Political polarization

Extracted Attributes

• Type

  Affective polarization (emotional dislike and distrust of political out-groups)

• Definition

  The divergence of political attitudes away from the center, towards ideological extremes.

• Exacerbated by

  Tech platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter

• Primary Context

  Political parties and democratic systems of government, particularly two-party systems

• Modern Divisions

  Religious against secular, nationalist against globalist, traditional against modern, or rural against urban

• Associated Process

  Politicization

• Consequences (US context)

  Declining trust in institutions, scorn for facts, legislative dysfunction, erosion of democratic norms, potential for real-world violence

• Contributing Factors (US context)

  Realignment of political party membership, rise of hyper-partisan radio and cable TV outlets, increased racial animus during Donald Trump’s presidency

Timeline

• An American Political Science Review study concluded that more polarization would help voters differentiate between parties, contrasting with later views on its negative impacts. (Source: web_search_results)

  1950

• Pew Research Center published a report on political polarization in the American public, highlighting the difference between growing ideological consistency and rising partisan antipathy. (Source: web_search_results)

  2014-06-12

• Political polarization was observed to drive online conversations about the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. (Source: web_search_results)

  2020

• The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace published research on polarization, democracy, and political violence in the United States. (Source: web_search_results)

  2023-09

• Gavin Newsom launched a new podcast, analyzed as a shrewd attempt to counteract political polarization and position himself for a potential 2028 presidential run. (Source: d48f5dcd-b511-4e5d-adec-0e6c1110bf66)

  Recent

Political polarization

Political polarization (spelled polarisation in British English, Australian English, and New Zealand English) is the divergence of political attitudes away from the center, towards ideological extremes. Scholars distinguish between ideological polarization (differences between the policy positions) and affective polarization (an emotional dislike and distrust of political out-groups). Most discussions of polarization in political science consider polarization in the context of political parties and democratic systems of government. In two-party systems, political polarization usually embodies the tension of its binary political ideologies and partisan identities. However, some political scientists assert that contemporary polarization depends less on policy differences on a left and right scale but increasingly on other divisions such as religious against secular, nationalist against globalist, traditional against modern, or rural against urban. Polarization is associated with the process of politicization.

Web Search Results

• Political Polarization - ECPS

  Political polarization can refer to the divergence of political attitudes to ideological extremes. Almost all discussions of polarization in political

• Political Polarization in the American Public - Pew Research Center

  The current report is divided into five parts: The first two focus on measuring the nature and scope of political polarization, emphasizing the difference between growing ideological consistency and rising partisan antipathy. The third looks closely at how polarization manifests itself in people’s personal lives. The fourth looks at the relationship between polarization and practical policymaking, and the fifth digs deeper into how political participation both amplifies and reflects [...] Later, the project will explore the various factors that contribute to political polarization, or stem from it. A September report will examine how political polarization is linked to people’s information environments: Their news sources, social media habits and interpersonal communication networks. Other reports will look at how political polarization relates to where people live, to their political environments, to how they view themselves and others around them, to their socioeconomic [...] Beyond the rise in ideological consistency, another major element in polarization has been the growing contempt that many Republicans and Democrats have for the opposing party. To be sure, disliking the other party is nothing new in politics. But today, these sentiments are broader and deeper than in the recent past.

• Political polarization on COVID-19 pandemic response in the United ...

  summarize (p.1) “Few trends in science have generated as much discussion as its politicization”. Similarly, Pittinsky (2015) refers to “America's crisis of faith in science”. At the same time, political polarization among both elites and the mass public has been on the rise in the United States (Fiorina, 2017; Hetherington, 2001; McCarty, Poole, & Rosenthal, 2016; Pew, 2014)—including affective polarization—or the increasing tendency to dislike and distrust members from the other party [...] Based on the extant literature, we advance two theoretical reasons to expect a significant degree of political polarization on trust and support for a wide range of COVID-19 public health policies and behaviors such that conservatives/Republicans are generally less supportive than liberals/Democrats. In other words, we expect to find significant asymmetries on the COVID-19 pandemic response. First, from a “bottom-up” point of view, political ideology is often defined as the beliefs and values [...] 37. Jiang J., Chen E., Yan S., Lerman K., Ferrara E. Political polarization drives online conversations about COVID-19 in the United States. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies. 2020;2(3):200–211. doi: 10.1002/hbe2.202. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 38. Jost J.T. The end of the end of ideology. American Psychologist. 2006;61(7):651–670. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.61.7.651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

• How tech platforms fuel U.S. political polarization and what ...

  Polarization is a complicated phenomenon. Some divisiveness is natural in a democracy. In the U.S., struggles for social and racial justice have led to backlash and partisan animosity. But the extreme polarization we are now witnessing, especially on the political right, has consequences that threaten to undermine democracy itself. These include declining trust in institutions; scorn for facts; legislative dysfunction; erosion of democratic norms; and, in the worst case, real-world violence. [...] Our central conclusion, based on a review of more than 50 social science studies and interviews with more than 40 academics, policy experts, activists, and current and former industry people, is that platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter likely are not the root causes of political polarization, but they do exacerbate it. Clarifying this point is important for two reasons. First, Facebook’s disavowals, in congressional testimony and other public statements, may have clouded the issue in [...] All of this cannot be attributed to the rise of Silicon Valley, of course. Polarization began growing in the U.S. decades before Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube appeared. Other factors—including the realignment of political party membership, the rise of hyper-partisan radio and cable TV outlets, and increased racial animus during Donald Trump’s uniquely divisive presidency—have contributed to the problem.

• Polarization, Democracy, and Political Violence in the United States

  In the 1950s, some influential U.S. scholars argued that America needed more polarization, which they defined as members of different parties holding differing policy beliefs. At the time, each of the two dominant parties encompassed a breadth of often overlapping political views thanks to conservative Southern Democrats and liberal Rockefeller Republicans. A famous _American Political Science Review_ study from 1950 concluded that more polarization would help voters differentiate between the [...] 5. Polarization is a highly nuanced field, and small assumptions can lead to big mistakes. Practitioners and philanthropists should be particularly careful about assumptions regarding moderation. People who poll as moderates may also be antidemocratic or supportive of political violence, especially on the right. On the left, support for democracy may coincide with support for violence. [...] 4. Religious or evangelical voters were one of many factors—not the driving factor—behind polarization. Religiously driven political polarization was a concern at the time because of the organization of the Moral Majority and post-1980s evangelical movements.71

Political polarization (spelled polarisation in British English) is the divergence of political attitudes away from the center, towards ideological extremes. Most discussions of polarization in political science consider polarization in the context of political parties and democratic systems of government. In two-party systems, political polarization usually embodies the tension of its binary political ideologies and partisan identities. However, some political scientists assert that contemporary polarization depends less on policy differences on a left and right scale but increasingly on other divisions such as religious against secular, nationalist against globalist, traditional against modern, or rural against urban. Polarization is associated with the process of politicization. Scholars distinguish between ideological polarization (differences between the policy positions) and affective polarization (an emotional dislike and distrust of political out-groups).