A new study of more than 7,500 California voters reveals a counterintuitive finding that could reshape how activists deal with social change: structuring contemporary issues as “civil rights” issues actually reduces public support for government actions, even for people who take civil rights strongly.
This study challenges decades of traditional ideas about how to build alliances and win public support for progressive causes.
The study, published in the American Sociological Review, found that this “moderate framework” impact occurs across different types of problems, beneficiary groups and political audiences, making the problem more than partisan resistance or racial resentment, but a deeper thing about how Americans deal with today’s civil rights language.
When good languages go bad
Researchers surveyed California voters in 2016 and 2019, asking them to read about people who are working-place discrimination, food insecurity, or lack of health care. Support for government intervention has always declined when civil rights terms are used to describe these issues.
“We found that in the abstract, respondents did feel very positive about civil rights and largely agreed with their meaning,” said Fabiana Silva, Ph.D., lead author of the University of Michigan Ford School of Public Policy. “But when the hardships encountered are constituted by civil rights issues, it actually reduces public support for government actions. We are amazed at how common this negative impact is.”
As it turns out, the effect is very consistent. The civil rights framework reduces support, whether the issue involves inequality treatment (such as workplace discrimination) or material deprivation (such as hunger). The incident backfires when applied to issues affecting African Americans, Mexican Americans, white Americans and undocumented immigration.
Perhaps most notable: The framework even reduces support for government actions by black respondents to help blacks face difficulties.
Key research results:
- Support for civil rights frameworks has declined in all population groups tested
- Discrimination and economic difficulties will have effect
- Even black voters show a decline in support when the problem is constituted by civil rights
- Americans define civil rights narrowly, focusing on equal treatment rather than economic needs
Memory issues
Why is civil rights (a concept that Americans generally support) so consistent? Researchers point to an unexpected culprit: our collective memory of the civil rights movement of the 1960s.
“When contemporary activists make civil rights claims, they unconsciously evoke an implicit comparison with the historic civil rights movement,” explains UC Berkeley co-author Dr. Kim Voss. “We believe this may undermine the power of civil rights claims because contemporary difficulties seem less important, and contemporary claims manufacturing seems less heroic than idealized collective memory.”
This creates impossible standards. Today is pale for workplace equality or health care struggles compared to Jim Crow’s epic battles. Now, the success of the civil rights movement in American memory may address efforts to address persistent inequality.
The study reveals another key insight that was not emphasized in the initial coverage: Americans define civil rights very narrowly. Most respondents understood civil rights as “rights regardless of race, gender, or religion, rather than broader economic or social rights. This narrow definition helps explain why the language of civil rights feels like an extension when applied to problems with poverty or health care.
Beyond Black and White
The research team expects that the civil rights framework may vary across groups or issues. They believe that given historical links or issues of discrimination rather than economic issues, it may be more effective for African Americans.
Instead, they found that a “broad framework that went beyond traditional political and demographic boundaries was counterproductive. “In fact, we found that even black respondents’ support for government action to address the hardships faced by black respondents has reduced support for black respondents,” Silva noted. “At the same time, this is not what we expect from the racialized rebound account.”
This finding excludes simple explanations based on racial resentment or partisan polarization. The consistency of cross-group effects suggests that the more fundamental of how the civil rights framework plays a role in contemporary American political discourse.
What works?
The researchers did not return empty-handed. Their analysis suggests that the “American Values” framework may be more effective—a kind of emphasis on equity, equality of opportunity, and personal dignity without triggering adverse comparisons with past movements.
“We are on how to improve the life opportunities for disadvantaged groups, such as racial minorities, immigrants and low-wage workers,” said Dr. Irene Bloemraad, co-author of the University of British Columbia. “We want to test what kind of propositions resonate with the average American.”
This alternative can help movement avoid memory traps while still attracting core American ideals. Instead of evoking a heroic past, it focuses on today’s values and future possibilities.
The meaning of the political field
The implications of these findings go far beyond the reasons for progress. Conservative movements (from gun rights to anti-abortion advocacy) also frequently adopt civil rights language to advance their agendas.
“This may be frustrating to the radicals,” Voss admits. “But the better benefit is that other frameworks besides civil rights may build public support more effectively.”
Research shows that effective advocacy may require a symbolic force beyond historical movements and direct explanation toward contemporary concerns and values. In an age where many Americans feel disconnected from traditional institutions and narratives, this shift in existing-focused frameworks is crucial to building the broad alliances needed for lasting social change.
For activists who want to know how to build support in an increasingly polarized political environment, the answer may not lie in evoking the greatest victories of the past, but rather directly talking to today’s shared values and the possibilities of tomorrow.
Related
If our report has been informed or inspired, please consider donating. No matter how big or small, every contribution allows us to continue to deliver accurate, engaging and trustworthy scientific and medical news. Independent news takes time, energy and resources – your support ensures that we can continue to reveal the stories that matter most to you.
Join us to make knowledge accessible and impactful. Thank you for standing with us!
