The exact political location where conspiracy theories thrive

People who are most likely to believe in conspiracy theories tend to share a specific blend of political views, pairing a desire for left-wing economic policies with conservative cultural values. A recent analysis published in the journal Political Psychology maps the ideological coordinates of conspiracy thinking across Europe, revealing that it thrives in a very precise corner of the political landscape. The results point out that those who long for economic equality but demand strict cultural conformity are especially prone to believe that secret plots control global events.

Conspiracy theories attract a diverse cast of characters, ranging from wellness influencers to alienated workers and political radicals. While psychologists have spent years studying the personality traits that make someone susceptible to such beliefs, less attention has been paid to the actual political demands of these individuals. Florian Buchmayr, a sociologist at the University of Bremen in Germany, wanted to understand what specific policy preferences unite people who see hidden agendas behind major events. Buchmayr and his co-author André Krouwel set out to map the political profiles of conspiracy believers beyond simple liberal or conservative labels.

Asking someone to place themselves on a basic scale from left to right rarely captures their actual policy preferences. Early studies suggested that conspiracy thinking was simply a trait of the political extremes, appearing equally on the far-left and the far-right. Other analyses pointed to a heavier concentration on the political right. The inconsistency in these past results likely stems from how political ideology was measured, prompting the researchers to take a multidimensional approach.

To investigate this, the researchers analyzed data from the European Voter Election Studies Survey, encompassing tens of thousands of respondents across 13 countries. The survey measured general conspiracy mentality, which is a person’s underlying tendency to assume that clandestine organizations coordinate major events. Respondents indicated their level of agreement with statements suggesting that secret organizations greatly influence political decisions, or that seemingly unconnected events are often the result of covert activities.

To map the political landscape, the researchers measured attitudes across three distinct dimensions of public debate. The first was economic redistribution, focusing on whether taxes should be raised on the wealthy to help the poor and whether corporations prioritize profits over fair wages. The second dimension was migration, assessing whether respondents felt that immigrants enriched their country culturally or if there were too many foreign nationals present. The third dimension focused on authoritarianism, measuring the desire for strong leadership and the belief that governments should uphold traditional moral standards.

By analyzing these dimensions, the researchers could sort individuals into 27 unique attitude profiles. They discovered that one specific profile stood out distinctly from the rest. Individuals who combined left-wing economic views with conservative cultural and anti-migration views registered the highest levels of conspiracy thinking.

The researchers labeled this ideological blend the national-authoritarian solidarity profile. People in this group desire strong state intervention to protect workers and redistribute wealth. At the same time, they want these economic benefits restricted to a culturally uniform, native population.

The authors suggest this group bemoans a lost paradise, idealizing a vision of a post-war society marked by low economic inequality and high cultural homogeneity. For these individuals, conspiracy theories may serve as a psychological tool to make sense of unsettling modernization processes that have disrupted their ideal world. Blaming hidden forces allows them to explain away cultural shifts that they view as destructive.

The study also identified the demographic least likely to harbor these ideas. That distinction belongs to individuals who hold right-wing views on the economy but progressive views on cultural issues. These individuals favor free markets and low taxes while embracing immigration and rejecting authoritarian leadership, making them highly resistant to grand conspiracy narratives.

There is an apparent paradox in the link between conspiracy thinking and authoritarianism. Conspiracy theorists frequently present themselves as rebels fighting against a malevolent elite or an oppressive government. Yet, the survey data shows they have a strong preference for strict authority and obedience.

The researchers explain this dynamic by referencing older theories regarding authoritarian personalities. These individuals often act rebellious toward current democratic institutions because they view those systems as weak or corrupted by hidden plots. Their ultimate goal is not a society free of rules, but rather submission to a new leader who possesses the strength to crush the conspirators.

Societal class and education levels did not alter this fundamental pattern in the data. While people with lower incomes and less formal education are generally more prone to conspiracy beliefs, the specific pairing of left-wing economics and right-wing culture remained consistent across the socioeconomic spectrum. The conspiratorial mindset acts like a gravitational pull, dragging individuals from various demographic backgrounds toward the exact same ideological center.

A wealthy individual with a college degree who believes in conspiracy theories will hold much more economically progressive and culturally conservative views than their wealthy peers who reject such theories. The same holds true for working-class populations. Regardless of their starting point, belief in secret plots aligns with a very specific set of policy demands.

The political landscape of Western Europe offers very few mainstream parties that cater to this specific mix of requests. Traditional left-wing parties typically embrace progressive cultural values, while traditional conservative parties lean toward free-market economics. This dynamic leaves the national-authoritarian solidarity group feeling politically homeless.

Because they lack mainstream representation, these individuals display high levels of distrust in political institutions. When they do cast a ballot, the data shows they disproportionately vote for radical right-wing populist parties. These parties have recognized the appeal of marrying hazy promises of economic protection with aggressive rhetoric against immigration.

Right-wing populist leaders frequently use conspiracy narratives to mobilize this exact base of voters. By portraying cultural changes and economic struggles as the deliberate work of a shadowy elite, these politicians speak directly to the defining anxieties of this demographic. Voting for these parties acts as an expression of their anti-establishment worldview.

The authors point out that the study relies on observational survey data, which cannot establish a strict timeline of cause and effect. Holding specific attitudes about taxes and immigration does not automatically cause someone to adopt a conspiracy mentality. It is equally possible that viewing the world through a lens of secret plots shapes a person’s policy preferences over time.

Future research could examine how these ideological pairings function outside of Europe, particularly in heavily polarized two-party systems like the United States. Tracking these attitude profiles across different election cycles could also clarify whether events like economic recessions push more citizens toward this conspiratorial center. Understanding where conspiracy beliefs are anchored offers a much clearer view of modern electoral dynamics.

The study, “The epicenter of conspiracy belief: The economically left-leaning and culturally regressive spot in the political landscape,” was authored by Florian Buchmayr and André Krouwel.