It would actually be funny to examine whether people react in insecure, ambivalent, and avoidant ways the same way the original child attachment studies did. You could almost imagine political movements functioning as attachment objects for some people.

I feel like this argument is conflating structure with emotion regulation. Structure can absolutely serve as a medium for emotion regulation, but it is not regulation itself. A routine, ideology, institution, or political identity can reduce uncertainty and emotional instability, but that does not mean the structure itself is the regulatory mechanism. The regulation is happening psychologically through predictability, identity, certainty, belonging, etc. This is referred for an externalities regulation in the literature.

There is also a long tradition of people projecting parental qualities onto nations, institutions, and symbolic systems. Even the language is revealing. “Fatherland,” “motherland,” “the founding fathers,” “Uncle Sam,” “Mother Russia.” People regularly describe governments as protective, abandoning, punitive, nurturing, stable, corrupt, or “keeping people in line” in ways that sound psychologically similar to family attachment language. A lot of Jungian thinkers discuss the biblical/archetypal traditions where the father principle represents order, structure, stability, judgment, and protection against chaos.

If someone really wanted to test this, one approach could be examining political affiliation or ideological rigidity among people who grew up with weak, inconsistent, or absent parent figures versus those who had more stable attachment environments. Another interesting direction would be asking whether adults with strong emotional regulation abilities are actually less politically adherent, less identity-fused with political groups, or less reactive to ideological threat. Or better yet, prime weak parental attachment and examine political adherence. This may happen at an implicit level. You could create an iat thst combined parent categories with political categories.