Political polarization in the United States
Political polarization is a prominent component of politics in the United States.[1] Scholars distinguish between ideological polarization (differences between the policy positions) and affective polarization (a dislike and distrust of political out-groups), both of which are apparent in the United States.[2][3] In the last few decades, the U.S. has experienced a greater surge in ideological polarization and affective polarization than comparable democracies.[4][5]
"Asymmetric polarization" redirects here. For asymmetric polarization in American news media, see Media bias in the United States.
Differences in political ideals and policy goals are indicative of a healthy democracy.[6] Scholarly questions consider changes in the magnitude of political polarization over time, the extent to which polarization is a feature of American politics and society,[7] and whether there has been a shift away from focusing on triumphs to dominating the perceived abhorrent supporters of the opposing party.[6]
Polarization among U.S. legislators is asymmetric, as it has primarily been driven by a rightward shift among Republicans in Congress.[8][9][10] Polarization has increased since the 1970s, with rapid increases in polarization during the 2000s onwards.[11] According to the Pew Research Center, members of both parties who have unfavorable opinions of the opposing party have doubled since 1994,[12] while those who have very unfavorable opinions of the opposing party are at record highs as of 2022.[13]
Politically polarizing issues[edit]
As of February 2020, a study conducted by the Pew Research Center highlights the current political issues that have the most partisanship. By far, addressing climate change was the most partisan issue with only 21% of Republicans considering it a top policy priority as opposed to 78% of Democrats.[24] Issues that are also extremely partisan include protecting the environment, reforming gun policy, and bolstering the country's military strength.[24] These differences in policy priorities emerge as both Democrats and Republicans shift their focus away from improving the economy. Since 2011, both parties have gradually placed economic stimulation and job growth lower on their priority list, with Democrats experiencing a sharper decline of importance when compared to Republicans.[24] This is in stark contrast to the 1990s, when both Democrats and Republicans shared similar views on climate change and showed significantly more agreement.[25] A 2017 poll conducted by Gallup identifies issues where the partisan gap has significantly increased over a period of about fifteen years. For Republicans, the most significant shift was the idea that the "federal government has too much power", with 39% of Republicans agreeing with that notion in 2002 as opposed to 82% agreeing in 2016. On the Democratic side, the largest shift was increasing favorability towards Cuba, changing from 32% in 2002 to 66% in 2017.[26] Ultimately, as partisanship continues to permeate and dominate policy, citizens who adhere and align themselves with political parties become increasingly polarized.[26]
On some issues with a wide public consensus, partisan politics still divides citizens. For instance, even though 60% of Americans believe that the government should provide healthcare for its citizens, opinions are split among party lines with 85% of Democrats, including left-leaning independents, believing that healthcare is the government's responsibility and 68% of Republicans believing that it is not the government's responsibility.[27] Likewise, on some prominent issues where the parties are broadly split, there is bipartisan support for specific policies. For example, in health care, 79% of Americans think pre-existing conditions should be covered by health insurance; 60% think abortion should be broadly legal in the first trimester but only 28% in the second trimester and 13% in the third trimester.[28] 77% of Americans think immigration is good for the country.[28] On gun rights, 89% support more mental health funding, 83% support closing the gun show loophole, 72% support red flag laws, and 72% support requiring gun permits when purchasing.[29] In the federal budget, there is 80% or more support to retain funding for veterans, infrastructure, Social Security, Medicare, and education.[30]
Political polarization also shaped the public's reaction to COVID-19. A study that observed the online conversations surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic found that left-leaning individuals were more likely to criticize politicians compared to right-leaning users. Additionally, left-leaning social media accounts often shared disease prevention measures through hashtags, while right-leaning posts were more likely to spread conspiracies and retweet posts from the White House's Twitter account.[31] The study continues to explain that, when considering geographic location, because individuals in conservative and right leaning areas are more likely to see COVID-19 as a non-threat, they are less likely to stay home and follow health guidelines.[31]
Effects[edit]
Demonization[edit]
Potentially both a cause and effect of polarization is "demonization" of political opponents, such as accusing them not just of being wrong about certain legislation or policies but of hating their country, or the use of "what are called ‘devil terms’ — things that are so unquestionably bad that you can’t have a debate about them” (according to Jennifer Mercieca).[108] Some examples include the accusations that President Biden has a plan, to “flood our country with terrorists, fentanyl, child traffickers, and MS-13 gang members", and that "Under President Biden's leadership ... We face an unprecedented assault on the American way of life by the radical left" (Mary E. Miller-IL), that “Democrats are so enamored of power that they want to legalize cheating in elections,” (Andy Biggs-AZ), "America-hating Socialists seek to upend the American way of life based on freedom and liberty and replace it with dictatorial government that controls every aspect of our lives" (Mo Brooks-AL).[109]
While "demonizing communication style" has been in use "for years" among "media personalities and the occasional firebrand lawmaker", its use became popular among high level politicians with the election of Donald Trump and with the 2022 election has become widespread among "the 139 House Republicans who challenged the Electoral College vote" in January 2021, according to a 2022 study of "divisive rhetoric" in 3.7 million "tweets, Facebook ads, newsletters and congressional speeches" by the New York Times.[109] Checking the Congressional Record, the Times found Republicans have "more than quadrupled their use of divisive rhetoric" since the early 2010s.
An example of the escalation in aggressive attack is Republican House leader Kevin McCarthy, who after the January 6 insurrection "implored members of his party to tone down their speech", saying, 'We all must acknowledge how our words have contributed to the discord in America ... No more name calling, us versus them.'” However in "dozens of tweets since then" McCarthy has referred to "Democrats as 'radical' leftists" who "prefer China to the United States" and are "ruining America".[109] (A "few Democrats", such as Representative Bill Pascrell of New Jersey, also have "frequently" used "demonizing speech on Twitter".)[109] Some political scientists have warned that "factionalism is alarming because it makes compromise harder and normalizes" divisive rhetoric throughout the country.[109]
Political violence[edit]
Some authors have found a correlation between polarization of political discourse and the prevalence of political violence.[17] For instance, Rachel Kleinfeld, an expert on the rule of law and post-conflict governance, writes that political violence is extremely calculated and, while it may appear "spontaneous," it is the culmination of years of "discrimination and social segregation." Part of the problem lies in partisan politics, as partisanship in the political arena fosters partisan violence. In return, this increases polarization within the public, resulting in a public that ends up justifying political violence.[110] Politicians may use political polarization as a weapon to further push existing institutions, which may also foster political violence. When applied to the United States, the current polarized climate may create conditions that can lead political violence within the country, unless there is meaningful reform.[110] In fact, data shows that within three years, both Democrats and Republicans increasingly agree that political violence is at least "a little" justified as long as their party's political agenda is advanced. In 2017, only 8% of both Democrats and Republicans justified the use of political violence, but as of September 2020, that number jumped to 33% and 36%, respectively.[111]