nguyenkevin2-blog

[nguyenkevin2-blog]

This Washington Post article offers a counterargument to the other articles and figures. It is not Americans who have been polarizing, but Washington DC that has. Congress, the main institution featuring partisanship has polarized over time by a great amount, while the American public has stagnated without much polarization.

This begs the question: Are the effects of polarization on our democracy flawed assumptions?

[nguyenkevin2-blog]

We should not listen to refute, nor accuse, but to listen and compromise.

Source: teapartytribune.com

[nguyenkevin2-blog]

In conversation with the how polarization causes one group of like-minded individuals to dislike their partisan counterparts, Lilliana Mason describes how it motivates people to participate in politics (take part in activism, vote for representatives, protest, etc), and drives the formation of passionate hatred for opposing partisan candidates running for office.  

Another important point is how competition increases our identity as belonging to the group we belong do, as opposed to our identity as citizens of a democracy.

This research-based article discusses why the trend of division is prominent and still occurring in our nation today.

[nguyenkevin2-blog]

Could it be that Washington was right? He foresaw the effects of a divisive two party system and knew that it would be an antagonist to our democratic republic. It’s a matter of time before democracy falls like a house of cards, swept by the wind of extreme polarization.

Source: imgflip.com

[nguyenkevin2-blog]

Here’s another perspective of the bubble effect!

This SNL talks about a city literally in a bubble taking place during and after the 2016 election. In the video we can see that everything is ecologically friendly, everyone has the same views, there is no police, and everything is luxurious and expensive. Do these stereotypes seem familiar? Yes indeed. Here the left side is being portrayed. How is such a bubble constructed? It’s rather simple; people with similar views agree and form communities of like-minded individuals, but this group polarization motivates a negative perspective of those not like them, eventually getting to the point where others are not accepted because of their views and beliefs.

The message here: “progressives” fail to be progressive, move out of their liberal bubbles, and unite with the right side to formulate a better nation that benefits all. That being said, it is not just the liberals who are the problem, the conservatives who live in their respective bubbles contribute to the polarization as well.

[nguyenkevin2-blog]

There are certain individuals who, almost all the time, fail to be tolerant and accepting of others’ views. These are the same people who fail to recognize that controversial issues are black and white, but do “recognize” their side of the story is the right one. In a nation where views differ across a broad spectrum, bigotry and intolerance make it harder to facilitate civil debate.

It's like a never ending argument about who is right and better. It's is not energized- pun intended- with facts nor respect, but with personal attacks, informal arguments, and illogical claims.

The media chooses to cover those who are loudest, those who attract the most attention in order to acquire the highest number of viewers, but for those who are tired, who are fed up with the results of this uncivil argument, are usually silenced and left out of the spotlight. I have emphasized the importance of respecting diversity, but we must also act without oppressing others' views. We must listen, to listen and not speak back. We must act, to benefit all and not just ourselves. We must repress bigotry and intolerance, and resume civil debate.

Source: politicalcartoons.com

[nguyenkevin2-blog]

More Effects of Political Polarization

Source: http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/

1. One’s political affiliation affects how they are seen by others.

2. “Compromise” for one side means results that will primarily benefit that side.

3. Formation of liberal or conservative bubbles (communities or groups in which all members share the same belief).

These three consequences are specific examples that can be applied to life in the US now, and they are all relevant and influential regardless of political affiliation.

[nguyenkevin2-blog]

This applies to civil debate and the American people.

Source: pinterest.com

[nguyenkevin2-blog]

“If this body isn’t capable of having those debates, there will be no place in this country where those debates can occur,” said Senator Marco Rubio.

Now that we’ve laid the groundwork for the existence of polarization in America, it is time to consider its many ramifications on society and societal institutions. In this video, we consider the Senate.

In this video, Senator Marco Rubio articulates an argument for civility in politics and the Senate for the sake of democratic debate. He complicates the claim that polarization in America is detrimental to democracy by explaining that at the core, debate facilitates democracy. Outlining examples from other governments, the senator argues his contention that if debate cannot happen in a civil manner in the senate, it will not exist anywhere in the nation. The specific effect of polarization is the silence of debate, and from that, the inability to solve issues. We’ve seen this when Congress is gridlocked on a specific issue and nothing gets done for the nation’s populace.

Civility is the key term here. I’m going to emphasize again that our nation was built as a democracy from which civil debate originated from. This video of Rubio on the Senate floor serves to complicate and provide an example to the effects of extreme political polarization.

[nguyenkevin2-blog]

Here’s a graphic representation of the division taking place in politics between the left and right. In 20 years, we have become less similar and willing to agree.

[nguyenkevin2-blog]

Yes, that’s what the current America looks like. A nation founded on the virtues of liberty, free speech, and difference is now a country of deep and loud polarization (and I say loud in reference to how loud the liberals yell at the conservatives about how right the left is -pun intended- and how wrong the right is, and vice versa). I’m certainly aware that there exists other parties and voices in politics, but the fact is these two get the most attention for their conduct and disputes.

“All you want is to expand the military and more guns! We NEED to worry about schools, taxes, social security!”

“No no, you’re wrong. We NEED to protect ourselves from foreign threats and our freedoms!”

You can probably guess which side is which, and predict how the argument will continue until one side resorts to ad hominem or ad metum or other logical fallacies. The point is: each side will ALWAYS believe that they’re right, that the other is wrong, and that compromise is impossible. This “war of words” is damaging to our democracy, disruptive to our civility, and detrimental to our futures.  

Source: freep.com