How Do Ordinary Citizens Experience Polarization Under an Authoritarian Regime? A Qualitative Study of Affects and Preferences in Postinvasion Russian Society

Abstract

In recent decades, political polarization has attracted increasing attention in academia and beyond. Most scholars consider polarization a phenomenon that erodes democratic norms in the interests of populist political entrepreneurs, thereby harming democracies. However, the definitional characteristics of polarization—affective and preference distance among citizens—can be observed and studied outside democracies as well. This study suggests exploring affective and preference polarization under an authoritarian regime, specifically in Russian society in the aftermath of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. An analysis of 213 semistructured interviews with supporters, undecideds, and opponents of the invasion demonstrates that polarization fails due to depoliticization, typical for autocracies. Specifically, the hostility of citizens diminishes because they find their adversaries mostly in primary groups—among relatives, friends, and colleagues. Hence, after the spark of conflicts at the beginning of the invasion, people prefer to avoid controversial topics to save the relationships with close ones. At the same time, preference differences appear to be non-divisive. Adversaries share political views, including the need for economic development and expansion of the welfare state, as well as a negative attitude toward corruption. The polarization attempted by the Kremlin and its opposition has failed, opening up prospects for further cooperation and compromise between citizens with opposing attitudes toward the war.