Parties' (non)responses to levels and changes of inequality: Reconciling rival views using new data on equality concepts

Do parties respond to inequality? Despite the growing relevance of economic disparities and their negative political and societal consequences, our understanding of party competition over redistribution remains limited. Thus far, research had to rely on broad salience scores of socio-economic positions from party manifestos rather than parties' distinct stances on (economic) inequality. To tackle this limitation, we introduce a novel (Varieties of Egalitarianism) dataset on party stances on economic inequality, equal chances, and equal rights for OECD countries over five decades (1970-2020). We demonstrate that responsiveness found in previous studies is driven by non-economic equality concepts. We then re-assess the impact of "inequality" on party responsiveness. Theoretically, we question (left) parties' responsiveness to levels of inequality. Low visibility of levels and system justification beliefs undermine the mobilization of those voters most in need of redistribution. As a result of the electoral disincentives, left parties do not emphasize economic equality. By contrast, rising inequality is visible and poses a real electoral threat that left parties should address via economic egalitarianism. In line with these rationales, we find that 1) (left) parties do not respond to inequality levels but 2) left parties do respond to increases in inequality when their below-median core groups fall behind. In the concluding discussion; we argue that our results suggest that a ratchet pattern could stabilize entrenched inequality.