The bulk of Us Against Them: Ethnocentric Foundations of American Opinion is devoted to examining how ethnocentrism influences how certain Americans approach various policy issues and hot button topics. Kinder and Kam are keen to note that ethnocentrism does not have an effect on every political topic. Rather, ethnocentrism is activated when a particular political issue, or a media framing of the issue, is presented as an "us against them" conflict. Sadly, this "us against them" frame fits many of the issues currently facing America. Thus, while ethnocentrism doesn't affect every political debate is does influence public opinion on a wide variety of topics. In Part 2 of Us Against Them, from chapters 4-10, Kinder and Kam use two different measures of ethnocentrism to predict attitudes on a variety of political topics. Summarising, ethnocentrism predicts the following:
- An aggressive, hawish foreign policy stance.
- Less empathy for foreign civilian casualties in America's wars (e.g., the deaths of Iraqi women and children in the War on Terror).
- Less support for foreign aid and assistance.
- Support for anti-immigration policies and protective measures to preserve "our American" culture from the effects of immigration.
- Opposition to gay rights.
- Opposition to policies, such as affirmative action, aimed at redressing historic inequalities between blacks and whites.
- Opposition to means-tested welfare (i.e., programs for low-income persons) such as Food Stamps or Medicaid.
- Support for social insurance welfare, such as Social Security and Medicare.
So, we like the welfare state. More precisely, we like social welfare that is for us. But we are against welfare for them.