Commentary
With the growth in points of friction between the great powers, organizations like the SCO will continue to play a role in the strategic adaptation of the smaller powers caught between them.
Temur Umarov
{
"authors": [
"Thomas Carothers",
"Andrew O’Donohue"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [
"U.S. Democracy in Comparative Perspective"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "democracy",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "DCG",
"programs": [
"Democracy, Conflict, and Governance"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Middle East",
"East Asia",
"Western Europe"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy",
"Foreign Policy",
"Global Governance"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
How Americans Were Driven to Extremes
American polarization has deep roots that have taken decades to grow and strengthen. The United States may look much like many other angry, divided countries, but its brand of polarization raises specific concerns about the future and functioning of its democracy.
Published on Sep 25, 2019
Source: Foreign Affairs
Every day brings more evidence of the United States’ profound political polarization. Partisan intransigence, vitriol, and divisiveness now contaminate most government institutions. What is more, these sentiments have steadily infiltrated every nook and cranny of American life. The 2020 presidential campaign will only further intensify the country’s partisan tribalism. And despite the lofty praise that news media and civil society heap on politicians who work across party lines, the divisive trend continues with no end in sight.
The more than 35 books published on this subject in the past decade have shed much light on partisan dynamics. Yet almost without exception, they examine U.S. polarization as an isolated phenomenon, separate from the experiences of other countries. In our research and advocacy work, we have taken a different tack.
Collaborating with scholars from around the world, we have examined the striking rise of severe polarization in numerous other democracies, including Bangladesh, Colombia, Poland, and Turkey. In each case we took a close look at the roots of polarization and then traced its trajectory over time, analyzing the main drivers as well as the negative consequences and attempted remedies.
Although polarization in the United States shares some basic features with political divisions elsewhere, we found that it stood out in many crucial respects. American polarization has deep roots that have taken decades to grow and strengthen. The United States may look much like many other angry, divided countries, but its brand of polarization raises specific concerns about the future and functioning of its democracy...
About the Authors
Thomas Carothers
Harvey V. Fineberg Chair for Democracy Studies; Senior Fellow, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
Thomas Carothers, a senior fellow in the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, is a leading expert on comparative democratization and international support for democracy.
Andrew O’Donohue
Fellow, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
Andrew O’Donohue is a fellow in Carnegie’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program. His research studies law and courts, democracy and authoritarianism, and Middle East politics, with a focus on Türkiye and Israel.
Political ReformDemocracyForeign PolicyGlobal GovernanceNorth AmericaUnited StatesMiddle EastEast AsiaWestern Europe
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- As It Turns 25, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Reflects the New World Order
- The Two Key Takeaways From Xi’s Egypt VisitCommentary
Amid celebrations of bilateral ties was a deeper focus on stability in the Middle East.
Amr Hamzawy
- Taking the Pulse: Is Canada Leading a Third Way?Commentary
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has twice inspired praise for standing up to U.S. President Donald Trump: at the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos and on Canada-U.S. trade negotiations. Is Carney showing a third way better than the EU has in dealing with the Trump administration?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Less of America is MoreCommentary
Middle Eastern states should welcome an accelerated U.S. disengagement from their region.
Michael Young
- Is the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Performance Art or Meaningful Collaboration?Commentary
Xi, Putin, and other regional leaders are back-slapping in Bishkek, but the SCO has yet to answer the most serious questions about continental Asia's economic future.
Evan A. Feigenbaum
