Why is American politics so much more polarized than it used to be?

Great Debates
81

You have a point, though not the one you mean. One cause of polarization may be that a larger number of Americans than ever before in our history would agree with my statement in post #69 (which I have stated often before on this board). Not a majority, but more than ever before. I’ve often read that “atheist” or “nonreligious” is the fastest-growing religious self-identification in America recently, and the group who would agree with me includes a great number of religious people as well. While at the same, time social/religious conservatives are fewer than ever before – no longer a majority, but still a very large minority. See the Pew Political Typology 2011. The “Staunch Conservatives,” the “highly engaged Tea Party supporters,” are the oldest group demographically, (61% ages 50 and older). They are declining, and they’re anxious, and they’re angry, and they’re not going away without a fight. And now, to a larger extent than ever before in history, they face a highly significant number of young Americans holding values not merely different from their own but in many respects diametrically opposed.

Well, I’m sure abortion will still be an issue in 20 years, that’s a special case going to the heart of America’s moralistic character, on both sides. But it won’t be a hot-button issue any more – as mentioned here, while the range of pro-and-anti opinions has not changed recently, their political salience has declined, people will be less likely to vote on them in the future. And the others will simply go away. Most Americans 20 years from now will wonder why SSM ever was an issue, and place centuries of antigay prejudice in the same old-shame bin as we now place anti-black racism.

But that’s only part of the picture. There are three basic poles/axes in American politics: social/cultural; economic; and foreign/military policy. Some issues, like immigration, touch on more than one, but those are the poles. The social/cultural pole may simply become less polarized as the generation now in retirement passes away; I see no particular social-values-divide emerging between GenX and GenY, or within either. The economic polarization may be more intractable – every American generation is internally divided on basic assumptions of economic policy, values and justice (note the Pew Typology now has a category for “Libertarians”); and, of course, every American generation is divided by class; and on this pole the political phenemena are conditioned not only by the economic beliefs of the people, nor only by their personal economic interests, but also by the vast influence of vested economic interests, big-biz, megacorps, on the political process and message. And that’s not about to change.

As for polarization on foreign-military policy – appears to be declining in salience, except in all the important ways it affects the economy, see above.

82

Because today’s polarization doesn’t surpass those times nor do I think it is close. Vietnam War and Civil Rights were more polarizing than anything today. Isolation in the first half of the last century was a pretty big deal. We’d all probably agree that the Civil War was the high (or low) point of polarization.

We might be more polarized than some other point (50’s and 80’s, maybe) but I don’t think we’re anywhere near the zenith. The caveat is that it’s hard to prove one way or another.

83

But, at all those times post-1865, we at least had a Congress whose members were willing to work together, only ever filibustering on a few very hot-button issues like civil-rights legislation. The gridlock and the consistent, apparently organized obstructionism we see there now are unprecedented.

84

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
I’ve often read that “atheist” or “nonreligious” is the fastest-growing religious self-identification in America recently…
[/QUOTE]
So you are saying that the alleged rise in partisanship corresponds with a rise in the number of the atheist left and a decline in the number of religious social conservatives.

If partisanship increases with a rise in side A, and a decrease in side B, it is a little hard to blame it on side B.

Regards,
Shodan

85

Not when, as here, side B is doing most of the screaming.

86

And on who else can we blame Side B’s overreaction to their own decline in power?

87

I blame the internet, right-wing radio, Fox “News”, and the Republican Party, in no particular order. What they have done is made it possible for a certain segment of the electorate to totally insulate itself from reality. In the old days, we may have disagreed but we both worked with the same set of facts and got our news from the same sources.

Then along comes right wing radio, where everything is a liberal conspiracy. Science became what they said it was, history became what they said it was. For the right-leaning voter uninterested in hearing both sides of the issue, it was a dream come true. They had their preconceived notions reinforced on a continual basis. They were encouraged to tune out the mainstream media, to distrust everything that wasn’t bathed in ideological purity. Objective facts no longer mattered.

Along comes Fox to provide news, filtered with a perpetual right wing spin. For the right-leaning voter, a place to again reinforce their preconceived ideas. Democratic missteps become major scandals, Republican scandals are glossed over or the miscreant is “mistakenly” shown on the air with a “D” after his name- time and time again. Your conservative brother in law now can get fed a stream of GOP propaganda on his car radio on the way to work, on the radio at work, and on television when he comes home. Now like all good disciples, he wants to spread the gospel.

