This post contains some very insightful interpretations and charts, and complements nicely my recent toot about vs .

Some highlights in a ๐Ÿงต thread:


๐Ÿ”ฌ Some notable exceptions to that global trend:

In the ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ , the influence of income has vanished, and support depends solely (and strongly!) on education (highly educated โ†” leftist).

In (epitome: ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช ) it’s the opposite: education became irrelevant, and political preference depends only on income (perhaps because they are wealthy, egalitarian countries?).

๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡น hasn’t changed like the other countries: there the Right is still supported mostly by educated (and rich) voters. (NB: in the 50’s and 60’s, Portugal was a dictatorship).

๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น is the rare case where leftist parties ended up being the parties of the richest segment of the population. I wouldn’t read too much into this, though, as the political landscape there during the last decade or two has been a populist mess.

๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ is the country where education and income tell you the least about political preferences! There’s still the secular correlation โ€œhigh income โ†” right wingโ€, but it’s very weak today. (NB: in the 50’s and 60’s, Spain was also a dictatorship).

ยท ยท 1 ยท 1 ยท 1


To be fair, most USA capital winners are technology based. An individual can currently pull in a quarter million a year with the right skills, over such a rate being exclusive to people with strong social connections.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.