Evidence from France: The Impact of Terrorism on Representative Democracy
Evidence following 9/11 and the 2004 Madrid bombing suggests that, after terrorist events, citizens also identify more with their country, as well as government institutions, political leaders and law enforcement. That is, terrorist events have the potential to mobilise citizens (e.g. by increasing participation) and bring a population together (e.g. through a rally effect). We therefore expected social cohesion amongst citizens, feelings of in-group integration and trust in the country’s political institutions to increase following terrorist events.
The results of our study were somewhat surprising. Figure 1* visualizes our findings for citizens’ out-group hostilities. The left panel highlights that anti-immigration opinions are quite dispersed across France (Figure 1.A), while the middle panel shows that a majority of French citizens find immigration to be quite important (Figure 1.B). More importantly, neither panel provides conclusive evidence of clear changes after the terrorist events. Perhaps surprisingly, this suggests that, despite the framing of the terrorist events in terms of security and immigration, citizens did not necessarily respond to (this) terrorist threat through the lens of immigration. Even more, in line with a recent study by Bruno Castanho Silva, anti-immigrant opinions and the salience of immigration appear largely unwavering.
The right panel (Figure 1.C) assesses political polarization and illustrates the lack of centrifugal movement of citizens in ideological or political terms. The public does not move towards the political extremes, and citizens do not distance themselves further from their ideological counterparts following the terrorist events. Altogether, while we expected the terrorist events to challenge some of the social foundations of liberal democracy, the different indicators in Figure 1 suggest little to no relevant changes in out-group hostility as a direct reaction to the terrorist events.
Figure 2 shows our findings for citizens’ in-group solidarity. The left panel (Figure 2.A) indicates the perceived social cohesion amongst French citizens is rather low, whereas the middle panel (Figure 2.B) highlights the societal integration levels are higher. Regardless of the absolute levels, we also observe a sizeable shift towards higher perceived cohesion and integration after the terrorist events. In line with then-president Hollande’s infamously low approval ratings, as well as equally low public satisfaction with then-prime minister Valls, the right panel (Figure 2.C) indicates limited trust in the central government’s abilities before the terrorist events. We do, however, observe a significant post-terror shift towards more trust in government.
Figure 2 thereby suggests the public responds to terrorist events with increased in-group solidarity. At least in the immediate aftermath, citizens come together and express trust in their leaders following collective threats. While such rally effects are not an uncommon finding in the terrorism literature, they are nonetheless remarkable in times where the representative character of liberal democracy is under tremendous pressure. Particularly, in a centralized and elitist country like France, this suggests citizens are not necessarily rejecting politics as such but might be dissatisfied with the implementation of representation by their elites.
The combined findings confirm the democratic resilience we know citizens to have. Our study shows that, much like an undeserved World Cup semi-final victory (e.g. France – Belgium in 2018), critical events can bring a country together and unite its citizens – even if only for a moment. While we do not necessarily want to argue that terrorism contributes to democratic consolidation, we do highlight that instant threats to democracy do not necessarily undermine citizens’ responsiveness and their support for some of the central pillars of liberal and representative democracy. Even more, we show that terrorist events can improve what has long been perceived as an eroding component of liberal democracy, namely in-group solidarity. Terrorist events can strengthen the popular legitimacy of political regimes and instigate rally effects around political institutions.
* The figures are available at the authors’ paper in the European Journal of Political Research and in the article’s supporting information.
Steven M. Van Hauwaert is a Lecturer in Comparative Politics at the University of Surrey. Robert A. Huber is a Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Salzburg, Austria. This article is published courtesy of the European Institute at LSE.