The internet provides a perfect opportunity to spread hate and misinformation. Anonymous bloggers can post all the hate and lies that they want, and their right wing audience eats it all up. OH MY GOD, DID YOU KNOW THAT OBAMA REPAINTED AIR FORCE ONE WITH HIS CAMPAIGN LOGO? Ridiculous, to be sure. But lies can now be passed around the planet with one mouse click. And for every person that looks up the truth on Snopes, there are a hundred who use the lie to harden their convictions.

The Republicans have taken advantage of their followers’ tendencies to hear only what they want to hear. But they’ve paid a price. They either have to BE batshit crazy or pretend to be so or lose a primary to someone who IS batshit crazy. Now the only politically correct thing a person can do from a Republican perspective is toe the party line on everything. All party votes must be unanimous. No compromising with Democrats on anything. Moderate Republicans were shown the door. Any Republican who dared suggest that Rush Limbaugh could be wrong on anything was forced to grovel before him and beg forgiveness.

After years of this, it’s almost like a competition. Each right wing host must get more and more outrageous in their attacks or else look soft on the Democrats. Each and every piece of legislation becomes Armageddon, Republican Senators filibuster their own bills if Obama happens to support them. Blogs and Facebook pages abound where there are no limits on the vitriol. The hatred and the heat keep ratcheting up.

Now we’re at the point where we can’t talk anymore. It’s pointless. We can’t agree on what the facts are. We can’t agree on what the problem is, much less how to fix it. The Republicans would much rather steer the ship straight into the reef in order to take command of the wreckage. It may appear to be partisan to say that it’s the Republicans’ fault, but it really is. The Democrats have changed precious little in the last twenty years. It’s the Republicans who have morphed into what is now essentially a terrorist organization, dealing in fear and loathing, racism and xenophobia in an endless lust for limitless power.

88

Partisans always blame the other side. That’s why they’re partisans. They’re also partisans because they do not acknowledge the rich irony of saying “there’s more partisanship because the Republicans are stupid evil assholes who are always always wrong!!!”

Regards,
Shodan

89

This. I don’t believe there is more polarization between people. Americans mostly want the same things. But the partisan polarization is undeniable. This is something we haven’t seen since the War Between the States. Again I lay it at the feet of the need of the GOP to fool voters into voting against their economic interests. I see nothing else that can explain it. Yes, changing electoral practices have favored ideological coherence but that only feeds the fire because of the gap between what the GOP claims to stand for and what it does stand for. There is nothing stopping them from just giving their base what they want just by being the more conservative party… except that there is no widespread support for plutocracy. The balkanization of the media is also an issue but people forget that this isn’t anything new. Before the New Deal openly partisan newspapers were the norm. The anonymity of the internet is overblown I think. It’s important now because people talk to each other directly less often than in the past. A whisper campaign is a whisper campaign however it is transmitted. I don’t place much importance on the fact that it happens in a matter of hours rather than a matter of days.

90

Fortunately (or not), that’s not the only way we have to tell. See post #85, and #83.

91

Just because you are paranoid doesn’t mean people aren’t out to get you. Where is the case against the Blame the GOP theory?

92

Most of the screaming in this thread is not by Republicans.

93

Most of the screaming in America is.

94

“We all know what happens when you mix politics and religion.”
Yep, the birth of America.

“W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Adams

95

Do you have a cite for that? It seems pretty equal to me.

96

[quote=“BrainGlutton, post:75, topic:665164”]

Not at all. Christian Socialists meet that description and I’m not dismissing them; they have something of value to contribute.

Sounds like you’re backpedaling - " But American social/religious conservatives, while often more good-hearted than the economic conservatives, are always absolutely and entirely wrong about every single thing that distinguishes them from others"

It sounds like when you think,“social conservatism” you think, ‘clergy,’ and that’s about it.

“The Constitution Party does not.”
Who or what does that even mean?
“No, there is no way in which “social conservatism” offers positive influences in the practice of sound economics or business leadership.”

