights in sub-Saharan Africa. Cambridge Univer-sity Press. google scholar
• Cox, N. J. (2005). Speaking Stata: Smoothing in various directions. The Stata Journal, 5(4), 574-593. google scholar
• Crimston, C. R., SeLvanathan, H. P., & Jetten, J. (2022). MoraL poLarization predicts support for authoritarian and progressive strong Lead-ers via the perceived breakdown of society. Political Psychology, 43(4), 671-691. google scholar
• Dagnes, A., & Dagnes, A. (2019). Us vs. them: PoLiticaL poLarization and the poLiticization of everything. Super Mad at Everything All the Time: Political Media and Our National Anger, 119-165. google scholar
• Davenport, C. (1995). MuLti-dimensionaL threat perception and state repression: An inquiry into why states appLy negative sanctions. American Journal of Political Science, 39(3), 683-713. google scholar
• DonneLLy, J. (2008). Human Rights. In J. S. Dryzek, B. Honig, & A. PhiLLips (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Theory (pp. 601-20). New York: Oxford University Press. google scholar
• Drukker, D. M. (2003). Testing for SeriaL CorreLation in Linear PaneL-data ModeLs. The Stata Journal, 3(2), 168-177. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1536867X0300300206 google scholar
• European Center for PopuLism Studies (ECPS). (n.d.). Dehumanization. Retrieved March 3, 2024, from https://www.popuLismstudies.org/ VocabuLary/dehumanization/#:~:text=Dehumanization%20is%20the%20act%20of,is%20an%20act%20of%20dehumanization. google scholar
• FaioLa, A., & Sâ Pessoa, G. (2022, October 28). The CannibaL vs. the Satanist: Toxic PoLitics Is Poisoning BraziL. Washington Post. https:// www.washingtonpost.com/worLd/2022/10/28/braziL-eLection-LuLa-boLsonaro/ google scholar
• Fine, J. A., & Hunt, M. F. (2023). Negativity and eLite message diffusion on sociaL media. Political Behavior, 45(3), 955-973. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11109-021-09740-8 google scholar
• Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). InternationaL norm dynamics and poLiticaL change. International organization, 52(4), 887-917. google scholar
• GiLLani, N., Yuan, A., Saveski, M., Vosoughi, S., & Roy, D. (2018, ApriL). Me, my echo chamber, and I: introspection on sociaL media poLar-ization. In Proceedings of the 2018 World Wide Web Conference (pp. 823-831). google scholar
• Gurr, T. R. (1986). The poLiticaL origins of state vioLence and terror: a theoreticaL anaLysis. pp. 45-71 in M. StohL and G. A. Lopez (eds.) Gov-ernment Violence and Repression: An Agenda for Research. New York: Greenwood. google scholar
• Hanushek, E. A., & Jackson, J. E. (2013). Statistical methods for social scientists. Academic Press. google scholar
• HareL, T. O., Jameson, J. K., & Maoz, I. (2020). The NormaLization of Hatred: Identity, Affective PoLarization, and Dehumanization on Face-book in the Context of IntractabLe PoLiticaL Conflict. Social Media+ Society, 6(2). google scholar
• HeLLström, J. (2019). Dehumanization in Everyday Politics : A study of discursive dehumanization of beggars on social media [master’s thesis]. UppsaLa University. https://www.diva-portaL.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1282776&dswid=-456 google scholar
• Henderson, C. (1991). Conditions Affecting the Use of PoLiticaL Repression. Journal of Conflict Resolution 35:120-42. google scholar
• Henderson, C. (1993). PopuLation Pressures and PoLiticaL Repression. Social Science Quarterly 74:322-33. google scholar
• HoLst, P. (2020). Us and Them: Experiences with Polarization Dynamics from the Perspective of Black Migrant Communities in The Nether-lands [master’s thesis]. Radboud University. https://theses.ubn.ru.nL/items/34c91b08-6852-46f8-bc91-fa37ebfd978a google scholar
• Huber, P. J. (1967). Under nonstandard conditions. In Proceedings of the Fifth BerkeLey Symposium on MathematicaL Statistics and Prob-abiLity: Weather Modification; University of California Press: BerkeLey, CA, USA (p. 221). google scholar
