An Investigation of Perceptions of (Un)just Systems: Tests of Rationalization in the Context of Irish Austerity Measures Séamus A. Power 1 , Tara M. Mandalaywala 2 , and Aaron C. Kay 3 1 Department of Psychology, University of Copenhagen 2 Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst 3 Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Fuqua School of Business, Duke University Following a global economic collapse in 2008, the Irish accepted economic hardship in the years immediately following the financial downturn without demonstrating. Why did not the Irish protest in response to the economic collapse, especially when other countries hit by the economic collapse did? Here, we empirically test ideas put forth in previous qualitative work: that a culturally ingrained moral principle, in life, “you reap what you sow,” helps explain why the Irish passively accepted austerity without protesting. We predicted if Irish acceptance of austerity occurred because of the belief their own actions caused their plight, then reminding them of this culpability should decrease support for civic engagement and protest and increase acceptance of austerity. Across a large sample of Irish participants (N = 570), we found no evidence that experimental induction of culpability affected support for protest or acceptance of austerity. However, we found interindividual variation in the extent to which participants did not support the protest and saw austerity measures as fair was associated with several psychological mechanisms that might underlie a “reap what you sow” mentality, namely with an increased tendency to support system justifying policies and endorse the belief the world is an inherently fair place. Our contribution highlights the importance of conducting ecologically valid research into unfolding social, economic, and political phenomena, and integrating qualitative with quantitative methods to gain a holistic and psychologically rich understanding of contemporary phenomena. Public Significance Statement Our research on the “reap what you sow” hypothesis highlights a novel cultural and moral process which helps explain why people accept economic hardship without taking to the streets to demonstrate and demand sociopolitical change. Keywords: ecological validity, financial crisis, Ireland, protest, system justification Supplemental materials: https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000540.supp In 2008, the economies of Ireland, Greece, and Spain collapsed. In response, the governments of these countries imposed harsh austerity measures. However, while the residents of Greece and Spain actively engaged in protests in response to austerity measures, the Irish passively accepted austerity for 6 years without demon- strating only to protest during an economic recovery from 2014 to 2015. The curious case of the Irish provides an interesting opportu- nity to investigate cultural variation in how people experience, understand, and react to economic hardship. Under what conditions can and do people living in democratic nations accept hardship without engaging in democratic activities, such as demonstrating, to effect social change? And under what circumstances does their tolerance turn to protest and other forms of democratic engagement and civic discontent? And what are the psychological mechanisms underlying these behaviors? There are a number of relevant social psychological theories, and psychological traits, that help explain why groups do not protest. In this article, we focus on system- justification theory (SJT) and three related individual traits that help explain maintenance for the status quo: Belief in a just world, locus of control, and proneness to guilt and shame. These psychological explanations exist independently of the localized Irish case. How- ever, we use these psychological constructs to examine, and unpack, the thickly descriptive ethnographic reports of Irish inaction against austerity and the “reap what you sow” moral explanation used to describe this localized form of system justification. SJT posits people have a motivation to justify the prevailing status quo (Jost et al., 2004). System justification is a “process by which existing social arrangements are legitimized, even at the expense of personal and group interest” (Jost et al., 2004, p. 2). Most of the supporting evidence is based on experimental and correlational social psychological research (Jost, 2019). The theory highlights the tendency to accept the status quo and to imbue it with legitimacy, such that the system in which one lives is seen as morally good, fair, natural, desirable, inalterable, and therefore inevitable (Jost, 2020). Justification for, and ultimately acceptance of, the system in which This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. Séamus A. Power https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6770-4756 Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Séamus A. Power, Department of Psychology, Øster Farimagsgade 2A, 1353 København K, Denmark. Email: seamus.power@psy.ku.dk Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology © 2021 American Psychological Association ISSN: 1078-1919 https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000540 49 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. 2021, Vol. 27, No. 1, 49–57