What is the solution to extreme divisiveness?
Oh, now you have stepped into one the greatest modern debates in political science. Abramowitz versus Fiorina. Sorting versus polarization – and now we have calcification. Let’s get ready to rumble!!!!
In broad strokes, Morris Fiorina has argued for years that polarization is limited to the political class (elected officials and activists) and that a huge middle is hiding in plain sight.
Alan Abramowitz countered argued – for years – that polarization has moved into the masses and that it is related / following polarization in the political class.
Sorting is a process where voters sort themselves into the “correct” parties and polarization is where partisans ascribe to more and more extreme positions.
So, how bad is it?
I think in our world, it is pretty bad. I define our world as people that work in politics, work around elected officials, work with activists, read blog posts on politics. You know – the political nerds of the world.
Sorting
We have sorted. A quick example, in the blue county that I live in there are 64 precincts. At the county level, Alachua voted for Charlie Crist 57% versus Ron DeSantis 42%. On average, a 15% spread.
However, if we look at the precinct level….
In 80% of the precincts in Alachua County, the vote spread is more than 15%.
In 74% of the precincts in Alachua County, the vote spread is more than 20%.
In a quick box plot, we observe some real outliers. In one precinct alone, the spread is 83%! 83%!
The data isn’t easily available to explore all of Florida most recent returns, but in previous research using the precinct as the unit of analysis, the same rough pattern played out.
In addition, almost 40% of parents would be very upset if a child married someone from a different party.
So, we, the voters, have sorted not only in ideology – but also geography – and now marriage.
And we recognized how critical others behavior is on our own.
Polarization
Pew studies polarization in the United States and has one of the best gifs of the polarization.
My hope is that they update it with new information.
Elite Polarization
General Polarization
As you can see, political elites polarized first and the public trailed. It’s only gotten worse.
Yes, there is a large portion of the public that sits “in the middle” or not as extreme – but most of them are not politically engaged. Don’t believe me? Go to any Walmart and conduct an interrupt poll. (Secret – a lot of people just aren’t that into us….)
But of the politically engaged, polarization is pronounced, ugly and for some of us – at a truly unhealthy level.
How we got here is beyond the scope of this blog post that is attempting to answer “What is the solution to extreme divisiveness?”
A deceptively simple question, but we have to agree on the unit of analysis. Are we talking solution at a mass level or at an individual level?
Mass Level
I believe firmly that social media isn’t the “cause” of our divisiveness – I think our human nature / behavior is, and social media is the gasoline that ignites and flames our worst passions.
But to make it all the worst, social media companies knew what they were doing in “increasing engagement” was going to lead to more divisiveness.
- https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-it-encourages-division-top-executives-nixed-solutions-11590507499
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Facebook_leak
- https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-employees-worrried-about-2018-algorithm-change-misinformation-trump-politics-2021-9
“Our algorithms exploit the human brain’s attraction to divisiveness,” read a slide from a 2018 presentation (Facebook).
“If left unchecked,” it warned, Facebook would feed users “more and more divisive content in an effort to gain user attention & increase time on the platform.”
Unfortunately, these platforms are the perfect hack for our human brains / nature – especially the bad sides.
It is rare that I would argue for government regulation, but in this case, I am.
I think it is critical that these platforms be held accountable for the bullshit on their platforms – bullshit they know is harmful, bullshit they know is divisive and most importantly bullshit they know is bullshit.
I would say the same for cable news ‘opinion’ shows.
In addition, I think we are going to need to figure out how to ‘save’ local journalism, but that is a longer post.
Individual level
I think awareness is key. None of us are immune from the toxic environment that we work in; and none of us are smart enough to outwit human nature.
There are individual things you can do to minimize social media. Turn it off, watch what you post, take responsibility for your own behavior.
I did this about a year ago. At some point, I loved posting explosive political content. It was a jolt. Let’s “debate”. However, at some point I realized it was all bullshit and I was a participant in it. So, now, I post pictures of my puppy, laments about Gator football, and other hobbies.
Funny thing happened on the way, I retrained the algorithms to show me Boxer puppies, people catching monster trouts, and other assorted silliness. The political stuff – when I stopped – stopped being served to me as much.
Additionally, I have been experimenting with information diets, literally starving myself of news content or turning it all off. It is difficult, but I am also finding that ALL truly important news finds me – really, really quickly. A call, an email, a text – I don’t want to brag – but I have yet to miss a “major news story.”
BUT, here is the most important suggestion to solving divisiveness at the individual level: scotch (or coffee if you don’t drink).
We must seek out different people and form trusting relationships with them. We must not allow ourselves to label the others as “evil” or even worse. We all need more circuit breakers.
I will agree, some people are likely gone. Gone into a dark place that we aren’t going to be able to form a relationship with. Pick some one different.
My wife keeps me grounded (in more ways that I can count), and she is gasp….a member of the other party.
She is my circuit breaker.
When I find myself enraged at the other side and on the verge of calling them all names – she appears and asks me to put the damn toilet seat down for the 1,000,000 time. It is literally impossible for me to hate her and her patience.
When elected officials call the others “animals” or when talking heads call the others “evil” or when political “leaders” swear the “left is out to murder us all”, my wife steps in and waves.
Each of us needs such a stop gap in our political dealings – especially if you work in the field.
So here is the concrete suggestion – find someone on the “other” side to have a scotch or cup of coffee with and just have a natter. (Maybe more pubs without wifi and tvs…..)
It is critical we form a trusting relationship with an “other”(s) so that when you have the urge to start hating, you too have a circuit breaker.
Conclusion
Divisiveness is all around us – it is rewarded financially; it is rewarded socially – one could argue it is a near currency in today’s public.
Until government regulation and case law catches up, we need awareness that we are essentially on our own.
And divisiveness is a strange game. The only winning move – at the moment – is not to play and have a scotch.