• Iyengar, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2015). Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization. American journal of political science, 59(3), 690-707. google scholar
• Judge, M., Kashima, Y., Steg, L., & Dietz, T. (2023). EnvironmentaL Decision-Making in Times of PoLarization. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 48, 477-503. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-112321115339 google scholar
• KteiLy, N., Bruneau, E., Waytz, A., & CotteriLL, S. (2015). The ascent of man: TheoreticaL and empiricaL evidence for bLatant dehumaniza-tion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 109(5), 901. google scholar LeLkes, Y., & Westwood, S. J. (2017). The Limits of partisan prejudice. The Journal of Politics, 79(2), 485-501. google scholar
• Linden, M., BjörkLund, F., & Backström, M. (2016). What makes authoritarian and sociaLLy dominant peopLe more positive to using torture in the war on terrorism?. Personality and Individual Differences, 91, 98-101. google scholar
• Maoz, I., & McCauLey, C. (2008). Threat, dehumanization, and support for retaLiatory aggressive poLicies in asymmetric conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52(1), 93-116. google scholar
• MarcouLides, K. M., & Raykov, T. (2019). EvaLuation of Variance Inflation Factors in Regression ModeLs Using Latent VariabLe ModeLing Methods. Educatlonal and psychologı’cal measurement, 79(5), 874-882. https://doi.org/l0.1177/0013164418817803 google scholar
• MarshaLL, M. G., & Jaggers, K. (2009). PoLity IV project, poLiticaL regime characteristics and transitions, 1800-2007, dataset users’ manu-aL. Center for Systemlc Peace. google scholar
• Martherus, J. L., Martinez, A. G., Piff, P. K., & Theodoridis, A. G. (2021). Party animaLs? Extreme partisan poLarization and dehumaniza-tion. Polltlcal Behavlor, 43, 517-540. google scholar
• McCoy, J., & Somer, M. (2019). Toward a theory of pernicious poLarization and how it harms democracies: Comparative evidence and possibLe remedies. The Annals of the Amerlcan Academy of Polltlcal and Soclal Sclence, 681(1), 234-271. google scholar
• McNeiL-WiLLson, R., Gerrand, V., Scrinzi, F., & TriandafyLLidou, A. (2019). Polarlsatlon, vlolent extremlsm and reslllence ln Europe today: An analytlcal framework. BRaVE Project. Retrieved from https://hdL.handLe.net/1814/65664. google scholar
• Mignozzetti, U., & Spektor, M. (2019). BraziL: When PoLiticaL OLigarchies Limit PoLarization but FueL PopuLism. In T. Carothers & A. O’Dono-hue (Eds.), Democracles Dlvlded: The Global Challenge of Polltlcal Polarlzatlon (pp. 228-256). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. google scholar
• MitcheLL, N, J., & McCormick, J. M. (1988). Economic and PoLiticaL ExpLanations of Human Rights VioLations. World Polltlcs 40:476-98. google scholar
• Nguyen, C. T. (2020). Echo chambers and epistemic bubbLes. Eplsteme, 17(2), 141-161. google scholar
• Pemstein, D., Marquardt, K. L., TzeLgov, E., Wang, Y. T., KruseLL, J., & Miri, F. (2018). The V-Dem measurement modeL: Latent variabLe anaLysis for cross-nationaL and cross-temporaL expert-coded data. V-Dem worklng paper, 21. google scholar
• Piazza, J. A. (2020). PoLitician hate speech and domestic terrorism. Internatlonal Interactlons, 46(3), 431-453. google scholar
• Piazza, J. A. (2023). PoLiticaL poLarization and poLiticaL vioLence. Securlty Studles, 32(3), 476-504. google scholar
• Poe, S. C., & Tate, C. N. (1994). Repression of Human Rights to PersonaL Integrity in the 1980s: A GLobaL AnaLysis. Amerlcan Polltlcal Sclence Revlew 88, no. 4: 853-72. google scholar
• QueensLand Human Rights Commission (QHRC). (n.d.). ViLification. Retrieved March 3, 2024, from https://www.qhrc.qLd.gov.au/your-rights/discrimination-Law/viLification google scholar
• Rains, M., CLay, K. C., Bakker, R., Brook, A.-M., HiLL, D. W., LaVeLLe, M., & Murdie, A. (2023). HRMI CiviL and PoLiticaL Rights Metrics 2023 TechnicaL Note (Version 2023.7.5). Retrieved from https://humanrightsmeasurement.org/methodoLogy-handbook/ google scholar
