In the midst of a rapidly changing global political landscape, the United States has experienced increased polarization of political parties and ideologies. Differing political opinions is a core component of democracy. However, increasing distance between political parties in the United States today has surpassed party mobilization and is nearing a dangerous era of democratic backsliding and political gridlock.
What is Polarization?
In the context of politics, polarization generally refers to ideological differences and the process by which these differences increase over time. In theory, these differences are used to fulfill varying political expectations within a democratic system (Slater, 2016). However, political scientists have redefined polarization to represent, “a process whereby the normal multiplicity of differences in a society increasingly align along a single dimension and people increasingly perceive and describe politics and society in terms of ‘Us’ versus ‘Them’” (McCoy, 2018). This sense of distance within a political system creates a dynamic of intergroup conflict, leaving democracies vulnerable to gridlock and in more serious cases – collapse.
The threat of polarization is rooted in the movement of party identity from issue-based differences into an entire social identity. When opinions are united under a single identity or faction, as they are in the American political party system, members of that faction are likely to question the legitimacy of rival factions, or the “other” (McCoy, 2018). By grouping rivaling factions into different social identities, members then perceive each other as a threat to their own ideals. This in turn manifests itself as distrust towards opposing political parties and candidates. This breakdown of trust within a political system threatens the potential for political compromise, leading to gridlock. In worse-case scenarios, political gridlock can completely paralyze a government, resulting in the breakdown of government institutions (McCoy, 2018).
The effects of polarization are already impacting American government institutions.
As the United States political party system becomes increasingly more polarized, it is quickly approaching the dramatic effects of extreme polarization on democracy. As of 2014, the Pew Research Center reports that 36% of Republicans and 27% of democrats view their rival party as a threat to the nation’s well-being (Pew Research Center, 2014). The growing sense of distrust within the American party system has already begun showing its effects within U.S. government institutions.
Examples of gridlock within Congress have been prevalent throughout the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. As reported by The Washington Post, open feuds broke out between democrats and republicans over relief packages. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spoke to the matter, stating, “Why can’t they come to an agreement? We don’t have shared values. That’s just the way it is. So it’s not bickering. It’s standing our ground. We’re trying to find common ground.” This statement directly reflects gridlock within Congress brought on by a polarized party system.
Gridlock in Congress does not come without consequences. Analytical company GALLUP reports that as of February of this year, 75% of Americans disapprove of Congress. Congressional approval ratings have been on a steady decline since the start of the 21st century. That is, as polarization increases within the United States, the public perceives congress to be less and less successful.
Democratic erosion is a domino effect of polarization. As the public’s faith in government institutions dwindles, democracies are more vulnerable to democratic backsliding. Polarized perceptions of the government result in undemocratic practices by both government supporters and opposition parties. Under the “Us versus Them” rhetoric of polarization, government supporters are more likely to tolerate illiberal practices within government institutions, while opposition groups are encouraged to use undemocratic means to express opposition (McCoy, 2018). The United States has experienced increasing disparities between political parties. As American political identity becomes more intertwined with social identity, the threat of democratic erosion becomes much more real for American democracy.
I completely agree with your analysis of polarization in America today and its effects on the efficiency and effectiveness of our democracy. As you said, gridlock is already obvious within the decision-making of Congress, and I really liked the quote by Nancy Pelosi, because when everyone thinks they are right then they can justify defending their position without altering it or compromising. The longer this division lasts the more I think it has the potential to one day mean a descent into conflict, as people’s trust in their government is eroded on both sides. It’s crazy to me how political ideology was not originally this dividing of an issue. But the tendency for some Republicans to view Democrats as brain-washed and misinformed and some Democrats to view Republicans as skeptical and uninformed shows how far the divide has developed.
Obviously, the question now is how to deal with polarization, and if it’s possible to backtrack on the damage that has been done. I’d be interested to hear if you have any ideas for solutions. Perhaps the first step would be to facilitate more in-person conversations like those by the Braver Angels organization. Conversations occur on college campuses and academic spaces, but for the majority of the public, these interactions take place over social media where the chances of hearing out a friendly but opposing idea are slim. These conversations should have the benefit of revealing people’s similarities, without exacerbating their differences as news and social media tend to.
I loved your analysis of the state of polarization in the united states today. I think it is important to include the role that negative partisanship plays in polarization. This is when partisanship is manifested not as support for one’s party but as opposition to the other party. You do mention it, but I don’t believe you call it by name. Negative partisanship plays into how polarization drives the parties further apart, making governing slower and less effective. It also plays into the “other” mindset, where there is an in-group that you follow blindly from a result of echo chambers and propaganda that trains one to distrust anyone outside the group. It is very difficult to separate the role racial politics and identity play in the in-group/out-group dynamic. So often, the parties rely on propaganda that plays off fear and doubt along racial, ethnic, and/or religious lines. This leads to a deeper divide among Americans, which consequentially makes governing as one nation even harder. I find how you connect polarization to democratic erosion great. Dalio explains this when covering the fall of a nation and the realigning of the world order. The fall comes as polarization leads to the rise of populist and authoritarian leaders who erode the institutions. We saw this in 2016 as increased polarization lead to the election of Donald Trump. Eventually, the 2020 election saw Trump spread the “big lie” conspiracy that the election was rigged. This of course led to the January 6th insurrection. This shows how polarization leads to democratic backsliding.
This post caused me to do a lot of thinking because, I honestly, think that some of my beliefs probably do contribute to polarization whether I intend for them to or not. The Pew Research Center report that 36% of republicans and 27% of democrats view their rival party as a threat to the nation’s well-being was especially relevant to me as I too feel that my rival political party is a threat to America’s well-being. It reminded me of a discussion we had in class on people not being friends with or marrying someone of an opposite political party, which is another thing that can apply to me. If I look around my friend group we might have some small political differences but we are registered to vote under the same political party and we all are pretty adamantly against the opposing one. I understand that not everyone of the same political party has the same beliefs and the harmful ideas that are held by some members of the opposite party some other members are also against. However, I have a problem with them still identifying as a part of said party when those ideas are a part of their platform. While I do not agree with everything my party stands for, there is no widely held belief in my party that I adamantly disagree with or that goes against everything I stand for, which I can not say about the other political party. However, I do realize everything I just wrote is an example of polarization and that to be honest I am a part of the problem. What I want to know and do not find in a lot of the research on the topic is how should I deal with my own polarization? I agree with and see all the research that says it’s wrong but I am still not sure how I can internally combat it.