Are Christian politics possible? A Kierkegaardian perspective

This paper provides a rereading of Søren Kierkegaard's attack upon Christendom in light of his theory of spheres of existence to examine whether Christian politics are possible after Kierkegaard. Talking of Christian politics makes sense only in the esthetic and the religious spheres of existence. However, Kierkegaard argues that politics worthy of the title Christian are impossible. Either such politics are simply Christendom far removed from New Testament Christianity, or Christian politics are faced with the paradox of existing before God and cannot proceed.     

Religious Organizations and Government: An Ecclesial Lutheran “Take”

Sharp debates exist today about the appropriate relationship between religious organizations and government, with views ranging from Christian nationalism to strict secularists. This essay explores a mediating position expressed in the conceptual phrase that religious bodies should “work with civil authorities in areas of mutual endeavor, maintaining institutional separation and functional interaction.” The essay uses historical and ecclesial sources to describe the struggles and underpinnings that lead to this position and then unpacks its meaning and import. While originating from within the conceptual and ecclesial American Lutheran tradition, the essay points to this approach as a public proposal for sound relationship between religious communities and political authority in the United States.     

There's a certain slant of light: Three attitudes toward the political turn in analytic philosophy

There has been a growing interest within analytic philosophy in addressing political and social issues, which has been referred to as the “political turn” in the discipline. The aim of this paper is twofold. First, it discusses the very characterization of the political turn. In particular, it introduces the definition proposed by Bordonaba-Plou, Fernández-Castro, and Torices, suggests that we should not consider the turn a form of activism, and explores an additional benefit of the ideal/nonideal distinction for characterizing the turn. Second, it addresses the concern of what attitude we should take in the face of the different sensitivities we might have with respect to what constitutes an injustice. Which philosophical works should count as part of the political turn? The paper explores three different attitudes toward this dilemma, and favors what it calls the revisionist attitude, which emphasizes the fact that our perception of injustice is subject to error.     

Overestimating Reported Prejudice Causes Democrats to Believe Disadvantaged Groups Are Less Electable

Four studies show that Democrats overestimate the explicit prejudice reported by the American electorate, leading them to perceive presidential candidates from disadvantaged groups as less electable. Study 1 (MTurk; n = 728) found that Democrats overestimated the percentage of Americans who say they would not vote for presidential candidates from disadvantaged groups. Study 2 (MTurk; n = 597) replicated this finding and demonstrated that Democrats who perceive high levels of explicit prejudice toward a group also believe presidential candidates from that group are less electable. Moreover, Democrats who more frequently interacted with Republicans were more accurate in estimating the amount of explicit prejudice reported by Republicans, Democrats, and Americans in general. Studies 3A (Prolific; n = 930) and 3B (YouGov; n = 747) found that presenting information about true levels of reported prejudice made Democrats believe generic presidential candidates from disadvantaged groups would be more electable. We did not find evidence that information about true levels of reported prejudice affected Democrats' beliefs about the electability of specific candidates in the 2020 Democratic Primary or their support for these candidates.     

Female Politicians as Climate Fools: Intertextual and Multimodal Constructions of Misogyny Disguised as Humor in Political Communication

The present study explores how the polarized political discussion on climate change is used to construct as a humorous misogynist message in a Finnish far-right political campaign video from 2021. Applying a multimodal analytical approach, the study explores the ways in which humor and irony are mobilized in the video through intertextual cues and verbal, visual, and sonic means to produce a dichotomy between “us”—the rational males who oppose strong measures against climate change—and “them,” the irrational females, who propose them. The study contributes to political psychology, first by responding to the call for social and political psychologists to expand our knowledge of the production and spread of misogyny in online political communication; second, by showing the importance of studying intertextual and multimodal constructions of misogyny disguised as humor in political communication, and, finally, through demonstrating the utility of interdisciplinarity and multimodal analytic approaches in research on online political mobilization and persuasion.     

Intellectual Humility and Political Polarization: An Exploration of Social Networks,Attitudes, and Affect

Political polarization is increasing in the United States, threatening social harmony. As this threat grows, it is important to identify factors that engender polarization and ways to disrupt them. To this end, we examined the buffering role of intellectual humility against political polarization and the potential mediating role of political heterophily (i.e., affiliation and communication with political outgroup members). Data were collected in five assessments over an eight-month period, beginning one day prior to the 2020 U.S. presidential election (N = 387) and ending in July 2021 (N = 181). Results showed that intellectual humility was associated with (1) less affective and attitudinal polarization (although in some cases this effect was only present among conservatives) and (2) more political heterophily. Cross-sectional and prospective mediation analyses suggested that intellectual humility may act through political heterophily to reduce attitude polarization. Our findings offer support for the notion that intellectual humility buffers against political polarization and provide preliminary evidence for political heterophily as one mechanism of action.     

The comrade on the crossroads of scholarship and struggle: Troubling the exile of Frantz Fanon from social and political psychology

This article traces the presence and absence of Frantz Fanon in the field of social and political psychology. Our work is guided by an assemblage of methods— a critical analysis of mainstream scholarship, a collective interrogation with a transnational gathering of colleagues and friends, and a deep reading of Fanon's texts on struggle, internalized oppression, violence and a new humanism. Through this, our paper is a call for radical disciplinary reflection on why Fanon has been ruthlessly exiled from social/political psychology, the potential his writings hold for courses, scholarship, and struggle, and how we might more boldly theorize, as he did, from within the fire of struggles for justice and liberation.     

COVID-19 attitudes,cognitions, and behaviors in association with personal ideology and social media exposure: Findings from emerging adults in the Southern United States

In the U.S., the COVID-19 pandemic has been highly politicized and has been the subject of large-scale media misinformation. Personal ideologies—including religiosity and political leanings (i.e., conservative, liberal)—have heavily guided responses to the pandemic, particularly in the Southern United States. However, microenvironments like Southern U.S. universities provide a unique perspective into the juxtaposition of larger societal conservatism and the liberalism associated with higher education. In the current study, we examined Southern university students' political beliefs, religiosity, and social media exposure in association with their COVID-19 attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors. Participants' political beliefs were associated with their COVID-19 concern, myth acceptance, vaccination status, and likelihood to receive a future vaccination. Religiosity and social media exposure were more nuanced. Future research into personal ideologies as emerging adults develop their independent identities away from their parents, and how this process can impact health behaviors, is needed.     

Dating during the time of COVID-19: Risk perceptions and political ideology

This study examined predictors of single people's beliefs about COVID prevention behaviors, intentions to engage in COVID prevention behaviors while dating, and actual dating behavior during the pandemic. Results revealed that single participants engaged in “riskier” dating behaviors (i.e., in-person unmasked) more frequently than “safer” dating behaviors (i.e., remote, or in-person masked/distanced). Individuals who perceived greater (vs. lesser) risk associated with COVID more strongly endorsed beliefs about social distancing (self and other) and were more likely to personally (or request others) engage in COVID prevention behaviors while dating. However, perceived risk did not predict actual dating behaviors. Conservatives (vs. liberals) less strongly endorsed beliefs about social distancing (for others, but not the self) and were less likely to personally (or request others) engage in COVID prevention behaviors while dating. Conservatives also reported meeting potential romantic partners more frequently than liberals. However, political ideology did not predict actual dating behaviors. Results suggest there is a disconnect between college students' beliefs/intentions and their actual dating behavior. These results demonstrate the importance of developing public health interventions that take into account the disconnect between college students' health-related intentions and actual behaviors, particularly in the context of dating.