Really? Did you come to this belief of your own accord, or was it something you read or were spoon-fed during a lecture somewhere. I mean, with all do respect, you do know how narrow minded and illogical that statement comes off as, right?
“To what advantage is ignorance if it can’t be educated?”

A great deal!
Education and knowledge does not come with instructions - How to use wisely. An “educated” fool is the most dangerous of its kind.

As for Jesus and faith; lending counsel for that which you reject in the first place, is, ‘bad business.’

97

No, I think social/religious conservatism. Everybody knows what it is and who the social conservatives are and that Christian Socialists are not among them – the latter might have similar traditional moral values, but spreading or imposing them is not on the agenda.

I mean the Constitution Party, as embodying a politics that has nothing of value to offer America. You haven’t heard of it? It is one of the “Big Three” third parties in America, with the Greens and Libertarians. If the Tea Partiers ever decide to go third-party, they could comfortably merge with it (they could not, with the Libertarians). “The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries.”

Pat Buchanan’s America First Party (which seems to be entirely dormant lately) is somewhat similar, paleoconservative, but less religious in focus, more emphasis on economic and military isolationism and anti-immigrant nativism.

Of my own accord. Give some counterexamples. If “social conservatism” implies valuing traditional gender roles, etc., that’s not good business leadership. IME, social conservatives have to transcend their conservatism to make good economic sense; some do – that is, we’re talking mostly about poor and working- and middle-class Americans here, and some see that their economic interests are not best served by the GOP’s economic policies, which are dictated by the party’s bizcon wing, which Pat Buchanan at least understands.

That, even if true, suggests no value ignorance might have.

98

– Treaty of Tripoli, 1796. As noted in “Our Godless Constitution” by Brooke Allen:

99

Look at the GOP’s unprecedented use of the Senate filibuster. Their unanimous vote against a moderate health care reform bill that incorporated many Republican ideas. Their refusal to raise any taxes until forced to due to the Fiscal Cliff. Look at the Ryan Budget supported by virtually all Republicans and compare to the Senate Democratic Budget.

100

Hiding behind the fallacy of false balance explains a significant fraction of your posting history on this board. The actual irony here is how hollow your declarations of irony are. Your worldview does not allow for the idea that perhaps one side of an issue actually is more guilty in some way. To you, every side has faults, therefore if you feel that one side has more faults, that’s just the bias of the person saying that.

It’s a ridiculous position.

The republicans could come out with a platform tomorrow that says they believe that all democrats and all people who vote for democrats should be executed. And one could say validly that the republicans have just raised the stakes on partisanship and hatred and lowered the level of political discourse. And you’d be right here on these boards saying “haha, don’t you see the irony, you only say that because you’re a democrat partisan!”

Your view does not recognize the actual potential for merits in these evaluations. You are so quick to rush in and declare everyone to be blind partisans because you yourself are the epitome of blind partisan. There should be some sort of meta-irony that makes your head explode.

The Republicans have become more radicalized in recent times and this is obvious to anyone who isn’t deliberately blinding themselves. They’ve created a complete echo-chamber that has been proven over and over again to lie. They openly celebrate the failures of the country if they believe that they’ll be perceived as damaging to Obama - have you ever seen the video footage of all the right wing pundits and politicians jumping for joy when Chicago was rejected to hold the Olympics? They’ve used the filibuster in the last 6 years more than the entire history of Congress combined. They vote against their own bills if they receive democratic support. Their stated primary goal in congress was not to improve the state of the country, but to make sure Obama wasn’t re-elected. They held the 200-year stellar history of the full faith and credit of the United States hostage to score some political points.

This is not how it’s always been, and this isn’t some easy “both sides are to blame” false balance bullshit. The Republican party has a deliberate policy of attempting to thwart or damage anything the democrats attempt to do regardless of what damage it may do to the country. There’s no “loyal opposition”, they aren’t acting in a well-meaning, honorable way over disagreements in public policy. They will let the whole motherfucker burn if they don’t get their way.

The Republicans have basically picked a strategy of continuously resisting anything and holding the country hostage, putting the democrats into the uneasy position of acting honorably and trying to do what’s best for the country despite this obstructionism, or fight fire with fire and make the whole situation worse. Partisan fighting has to increase in this situation.