• Renshaw, C. S. (2012). NationaL Human Rights Institutions and CiviL Society Organizations: New Dynamics of Engagement at Domestic, RegionaL, and InternationaL LeveLs. Global Governance, 18(3), 299-316. google scholar
• Roy, D., & Baumgartner, S. (2023, January 12). Images show the extent of BraziL’s CapitoL Riots. Councll on Forelgn Relatlons. Retrieved from https://www.cfr.org/articLe/images-show-extent-braziLs-capitoL-riots google scholar
• SchedLer, A. (2023). Rethinking PoLiticaL PoLarization. Polltlcal Sclence Quarterly, 138(3), 335-359. google scholar
• Shrestha, N. (2020). Detecting muLticoLLinearity in regression anaLysis. Amerlcan Journal of Applled Mathematlcs and Statlstlcs, 8(2), 39-42. google scholar S0rensen, E., & AnseLL, C. (2023). Towards a concept of poLiticaL robustness. Polltı'cal Studles, 71 (i), 69-88. google scholar
• Sundstrom, L. (2005). PhysicaL integrity rights and the internationaL criminaL court. The Amerlcan Journal of Internatlonal Law, 99(2), 460-482. google scholar
• Terren, L., & Borge-Bravo, R. (2021). Echo Chambers on SociaL Media: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Revlew of Communlcatlon Research, 9, 99-118. google scholar
• The WorLd Bank. (2012). The WorLd Bank DeveLopment Indicators (WDI). google scholar
• Themner, L., & WaLLensteen, P. (2012). Armed Conflicts, 1946-2011. Journal of Peace Research 49 (4): 565-75. google scholar
• TibbLes, M., & MeLse, E. (2023). A note on creating inset pLots using graph twoway. The Stata Journal, 23(1), 265-275. google scholar
• TiLLy, C. (1985). War making and state making as organized crime. Cambridge: BLackweLL. google scholar
• TurkuazLab. (2017). Dimensions of PoLarization in Türkiye in 2017. Strategies for Mitigating Polarization. Retrieved from https://www.turkuazLab.org/en/dimensions-of-poLarization-in-Türkiye-2017/ google scholar
• TurkuazLab. (2020). Dimensions of PoLarization in Türkiye in 2020. Strategies for Mitigating Polarization. Retrieved from https://www. turkuazLab.org/en/dimensions-of-poLarization-in-Türkiye-2020/ google scholar
• United Nations. GeneraL AssembLy. (1949). Universal declaration of human rights (VoL. 3381). Department of State, United States of America. google scholar
• USAID. (2016). Human Rights Landscape Analysis Tool: Guidance on Identifying Key Issues and Entry Points for Human Rights Program-ming. Washington, DC: USAID. google scholar
• VaLLier, K. (2023). The EmotionaL Decay of LiberaLism: Trust, PoLarization, and Affective Looping. In Realism, Ideology, and the Convulsions of Democracy (pp. 65-81). Cham: Springer Nature SwitzerLand. google scholar
• VezzaLi, L., Capozza, D., Stathi, S., & Giovannini, D. (2012). Increasing outgroup trust, reducing infrahumanization, and enhancing future contact intentions via imagined intergroup contact. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 437-440. google scholar
• VoLpato, C., & Andrighetto, L. (2015). Dehumanization. In Wright, J.D., International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 31-37). Amsterdam: ELsevier, Inc. google scholar
• White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica: journal of the Econometric Society, 817-838. google scholar
• Wirtschafter, V. (2022, November 9). After a victory for democracy, what is BraziL’s road ahead? Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/ articLes/after-a-victory-for-democracy-what-is-braziLs-road-ahead/ google scholar
• WoLff, A. W., & Maruyama, W. (2023). Saving the WTO from the NationaL Security Exception. Peterson Institute for International Economics, Working Paper, No. 23-2. google scholar
• Yair, O. (2020). A note on the affective poLarization Literature. Available at SSRN 3771264. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3771264 google scholar
• Yildiz, A. (2023). Prior RebeL Experience of Leaders and Its Influence on PhysicaL Integrity Rights. Aurum JournaL of SociaL Sciences, 8(2),173-196. https://doi.org/10.62393/aurum.1329167 google scholar