Grievance Politics: An Empirical Analysis of Anger through the Emotional Mechanism of Ressentiment

In this article we undertake an empirical examination of the psychology of what is often called ‘the angry citizen’, focusing on the emotional mechanism of ressentiment. A key element of the ‘anti-social triad of grievance politics’ (Capelos et al., 2021), ressentiment transmutes grievances felt as deprivation of opportunity, injustice, humiliation, lack of political efficacy, to emotional expressions of socially righteous indignation, destructive anger, hatred and rage. Focusing on anger as the output of negative politics can obfuscate the complex psychological footprint of ressentiment. To highlight the important differences between anger-proper and ressentiment, we use an original dataset with 164 excerpts from interviews with US ‘angry’ citizens available in Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era by Michael Kimmel, Strangers in their Own Land by Arlie Russell Hochschild and Stiffed: The Roots of Modern Male Rage by Susan Faludi. Employing qualitative and quantitative content analysis of the ‘angry citizens’ excerpts, we find evidence of envy, shame and inefficacious anger which fit the psychological footprint of ressentiment. Moreover, excerpts scoring high on ressentiment contain high frequency of reactionary anti-preferences and collective narcissism, pointing to the close relationship between the elements of the ‘anti-social triad of grievance politics’. This article engages with contemporary debates on negative politics, advances our theoretical understanding of the psychology of anger, and highlights the role of ressentiment as the emotional mechanism of grievance politics. Our findings have significant implications for understanding the political psychology of far-right support and extremist movements in contemporary democracies.