Last week’s elections brought to a brutal head how politically polarized the United States is. U.S. President Donald Trump’s relatively strong showing dashed the hope held by many of his critics that the election would constitute a repudiation of Trump, and in so doing, open the door to some kind of de-escalation of the country’s profound ideological divide. Instead, as George Packer wrote immediately after the election in an article in the Atlantic entitled “Face the Bitter Truth,” “we are two countries, and neither of them is going to be conquered or disappear anytime soon.”
A Wider Rift
Soberingly, more polarization appears probable, in three overlapping phases. First, as Trump keeps railing against the election, feeding the flames of conspiratorial thinking about imagined electoral fraud, he will further inflame partisan anger. His relentless attacks over the past four years on truth, institutions, and the legitimacy of his opponents have prepared the ground for this final, desperate campaign. With no substantial factual ground to stand on in his objections to the elections, he appears to hope that by bringing America’s partisan cauldron to a peak boil, some kind of crisis can be provoked that will break in his favor. He will undoubtedly cling to this approach long after he leaves office, defining his post-presidential political life as a sustained tirade against the election.
Second, when Joe Biden’s administration comes to power and begins governing, what will likely be a Republican-led Senate (barring a major surprise in the Georgia Senate runoff elections on January 5) will almost certainly dedicate itself to blocking as many of its programs and initiatives as possible. This will start with slowrolling Senate confirmation of Biden nominees, then extend to stymying any major legislation the administration will attempt. And it will take on special fervor when the administration begins to nominate federal judges and seek Senate confirmation for them.
The legislative blockage will very likely extend to most or all of the reform measures that Democrats have been hoping to advance concerning the functioning of the U.S. political system. There will be no progress, for example, on national-level measures relating to representational reform—such as DC statehood or Electoral College reform. Similarly improbable will be any political financing reform, which if enacted might contribute to a reduction of polarizing dynamics. And even the most moderate Supreme Court reforms, such as those concerning term limits for Justices, will be off the table.
This powerful partisan gridlock will prevail even if, which seems likely, a President Biden seeks to govern in an inclusive, nondivisive manner and tries to draw on the strong cross-partisan relationships he has successfully built over decades. A Republican Party that spent the last year painting Democrats, including Biden, as dangerous extremists, and dedicated itself to a scorched earth oppositional stance through the two previous Democratic presidencies, is not likely to change gears now. It will be egged on in this by the ever-more extreme conservative mediasphere, which characterizes the Democratic Party, and by extension any Democratic administration, as a fundamental threat to American democracy.
Third, looking further into the future, when the Republican Party begins the process of choosing a presidential nominee for the 2024 election, the party will likely not conclude that the problem in 2020 was the extreme ideological line that the party took, which basically boiled down to opposing everything Democrats support. Rather, the thinking will probably be that the shortfall in 2020 was with the candidate they had. Somewhat akin to how Democrats calculated after 2016, the idea will likely be that what they need is a somewhat more personally likable candidate to run with basically the same program. The campaign therefore will probably be just as polarizing in terms of the choices offered to the American public with as little common ground between them as there was in 2020.
In short, no respite from polarization is in sight. The serious dangers that polarization presents to our democracy—including growing citizen alienation resulting from political gridlock, institutional degradation resulting from some political actors putting partisan outcomes above democratic norms, and the ever-rising potential for aggravated and even violent conflict between citizens on opposing sides—will probably only grow.
Can the Body Politic Be Cured?
Given this daunting reality, it may be useful for those seeking to address polarization to move away from the idea of depolarization that has attracted attention in recent years and focus instead on managing polarization. It is very unlikely that the useful, but ultimately rather limited body of activities that are carried out in the name of depolarization—such as the many efforts to build bridges across partisan lines among citizens and among lawmakers and other politicians—will substantially change the fact that American political life is profoundly divided between two competing sides that hold strongly divergent positions on most critical issues, intensely distrust and dislike each other, and are nourished by divergent media and information diets. These activities should continue, but the major focus should be on maintaining the guardrails that keep a polarized system from going off track. Research from other cases of polarized democracies around the world highlights that the two most important such guardrails are respect by all powerholders for the rule of law and an election administration system that commands enough respect to keep even the most contentious election within bounds.
