“We the People of the United States in order to form a more perfect Union” are the first fifteen words of the United States Constitution. Those words show our Founders’ dream of a single people working together to improve the country. To achieve that vision, the Constitution established checks and balances that encourage political compromise. 

Today, the Founders’ dream of “We the People” working to solve common problems is at risk. Over the last several years, we have become more politically divided or polarized as a  nation. More than ever, we view those who think differently as the enemy, instead of as fellow citizens with whom we must find common ground. Polarization causes harm to our politics and our lives more generally. We must understand what has accelerated these divisions and consider what can be done to reverse this dangerous trend.  

Political polarization means that people are moving farther from the political center and are becoming more idealistic (Jilani and Smith). This means that people are less willing to compromise on policy disagreements and are more likely to view the opposite party as the enemy. One writer explained polarization like this: 

In terms of professional football, for instance, whether we pull for the Los Angeles Rams or the Chicago Bears, many of us are going to be loyal even when our team has a losing season, and when they are playing an ‘arch-rival,’ we become highly energized and invested in the game’s outcome. With politics, we also align ourselves with a particular side, and we lose our ability to perceive the competition/political rival through a clear and balanced perspective. We care more about “our side” winning than learning about the other side’s standpoints

(Jilani). In other words, polarization causes us to think of politics as a binary scoring of wins and losses instead of a process for deciding what is best. The binary view rejects the idea that there is a political responsibility to seriously consider differing viewpoints and to see if there is a way to reach consensus.
The data shows that political polarization has been rising in the United States. The most comprehensive study on the topic was conducted in 2014 by the Pew Research Center. Although the data is five years old, any observer of today’s political environment knows that since 2014 political polarization has only increased (Pew Research Center).

The Pew study observed trends over a twenty-year period starting in 1994, the second year of the Clinton presidency and ending in 2014, the middle of President Obama’s last term (Pew Research Center).  During that time, the divide between the median Democrat and the median Republican grew significantly. In 1994, people holding consistently ideological views on either side was only ten percent (Pew Research Center).  In 2014 that figure more than doubled to twenty-one percent and is most likely higher now in the hyper-polarized Trump presidency. In 1994, there was some political overlap between the two parties but now that has mostly disappeared (Pew Research Center). Ninety-two percent of Republicans are to the right of the average Democrat and ninety-four percent of Democrats are to the left of the average Republican, leaving few in the political middle (Pew Research Center). 

Most troubling, however, is that twenty-seven percent of Democrats and thirty-six percent of Republicans thought that the opposing party was a threat to the nations' well being. (Pew Research Center).  That statistic underscores that our country is so divided that many of us view fellow Americans with different party membership as the enemy. In a similar vein, large numbers of people on both sides said that they would like to live in a place where people share their views so that they can avoid being around those that they disagree with (Pew Research Center).

This polarizing trend has several negative effects on our political and personal lives. We are becoming more divisive and deceptive.  As one political scientist noted, it is more socially acceptable to lie when it is done to frustrate the enemy (Jilani and Smith). Thus, the increase in people viewing political opponents as enemies has increased the amount of lying and deception in society. The bitter nature of politics has also increased stress. Fifty-seven percent of Democrats in October 2018 said that it was stressful to discuss politics with someone that they disagreed with (Jilani and Smith).    

Political polarization also increases negativity in society.  A study of political advertisements shows that in 1960 only ten percent of ads were negative. By 2012 however, seventy-six percent of ads were negative. (Jilani and Smith).  Politicians know that we are more likely to react if we are told terrible things about “the enemy.” President Trump, in particular, has heightened this trend. He has re-tweeted that the Democrats are the “enemy of America” and called the media the “enemy of the people” (Hacohen) and (Erickson).

Polarization also has harmed the belief that government institutions can resolve problems through consensus (Jilani and Smith). This has caused politicians to make changes to the government rules that give power to the winning side instead of requiring compromise.  For example, the United States Senate has had a rule called the filibuster which encourages compromise by preventing bills from passing unless a three-fifths majority votes to pass the bill. Republicans recently limited the use of the filibuster in some circumstances so that they can enact their ideas without any support from Democrats and President Trump has called for getting rid of it completely. (Rieger). Changing our government system so that one side can push through their plans without compromise undermines the checks and balances system. Today, these fundamental changes are made in the name of winning and people do not seem to understand that these are major moves that change our government system forever.    

I have grown up in this highly polarized period and I feel its effects. I am interested in government and I have what would be characterized as liberal-leaning views. I do feel the “team” mentality that makes me close-minded to people who disagree with me.  For example, this summer I worked with someone who told me that he supported Trump. Instead of talking to him and seeing what his ideas were all about, I just tuned him out and we did not become friends. I decided that I did not want to be friends just because of his political thoughts and never learned anything else about him.  That is the negative personal impact of polarization on me, but it seems to reflect a lot of what is going on in the country generally.

What are the causes of polarization?  The trend toward polarization has several potential causes. One may be the passing of the World War II generation. That generation worked together against the threat of Nazism and Communism. They were united as Americans against foreign enemies (Blankenhorn). The generation in charge now has not had a similar experience and therefore the idea that being an American is more important than party affiliation may not be as strong. 

Another cause is the change in how people obtain information. Technology has created many more outlets from which a person can get information. Prior to the rise of cable news and the internet, most people got news from the three major networks, and therefore everyone had the same basic facts. Now, a person can listen to shows or read articles that match their views and never hear the other side (Blankenhorn). For example, every night at 9 pm, Sean Hannity appears on the Republican-leaning Fox News Network and Rachel Maddow appears on the Democratic-leaning MSNBC. A person watching those shows would not think that the hosts were discussing the same country.  

Finally, the actions of our leaders cause polarization. President Trump constantly speaks in a way that suggests that the people against him are acting in bad faith.  The President sets the tone for the country and the President has established a tone of distrust, which is passed on to the people. The President’s impact is particularly strong now as he faces impeachment for his lobbying of Ukraine for an investigation into his political opponent. The President is lashing out at those who oppose him by even suggesting that there could be a civil war if he is removed from office (Cobb). 

The real risk of political polarization is that it turns most people off to politics because of the fighting and lack of progress. As a result, the only people left engaged are those on the political extremes.  Michelle Obama made this point in her recent memoir, Becoming Michelle Obama.  She said that she was not interested in politics because she continues “to be put off by the nastiness-- the tribal segregation of red and blue, the idea that we’re supposed to choose one side and stick to it, unable to listen and compromise, or sometimes to be civil” (Obama 491).  In other words, polarization has caused Michelle to turn away from politics.

Barack Obama, in his Farewell Address, called political polarization the major problem facing the country.  But while he agreed with his wife on the polarization problem, he disagreed on the solution. He said that the solution was to be more engaged in politics. He said, however, that we have to engage in a different way. We need to leave our computer screens and partisan cable shows and have honest and civil conversations with each other about the country (Obama, Farewell Address). 

 President Obama is right.  We cannot just complain about our politicians and turn our backs on the political system. “We the People” means everyone is part of the government and everyone has an obligation to make the system work. Hopefully, as my generation gains more power, we can change the polarized attitude. I know that I will try because the country depends on it.