Is it Possible to Move Towards Depolarization?

With current trends and the fact that our current party era is called the Polarization Era, our country continues to see increased political divide between democrats and republicans. If we continue as it is now, this evolution will continue to increase polarization. Furthermore, with stronger media presences and divided government, there is no one looking for solutions. Rather, both parties are looking for ways to beat the other side, which will just continue to increase the divide.

So how could this divide evolve in the other direction? Historically, it has taken major catastrophes to bind our country. As discussed in the chapter, the Democratic party became the clear majority because of the Great Depression, having most of America support the actions needed for healing the economy. Although there still was the two party system, the country was bound together in the effort to fix the country. Directly after, World War II improved the economy and at the same time, our entry into the war gave the entire country one unified goal. These events suppressed political polarization. However, recently, we have not had similar experiences. 9/11 may have bound our country for a bit, but it created a war that led to disagreement and further polarization on ideology and the justification for the continued war. This way of looking at minimizing polarization is irrational as we cannot create binding events, nor do we hope for negative happenings that we can bond over.

One possible way to start lessening the polarization is for there to be a new candidate that appeals to both parties. Someone that may choose a side, but does not have enough on them to warrant scrutinization. However, this too, is unlikely for two reasons. First, with the current state of the media and fake news, unwarranted scrutinization will still occur and both sides will look for anyway to demonize the opposing candidate. Second, both parties will not be looking to nominate a candidate who will pull people from the opposing party, rather they will look to continue with the polarization and choose the candidate who is most supported and best represents the party. This, will no doubt, be someone the opposing side will not welcome.

I think at this stage in the Polarization Era, it is unclear how it will evolve, other than increasing polarization, as has been trending. We can hope for a solution sooner rather than later, but for now, especially with the highly controversial president we have today, we can expect to see polarization hold strong.

6 Responses to "Is it Possible to Move Towards Depolarization?"

Timothy Miller says:

April 22, 2018 at 9:24 pm

Calum,
I have written a paper before on the unification of our nation coming only after a catastrophe. It is sad but true. It will continue to happen which will have an impact on the elections following the catastrophe, but people need to focus on the elections prior to such an event and vote in a way to keep that from happening. It is no surprise that the Democrats won after the Great Depression, but America needs to unite before that happened to vote someone who could have kept it from happening. Polarization will continue to grow as the media continues to grow and dissect every move of the opposing party. Currently, when something terrible happens, we often spend too much time arguing over how to make it better, rather than finding something and focusing on it. The time spent arguing publicly between candidates is often time wasted in the eyes of Americans.
Thanks.
Joanna Briand says:

April 23, 2018 at 10:28 pm

Thank you so much for your post. What makes our current Republican-Democrat partisan divide so stable is that it perfectly lines up with the conservative-liberal ideological divide. This confluence of party and ideology is relatively new in American history. In order to see some kind of substantial change, it has been suggested that it needs to come from some sort of shift or the emergence of a new issue that undermines the current ideological divide. I agree that it should not be an event, as you also stated. But, rather, some kind of issue that comes about with time that could begin a new dialogue, a new debate that could allow people to start to understand why people believe what they believe on the other side. This may start to lower the intensity that exists within partisanship, and therefore, decrease polarization.
Madeleine Stone says:

April 24, 2018 at 9:48 am

Hi Calum,

Thanks for a great post! It is clear by the political atmosphere that exists today that there is an strict divide between democrats and republicans on the political spectrum. Historically, Americans are less likely now than they have been in the past to hold a mix of both conservative and liberal views- being scattered throughout the spectrum. However as we see now, people are getting closer and closer to each end of spectrum. At the same time, we can related this to ideological consistency, which is the shares of Americans holding liberal or conservative views across a wider range of issues. This is also increasingly associated with partisanship and polarization. I think that your argument to try and decrease polarization would be to have a candidate that would appeal to both parties. However, with this day in age I think that would be virtually impossible to do, like you said. I agree with you that it is unclear the best way to try and reduce this increasing polarization and hopefully we will see a solution in the 2020 election.
Chloe Blond says:

April 24, 2018 at 7:53 pm

Hi Calum

Thank you for your post! There is no doubt that the divide between the Republican and Democrat Parties is deepening. In thinking about what to respond, I boiled your blog post down to one, seemingly simple question. What would it take for the divide between Democrats and Republicans to lessen? I then took your question a step further and asked what it would take for Democrats and Republicans to work together?

I found an article online that states bipartisanship most often occurs in times when on party has internal divisions or when there are strong political incentives to cooperate. Julian Zelizer offers reasoning for why bipartisanship might be possible today. One of the reasons that Julian offers is that President Trump keeps diving deeper into politically intolerable territory. President Trump is causing damage that might not be reparable and damaging the reputation of his party. Some Republicans might be thinking that the only way to save their party is to reach across the aisle to Democrats. Senate Republicans might decide that working alongside the Democrats is the best way to stick it to President Trump. I had never thought of this before, but after reading it, it makes sense to me. What do you think?

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/republicans-democrats-bipartisanship-trump/538029/
Virginia Myers says:

April 24, 2018 at 9:45 pm

Dear Calum,

Thank you for your post. The growing gap between liberals and conservatives is a defining feature of American politics today. As you mentioned, the one thing we can expect in the short term is a continued divide between parties and ideologies. Earlier in the semester, we discussed the question of whether it would be better if we have a more partisan press? Some say that, after all, we are only reading media and news that align with and confirm our beliefs and biases. This made me think about cyberbalkanization, where you can go into a bubble and only listen to points of view that confirm our opinions. In a sense, it makes sense why we wouldn’t seek out information we don’t agree with, but this is bad and puts the health of our democracy at risk because it means we are narrowing our mindset and understanding of the political sphere. So, as you suggested throughout your blog post, it seems rather unlikely our country can move towards depolarization. However, what we can do as American citizens is work to educate youth and our peers to continue to read and critically analyze opposing points of views to expand our thinking and better exercise our popular sovereignty and influence government policies. Then, maybe we will be a less polarized society.
Sara Milano says:

April 27, 2018 at 8:58 pm

Calum,

I think many people share your hope for less polarization in the American political climate. While within our current system it is almost impossible for a third party candidate to become elected, we may still hope for a someone who is a weak-democrat or weak-republican. This candidate would be more moderate but still align themselves within an ideology. They may attract more voters from the other side or people who feel their ideologies do not align with the extremes that persist today. This may be one way to create less polarization in our politics, or at least our politicians.

Your comment about unifying America is really thought provoking. It seems that in times of trauma or tragedy, the country is able to band together beyond ideologies. Further, having an outside “enemy” often leads people to put aside their differences to achieve a common goal. However, the loss of life it would entail to generate enough tragedy to unify Democrats and Republicans is too great. Even following the mass shootings like those in Las Vegas where more than 50 people were gunned down, the aftermath became politicized. While I don’t disagree that these events are tied to gun control and have inherently political consequences, the gun control movement in the wake of the Florida shooting has led to more extreme polarization than this country has seen. This has even led to conservative commentators mocking the victims and activists from the high school in Parkland. This is certainly inappropriate, and following a tragedy like this we should come together as a country to mourn and reflect. However, tragedy has not been effective at unifying us recently, so hopefully it will be a positive event rather than a negative one that will lead Americans to finally look past their ideological divide.

Comments are closed.