With polarization his main governing strategy, Trump relentlessly targeted these two guardrails, inflicting both real and reputational damage to them. As much effort as possible should be put into upholding and strengthening them. On the side of the rule of law, stemming the politicization of judicial appointments is unlikely, but crucial efforts here should be considered across a range of domains relating to strengthening ethics and anticorruption rules for powerholders, fortifying prosecutorial independence, rebuilding inspector general roles, police and prison reform, and much else.
Bolstering America’s extraordinarily fragmented and creaky election administration apparatus should be a top priority. The idea of a federal elections agency deserves serious attention. There might be a small window of opportunity on election administration reform if some Republicans conclude from Trump having grown the Republican electorate by adding many Latino and Black voters that their reflexive support for voter suppression measures needs to be rethought. Though realistically, given the depth of the Republican Party’s voter suppression instinct, the conclusion they reach is likely to be at most a narrowing of their voter suppression efforts—focusing them on key places and groups—rather than abandoning them.
Managing a serious disability is a notably less inspirational task than attempting to cure it. However, certain bodies, including the U.S. body politic, are affected with conditions that are simply not curable through even the most well-intended efforts. They can at most be contained, and possibly over the medium to long term, mildly alleviated. It is crucial to set sights realistically on addressing polarization in order to sustain critical efforts on that front, in what will likely be difficult years ahead.
Comments(9)
Thank you so much for sharing your wisdom--you have been dedicated to strengthening democracy for so many years...I for one remain shocked and dismayed that we need many of the lessons here at home. Am grateful that you and development experts stand ready to help.
Would it help depolarization if Biden were to launch the slogan "Only an honest election is valid", and give active support to any groups that ask for recounts or contest the validity of ballots that were counted, and ensure that these claims are properly settled by the courts in a guaranteed impartial way. Perhaps also consider criminal charges against anyone who has knowingly fabricated or spread false evidence against the election process.
Good insights Tom and you are probably right - that over 70 million Americans voted Trump and his politics points to a deep seated polarization. It would have been good, in a sentence or two state what the two polarized sides in America's polity are and what divides them so deeply. I want to believe that there will be something that can be found that unites than just keep dividing. Trump, you rightly observe was an agent of division but I don't think the entire Republican establishment is like him. Perhaps another leader can contribute to a different trajectory in the republican following. For now, I would like to celebrate Biden and Kamala's triumph and hope that their administration can start on something that will truly deliver justice.
My goodness, no bias in this opinion piece. Relentlessly referring to Republicans as people overly looking to suppress the vote is not truthful nor is it helpful. It is like saying all Democrats want undocumented aliens to be able to vote in the US, which is just as unhelpful. Articles like this foster "polarization" vice helping to ease it. Sad...
How can Republicans of any stripe believe in a Biden presidency which adheres to the "rule of law"? After four years of lies and distortions regarding Trump and the Russians -- the phony Steel Dossier, illegal FISA warrants, false FBI accusations and direct intelligence agency misuse of power -- not to mention a completely partisan impeachment trial and the continuous horrid accusations of "Republican racism": The division between the "coastal elites" and "flyover America" couldn't be more stark. With Big Tech, Hollywood, Mainstream Media, Academia, Globalist Corps, the Swamp and Wall St. ("too big to fail") Banks as major donors, the Biden Democratic Party is at odds with Main St. small business and "America First" blue collar workers. Once the reality of this class distinction dawns on more and more Black and Brown "high-school-only voters" (as it has already) -- that they have much more in common with the tens of millions of white workers in the same boat -- the Republican Party will have completed a total metamorphosis from a free trade establishment party, to the political party of the working people. The real reality is that the partisanship in American politics is far more a reflection of class than race. But it is also a clear rejection of the massive government spending programs and near total centralization of economic decision making as described by the Democratic Party's adherence to a vast Washington-administered -- Green Industrial Policy. Oil and gas are indeed existential environmental threats, but even more immediate for workers are the bread and butter issues of good paying energy jobs and an electrical grid that is safe from disruption and higher prices. Wind and solar have, as yet, have not solved any of these bread and butter issues. And without a huge hydrogen component, they alone most likely won't solve environmental ones either. Not soon or even in the distant future can such technologies (wind and solar alone) be counted on. The vaunted "breakthrough on clean energy" has yet to materialize. But when it does, the tens of millions of struggling workers in "flyover country" will want to reestablish vibrant small towns, small businesses and new, made-in-America small factory production. Big government is more in line with big business monopolies. But what the workers need is a real democracy, within a regime of social equality, local control and energy decentralization. This is more a reflection of Republican values than Democrat.
