back to programm overview

Would you condemn the sacrifice of political enemies?

Rebekka Kesberg, University of Sussex; Matthew Easterbrook, University of Sussex

Across the world, the current political landscape and social atmosphere is characterized by a highly polarized climate. Studies show that ordinary individuals increasingly dislike, distrust, and degrade individuals affiliated with outgroups that they do not identify with. Simultaneously, within the UK as well as in other European countries politicians and other public figures have been ‐ sometimes even fatally ‐ attacked (e.g., Sir David Amess). While these acts triggered public outrage and are condemned by most individuals, others might justify them by referring to the victim's political affiliation. Using a moral dilemma, I examined the role of victim's political affiliation for the moral justification of an act. Participants (N 386) were presented with the trolley dilemma and indicated how justifiable Joe's decision to sacrifice one person to save five people is. Participants judged 20 versions of the same situation varying in terms of the political affiliation of the individual being killed and the individuals being saved. As hypothesized and in line with ingroup favouritism, participants valued ingroup lives over outgroup lives. Participants also distinguished between different political outgroups, that is outgroups ‐ which individuals felt indifferent towards ‐ were valued more than outgroups which individuals hated. Further, individual differences moderated this relationship. Specifically, individuals who endorse populist attitudes and highly polarized individuals showed larger differences in their moral judgements, that is larger difference in how valued ingroup and outgroup lives are. The opposing pattern was found for individuals who endorse democratic values. In combination, the results replicate classical intergroup bias findings and highlight how populist and democratic attitudes consolidate respectively dissolve group boundaries. Implications of these findings for democratic governance and societal cohesion are discussed.

back to programm overview