Kills Parties and Democracies
The best new study on what kills democracies (How Democracies Die) finds that it is no longer the military coup. Now polarization is what does them in. And the populist wave now sweeping the globe has been highly polarizing. There’s no surprise in that — populism is an Us vs Them ideology pure and simple.
In theory, left-wing populism is not polarizing, because it will unite the 99% — just about everyone. But that never happens. Never. If it did, then Sanders would win with 99% of the vote. It’s hard to imagine anything more ridiculous. As we all know, there is a lot more hate between the parties today than in the past.
This section looks at four topic areas:
- Emotional polarization (not issue polarization) is the kind ripping us apart.
- Why polarization from the left hurts the left in this time of negative partisanship.
- Sources of left polarization.
- Sources of right-wing polarization
- Ezra Klein’s new book: Why We’re Polarized
As an introduction here’s a brief explanation of emotional polarization.
What is Emotional Polarization?
Polarization began ripping our country apart in the late 1960s, and it’s only gotten worse. Only when we truly understand what polarization is can we begin to fix it.
It always takes two forms. Issue polarization is the one most often measured, and the one we tend to think is fundamental. But what really worries people, and rightly so, is emotional polarization (academics call this “affective polarization”). Understanding the difference provides the key to the dangers of our present situation.
It may surprise you to note that positions on political issues are no further apart now than in the Great Depression. In the early 1930s, we had no unemployment insurance, no Social Security, no Medicare, no safety net at all, and Franklin Roosevelt (the liberal candidate) won the presidency on a balanced budget platform with a campaign theme song of “Happy Days Are Here Again.” The Republicans, of course, had run somewhat to his right. Meanwhile, Huey Long, the wildly popular populist Louisiana governor and then US Senator, was demanding wealth redistribution that makes Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren look like Tea Party candidates.
Despite this high degree of issue polarization, Congress never voted along strict party lines, and the public trusted government far more than it does today. Issue polarization was greater, but emotional polarization was far less than it is today.
Perhaps it seems obvious that issue polarization and emotional polarization should go hand in hand. But, as Gershwin wrote in Porgy and Bess, “It ain’t necessarily so.” Here’s why:
“Listen,” shouts the angry but unintentionally hilarious leader of The People’s Front of Judea (PFJ), “the only people we hate more than the Romans are the fucking Judean People’s Front” (JPF). That’s from Monty Python’s film, Life of Brian (set in 30 AD). Of course, in the film, the two political sects, the PFJ and the JPF, are almost identical. But each hates the other more than they hate their real enemy, the Romans. They are almost perfectly aligned on their only important issue — they have no issue polarization. But through in-fighting, their emotional polarization has gone through the roof.
(Full disclosure: In 1968, I voted for the Freedom and Peace Party, not to be confused with the Peace and Freedom Party! Such hair-splitting is a real talent of the radical left.)
Another way to look at the difference between types of polarization is that with emotional polarization we view our political opponents as enemies rather than adversaries. We hate our enemies and seek to conquer or destroy them as in war. Although we want to defeat our adversaries, compromise is still possible, even honorable. Trump is our enemy; Obama voters who voted for Trump may still be our adversaries. Emotional polarization is turning America into a nation of enemies.
Ripped Apart