What about introducing more "mediation," "conflict management," "conflict analysis," and "conflict resolution" techniques into our secondary schools, colleges/universities and police academies? And, could we not tie such courses into requirements for promotion in policing, secondary school teaching, even for diminishing of student debt, to create some incentive for taking and learning them?
An interesting read and certainly timely need. However, there are certainly many polarizations that became manifested in the election by a simply binary choice that were fuzzied by their sources of knowledge and tribe loyalties. These polarizations have their own provenance, dynamic, and potential. The tribe ones are "hard" - based on family, locality, or religious based. Those tend to be automatic and absolute - changed only by leaving the tribe or extraordinary circumstances. Other polarizations are "soft" - based on job opportunities, knowledge, economic conditions, healthcare, news of the moment, personal reactions to candidates, environmental concerns, network communities, disinformation exposure, age, race/ethnic origin, education, societal experiences. Soft polarizations are ephemeral and are in need of considerably better understanding - especially as to the extent of how they have evolved and the remediations and potential harmonization - a term extensively used in international venues where there are sovereign disparate positions.
I see and agree with Thomas Carothers' basic premise regarding the difficult polarized years ahead of us in our deeply troubled democracy.It is why I wonder if even his recommended management of this complex and paradoxical polarization issue is possible since it would require a level of sustained collaboration none of the sides are willing or would be willing to consider let alone be willing to be on the same video Zoom call together. What will work I believe is what has been happening since the 2018 Midterm election ; namely the continued surprising galvanization and mobilization of brand new demographically different generational faces beginning to break up the polarization as they rise rapidly to power even in the context of a winnable justice oriented third party.Remember 1860.
Fake and Phony Democracy 1.The American body politic has been corrupted from the beginning, it will take too long to provide historical evidence. 2.American leaders and politicians failed to face the bitter truth. 3.The bitter truth is the fact American democracy is phony and fake. 4.The proof: 1 percent of the population controls and rules over the 99 percent of population. In principle, democracy is majority rule. In America the rich and powerful one percent of the population rules the country. 5.For that reason, election, general election, presidential election, ballot, etc. are only the veneer of democracy, it has no reality or worth. 6.The reality is the fact the one percent who controls the government gets richer and richer and more powerful while the poor 99 percent gets poorer and poorer and become helpless and desperate. 7.The case in point is the fact that American healthcare system is the most costly, fraudulent, predatory, ineffective, and overcharged healthcare system in the world with immunity. No one in government is interested to change the blood-sucking system or prosecute corrupt doctors, dentists, hospital owners, labs and medical supplies, drugs and insurance companies as an organized crime for fraud and monopoly. Unlike normal business practices, patients do not get cost information in advance. Doctors and hospitals are given blank check to charge whatever they please. 8.The legal system benefits the legal professions, court and prosecutors, lawyers of both sides; encourages crooks and criminals, terrorizes and victimizes ordinary Americans; creates unfairness and travesty in justice. 9.The corrupt two parties of America, Republican and Democrat, serve only their own interests and special interests, but not the national interest and the interest of the majority of American people. 10.The US Constitution is flawed because it does vest American people with the ultimate sovereignty, but encourages the continuity of vested interests in holding America hostage and paralyzes the normal functions of a good government. The Constitution allows the American Republic to turn into the evil empire under which the whole world is suffering needlessly. Willie Wong, 11/13/2020
Comment Policy
Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.