Class voting

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages) This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Class voting" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (March 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. (March 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Part of the Politics series
Voting
Balloting Ballots Absentee ballot Provisional ballot Sample ballot Candidates and Ballot measures Write-in candidate Electorate Slate Ticket Collection Ballot box Compulsory voting Early voting Electronic voting Open ballot Polling place Postal voting Precinct Vote center Voting booth Counting Popular vote Tally Voting machine
Electoral systems Plurality and majoritarian systems First-past-the-post voting Two-round system Instant-runoff voting Plurality-at-large voting General ticket Usual judgment Proportional and semi-proportional systems Single non-transferable vote Cumulative voting Binomial system Party-list Single transferable voting Spare vote Mixed-member systems Mixed-member proportional Additional member system Mixed single vote (positive vote transfer) Scorporo (negative vote transfer) Mixed ballot transferable vote Alternative Vote Plus Dual-member proportional Rural–urban proportional Majority bonus system Parallel voting (Mixed member majoritarian)
Voting strategies Issue voting Fusion voting Split-ticket voting Straight-ticket voting Tactical voting Vote pairing Protest votes Abstention Donkey vote Election boycott None of the above Refused ballot Spoilt vote
Voting patterns and effects Coattail effect Voting advice application Likely voter Paradox of voting Passive electioneering Vote splitting Political apathy Voter fatigue Voter turnout Protest votes
Electoral fraud and prevention Ballot harvesting Ballot stuffing Voter intimidation Vote buying Voter suppression Voter caging Prevention Election ink Secret ballot Voter registration End-to-end verifiable voting
Politics portal
v t e

Class voting is the relationship between social class and voting behavior. The concept is central in political sociology, as political parties are seen by a large segment of scholars as representing social classes.^[1]

The is a lack of clear consensus among scholars investigating class voting, with no agreed-upon definition or standardized measurement for class. In academia class is characterized as a contested concept due to this lack of scholarly agreement on its definition.^[2] The English sociologist Robert Alford took a binary approach to class, delineating two categories: the non-working class and the working class.^[3] Alford's influential work, "Party and Society: The Anglo-American Democracies," introduced the Alford Index for measuring class voting, currently the most widely utilized and critiqued index in the field. Additionally, Alford identified two voting categories: left-wing and right-wing votes.^[3]

Class voting as understood in a modern context started in the backdrop of the French Revolution and amidst escalating class tensions during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, social class emerged as a significant societal division that profoundly impacted electoral dynamics. This period witnessed a distinct pattern where laborers predominantly aligned with left-wing political parties, while the privileged middle class tended to support right-wing parties.^[5]

One of the most important works to scientifically research the question was the seminal work "The People’s Choice" (1944) by Lazarsfeld, Berelson, and Gaudet-Erskine. Now the is widely acknowledged as the foundational exploration of electoral sociology in the United States.^[3] In their investigation into the impact of social class on voting behavior during the 1940 presidential election, the researchers curated a representative panel and conducted seven rounds of comprehensive questioning. Their findings revealed a significant alignment between individuals' social and professional backgrounds and their voting preferences. Moreover, a noteworthy discovery was the limited deviation from initial choices among the majority of participants, suggesting minimal influence from electoral campaigns on vote selection.^[6]

The researchers identified three pivotal variables—economic and social status, religion, and place of residence—that played a crucial role in shaping political preferences. This led Lazarsfeld and his team to draw the conclusion that individuals tend to think politically in accordance with their social identity, asserting that social characteristics ultimately determine political traits.^[6]

One of the early theorists of class voting was Robert Alford, an English sociologist born in 1963, conceptualized class as a binary division, delineating two primary categories: the non-working class and the working class. Alford introduced a pivotal tool for quantifying class-based voting behavior, now widely recognized as the Alford Index which has drawn as drawn both acclaim and critique within scholarly discourse.^[7]

