In the aftermath of the takeover of the Capitol by supporters of Donald Trump, I find myself wanting to write about what I believe to be one of the most important issues affecting America today: political polarization. Political polarization is “the divergence of political attitudes to ideological extremes”. This phenonemenon appears to be steadily increasing over the past few decades. This Pew Research article from 2014 discusses polarization and the evidence suggesting that it has increased drastically. Here’s one particularly illuminating statistic found in the survey data:

• In 1994, 16% of Democrats had a “very unfavorable view” of the Republican party. The number for Republicans having this view towards the Democratic Party was similar, 17%. In 2014, those numbers increased to 38% and 43% respectively.

When discussing broad societal shifts in behavior, I think it’s helpful to focus on the systems in which these behaviors occur, and the potential incentives for these shifting behaviors.

The System

The United States has a 2 party system. The 2 party system is not a system that was defined in the Constitution or by the founding fathers (in fact, they cautioned against it), but rather emerged due to certain quirks in our elections. Political scientists seem to agree that the primary reason we evolved into a 2 party system is due to a winner-take-all voting system. In the presidential election, (most) states allocate ALL electoral votes to the winner of each respective state. In congressional elections, House representatives are elected per district, usually by whomever receives a plurality of votes. Senators are elected on a state level, 2 per state. Again, most states just require a plurality of votes in order for a candidate to win a district/state.

The Incentives

How does a winner-take-all voting incentivize a 2 party system? Here’s an example:

Imagine the (imaginary) state of West Dakota. West Dakota has 4 parties, each with relatively equal splits of support, let’s say 25% each. During a senate election, 1 senate seat is up for grabs. Let’s say that Party 1 and Party 2 are more left-leaning while Party 3 and Party 4 are more right-leaning. The Senate candidate for Party 1 is highly partisan and very principled. His/her party would never consider joining forces with Party 2 as a result, despite being ideologically similar. The Senate candidates for Party 3 and 4 are flexible and care more about right-leaning policies being instituted, than individual election victories. Both Party 3 and Party 4 acknowledge that their political views are similar, and it is therefore advantageous to join forces to make the Super Party, and run under a single candidate, so that they get 50% of support. In the election that follows:

• Party 1 gets 25% of the vote
• Party 2 gets 25% of the vote
• Super Party (Party 3 + 4) gets 50% of the vote

In most states, the Super Party would win the Senate seat outright. In this example you can see that there is a VERY STRONG incentive for similar-minded parties to simply consolidate in order to win the very limited seats (just 1 in this election). These incentives exist in most configurations. You could imagine that after Party 1 and 2 loses this election, they realize they will never win again unless they too join forces.

The same is true of presidential elections where most states allocate ALL electoral votes to the candidate who gets a plurality of votes. No political party in the long run will survive this kind of system unless they create broad coalitions, and ultimately a single political party identity. And thus you have Democrats and Republicans and small-3rd-parties-who-never-win.

The winner-take-all system is the opposite of proportional representation. In a system that uses proportional representation, the parties representation in Congress would be proportional to the voting share they got in the election (in this example, 25%, 25%, and 50%). This allows for a broader variety of views in our government.

Polarization, the 2 party system, and you

As a result of the 2 party system, American politics begins to resemble a football game. With just 2 major parties, it is very easy for politicians to frame every issue as an us vs them - this appeals to a fundamental instinct of human beings: my tribe must survive against all others. Grouping the “others” into a single category, or political party, makes it easy to campaign using us vs them rhetoric.

Then came social media

With the advent of social media (and further globalization), it became trivially easy to find people you agree with. In fact, finding people you agree with FEELS good. To validate your worldview is to validate your identity. To face evidence to the contrary of your worldview SUCKS. Self-doubt is hard and self examination is even harder. And so you have echo chambers. Echo chambers allow for groups of people to ONLY seek validation or group outrage in respect to any political issue. These echo chambers feel good, and incentivize people to increase usage of social media. What does this do? $$$$$. Facebook and Twitter try to maximize the time in which your attention is diverted to their product. They make their money with advertisements, and the more they can bombard your eyes with, the better (for them). Cable news ultimately figured this out as well, and so you have 24/7 cable news exhibiting obvious signs of bias and inflammatory rhetoric in order to drum up viewership. To sum this up in a nice and overly reductive equation:

2 party system + the internet = echo chambers = $ = more echo chambers = polarization

You

I don’t really have a great solution for political polarization on a systemic level. It is clear to me that there is a financial incentive for companies that control media and communication to increase polarization. Additionally, the 2 party system would require sweeping changes to our voting systems such as instituting ranked choice voting. On an individual level, there are a couple of ways to prevent yourself from falling into the trap of polarization:

1. Realize that politics is not your whole life. It doesn’t need to be your identity. You are so much more than who you casted your ballot for.

2. Be aware of tricks your mind plays on you to feel good. Read up on confirmation bias, in-group bias, and the Dunning-Kruger effect.

3. Delete Facebook. Hit the gym. Lawyer Up. Just kidding, but DO reduce the time you spend on social media.

4. Seek out a variety of views, and don’t dismiss them wholesale. Yes, it’s uncomfortable but you’ll be a better (and more likeable) person.

5. Cultivate empathy. People’s political views are shaped by their life experiences. Try and put yourself in their shoes before judging them. That’s not to say that one shouldn’t engage in strong (but respectful) debate, or dismiss clearly harmful ideas.

6. Vote. Participate in the political system in good faith. If you don’t, then you’ve lost your license to complain about the state of the world.