Deborah Hill Cone

Despite growing concerns about declining social cohesion, no systematic analyses have assessed how societal disengagement manifests in New Zealand. The present study addresses this oversight by examining societal disengagement in a large, nationwide random sample of New Zealand adults collected in 2021/2022 (N = 34,131). Using latent profile analysis, we identified seven profiles in the population that differed on seven indicators of disengagement: feeling wronged, powerless, meaningless, disconnected from community, financially deprived and pessimistic, and wary of authority. Two enfranchised profiles captured most of the sample (68.9%), suggesting most people are generally connected to society. However, we identified a small Anomic profile (6.4%) in which members experienced alienation and disengagement across indicators. We also identified four additional profiles reflecting combinations of enfranchisement and disengagement. The seven profiles differed across demographic characteristics and reflect qualitative distinctions between the socially enfranchised and disengaged in New Zealand.

Protestors recently repurposed the abortion rights’ mantra, “my body, my choice,” to oppose COVID-19 mandates. But do those who oppose public health mandates fully support the right to choose? We answer this question by using exploratory analyses to identify the unique response patterns underlying support for abortion and COVID-19 mandates in random samples from the United States (Study 1; N = 2,331) and New Zealand (Study 2; N = 33,310). Latent profile analyses revealed a small subgroup in both countries (12.6% and 3.4% of the respective samples) who opposed mandates. Yet contrary to the “my body, my choice” rhetoric seen at anti-mandate protests, they also opposed abortion. Across both studies, those in the Anti-Mandate profile tended to be more religious, conservative, and distrustful of institutions. In Study 2, they were also low on cognitive consistency and high on conspiracy belief. Finally, the Anti-Mandate profile was opposed to free speech critical of both the United States and religion (Study 1), high on sexual prejudice (both studies), unsupportive of progressive protests (but supportive of reactionary protests; Study 2), and likely to vote for conservative parties (both studies). These results reveal the mobilization potential of the anti-mandate movement, uncover important contradictions within its members, and illustrate the nuanced ways in which opposition to gender policies (i.e., reproductive rights) coalesce with reactionary protests.

Protestors recently repurposed the abortion rights’ mantra, “my body, my choice,” to oppose COVID-19 mandates. But do those who oppose public health mandates fully support the right to choose? We answer this question by using exploratory analyses to identify the unique response patterns underlying support for abortion and COVID-19 mandates in random samples from the United States (Study 1; N = 2,331) and New Zealand (Study 2; N = 33,310). Latent profile analyses revealed a small subgroup in both countries (12.6% and 3.4% of the respective samples) who opposed mandates. Yet contrary to the “my body, my choice” rhetoric seen at anti-mandate protests, they also opposed abortion. Across both studies, those in the Anti-Mandate profile tended to be more religious, conservative, and distrustful of institutions. In Study 2, they were also low on cognitive consistency and high on conspiracy belief. Finally, the Anti-Mandate profile was opposed to free speech critical of both the United States and religion (Study 1), high on sexual prejudice (both studies), unsupportive of progressive protests (but supportive of reactionary protests; Study 2), and likely to vote for conservative parties (both studies). These results reveal the mobilization potential of the anti-mandate movement, uncover important contradictions within its members, and illustrate the nuanced ways in which opposition to gender policies (i.e., reproductive rights) coalesce with reactionary protests.