Alford also identified two distinct voting tendencies: a left-wing vote and a right-wing vote. The Alford Index operationalizes class voting by computing the disparity between the percentages of workers and non-workers casting ballots for left-wing candidates. In instances where all workers align with left-wing politics and none of the non-workers do so, the Alford Index achieves its maximum value of 100%, indicating a perfect class vote. Conversely, if the proportion of left-leaning voters among workers and non-workers is equal, the index yields a value of 0%, signifying the absence of a discernible class vote.^[7] The Alford Index, a significant measure in its time, has exerted a notable influence on subsequent approaches. Contemporary scholars often reference a classification system that was inspired by the Alford Index, which was developed by John Goldthorpe and Robert Erikson in 1992.^[8]

The sociological model of class voting is defined as emphasizing bottom-up analysis the top-down approach, which looks to parties as the primary mechanism of class voting. In model has its origin in the book The People’s Choice (1944), by Lazarsfeld, Berelson, and Gaudet-Erskine, the pivotal in the study of electoral sociology in the United States. Investigating the 1940 presidential election, the researchers found a significant link between individuals' social backgrounds and their voting preferences. They identified key factors—economic status, religion, and place of residence—that shape political views. Lazarsfeld and his team concluded that social characteristics drive political traits. This model remains influential to this day.^[9]

Dealignment in terms of class voting is understood as the reduction of the importance of class voting in favour of new cleavages, which have been called "post-materialist".^[10] In a period that class-based thinking in much of academia seemed prevalent, one of the first to discuss the idea of social class dealignment was Robert Nisbet, who in 1959 considered that because of current social developments during the period that he was writing, social class had become largely obsolete as a useful concept in social science, as status and values became more individualized.^[11] The concept is contested in academia, but at least starting at least from the 1980’s some researchers increasingly were noticing a decline of class voting based on the traditional definitions in western countries, in contrast with the early post-WW2 period, leading to questions about "class voting dying out".^[12]

According to researcher Geoffrey Evans, summarizing much of the scholarly results, the decline could be explained by five explanations:

1. Social class has lost some or all of its importance as a determinant of life chances and in consequence its role as a source of divergent political interests.
2. New post-industrial social cleavages are replacing class-based conflict, with new identities such as gender, race and ethnicity becoming more prominent.
3. Cognitive mobilization leading to people being more issue oriented rather than class oriented in voting.
4. Post-material values led to a decline in the importance of class voting.
5. The manual working class has declined as a share of the electorate, so left-wing parties have adapted by changing their programme and class appeal.^[2]

A different strand of scholars, starting at least from the 1990's started arguing that rather than class voting losing importance, it is rather changing, thus "realignment", particularly in the West and the USA.^[13] Realignment researchers argued that even though classes were assumed to be less distinctive in their material conditions and value preference, yet that the distinctions have been transformed rather than removed, considering globalization as one of the main drivers of this realignment.^[14]

One 2021 research paper argues that class realignment consists of two main components. The first component is the changing behaviour of the working class. While the working class continues to form a substantial portion of the social-democratic vote, there has been a noticeable shift away from the left. This shift is characterized by a general decline in voter turnout among the working class in Western Europe and a significant educational voting gap. Many working-class voters have shifted their support to other mainstream parties, including those on the right, either directly or indirectly. The second component of class realignment focuses on the middle class. Within this group, there has been a notable shift among the highly educated middle class from the mainstream right to the left. In contrast, the managerial middle class continues to support mainstream right-wing parties. As the middle class has expanded, their voting behaviour has become increasingly fractured.^[15]

Another 2020 paper sees realignment in a western context driven by several factors: The increase in higher education, leading to graduates forming a new social class.Mass migration and the resulting reaction from socially conservative white voters. The growing proportion of older voters due to increased life expectancy. The development of cosmopolitan cities contrasted with conservative hinterlands.^[16]

In 2018 the concept of a "tripolar political space," was proposed suggesting that class voting has evolved into competition among three new political poles: the left, the center-right, and the radical right. Despite changes in class structures, voting behavior and competition remain influenced by class dynamics within these three political poles.^[17]

The research also raises concerns about Western-centric and Eurocentric perspectives, as most studies focus on Western countries, calling into question the generalizability of these theories beyond the Western context. However, there have been efforts to understand the political dynamics of classes in post-Communist Eastern European countries. At east least some research has concluded that "divisions have emerged to some degree in each state according to its specific social composition, historical inheritance, and post-communist economic and political performance", indicating that class voting is also evident in post-communist nations.^[18]