Polarization (politics)

About: Polarization (politics) is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 4529 publications have been published within this topic receiving 113994 citations.

Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy The Emergence of the Cartel Party

Abstract: Many recent discussions of the decline of party are predicated on the assumption that the Duverger/socialist mass-party model is the only model for parties. We contend that this assumption is misco...

Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches

Abstract: The idea of America as politically polarized--that there is an unbridgeable divide between right and left, red and blue states--has become a cliche. What commentators miss, however, is that increasing polarization in recent decades has been closely accompanied by fundamental social and economic changes--most notably, a parallel rise in income inequality. In Polarized America, Nolan McCarty, Keith Poole, and Howard Rosenthal examine the relationships of polarization, wealth disparity, immigration, and other forces, characterizing it as a dance of give and take and back and forth causality.Using NOMINATE (a quantitative procedure that, like interest group ratings, scores politicians on the basis of their roll call voting records) to measure polarization in Congress and public opinion, census data and Federal Election Commission finance records to measure polarization among the public, the authors find that polarization and income inequality fell in tandem from 1913 to 1957 and rose together dramatically from 1977 on; they trace a parallel rise in immigration beginning in the 1970s. They show that Republicans have moved right, away from redistributive policies that would reduce income inequality. Immigration, meanwhile, has facilitated the move to the right: non-citizens, a larger share of the population and disproportionately poor, cannot vote; thus there is less political pressure from the bottom for redistribution than there is from the top against it. In "the choreography of American politics" inequality feeds directly into political polarization, and polarization in turn creates policies that further increase inequality.

The politicization of climate change and polarization in the american public's views of global warming, 2001–2010

Abstract: We examine political polarization over climate change within the American public by analyzing data from 10 nationally representative Gallup Polls between 2001 and 2010. We find that liberals and Democrats are more likely to report beliefs consistent with the scientific consensus and express personal concern about global warming than are conservatives and Republicans. Further, the effects of educational attainment and self-reported understanding on global warming beliefs and concern are positive for liberals and Democrats, but are weaker or negative for conservatives and Republicans. Last, significant ideological and partisan polarization has occurred on the issue of climate change over the past decade.

Affect, Not Ideology A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization

Abstract: The current debate over the extent of polarization in the American mass public focuses on the extent to which partisans’ policy preferences have moved. Whereas "maximalists" claim that partisans’ views on policies have become more extreme over time (Abramowitz 2010), "minimalists" (Fiorina and Abrams 2009) contend that the majority of Americans remain centrist, and that what little centrifugal movement has occurred reflects sorting, i.e., the increased association between partisanship and ideology. We argue in favor of an alternative definition of polarization, based on the classic concept of social distance (Bogardus 1947). Using data from a variety of sources, we demonstrate that both Republicans and Democrats increasingly dislike, even loathe, their opponents. We also find that partisan affect is inconsistently (and perhaps artifactually) founded in policy attitudes. The more plausible account lies in the nature of political campaigns; exposure to messages attacking the out-group reinforces partisans’ biased views of their opponents.

Ethnic Polarization, Potential Conflict, and Civil Wars

Abstract: The increasing incidence of ethnic conflicts, and the much-publicized consequences of these conflicts, have attracted the interest of many researchers in the social sciences. Many studies have addressed directly the issue of ethnic diversity and its effects on social conflicts and civil wars. Political scientists have stressed the importance of institutions in the attenuation or intensification of social conflict in ethnically divided societies. Recently economists have connected ethnic diversity with important economic phenomena like investment, growth, or the quality of government (William Easterly and Ross Levine, 1997; Alberto Alesina et al., 2003; Rafael La Porta et al., 1999). The number of papers dealing with the effects of ethnic diversity on issues of economic interest is growing rapidly. In this respect, it is common in recent work to include as a regressor in empirical growth estimations an index of ethnic fractionalization. There are several reasons to include such an indicator. First, some authors have argued that ethnically diverse societies have a higher probability of ethnic conflicts, which may lead to civil war. The political instability caused by potential ethnic conflicts has a negative impact on investment and, indirectly, on growth. Second, ethnic diversity may generate a high level of corruption which, in turn, could deter investment. Finally it has been argued that in heterogeneous societies the diffusion of technological innovations is more difficult, especially when there is ethnic conflict among groups in a country. Business as usual is not possible in a society with a high level of potential ethnic conflict, since this situation affects all levels of economic activity. Trade may be restricted to individuals of the same ethnic group; public infrastructure may have an ethnic bias; government expenditure may favor some ethnic groups, etc. The common element in all these mechanisms is the existence of an ethnic conflict which, through social and political channels, spreads to the economy. However, many empirical studies find no relationship between ethnic fractionalization, ethnic conflict, and civil wars. There are at least three alternative explanations for this. First, it could be the case that the classification of ethnic groups in the Atlas Nadorov Mira (henceforth ANM), source of the traditional index of ethnolinguistic fractionalization (ELF), is not properly constructed. Some authors have used other sources to construct datasets of ethnic groups for a large sample of countries. In general, the correlation between the index of fractionalization obtained using these alternative data sources is very high (over 0.8). Second, James D. Fearon (2003) has argued that it is important to measure the “ethnic distance” across groups in order to obtain indicators of cultural diversity. He measures these distances in terms of the proximity in a tree diagram of the families of languages of different countries. As in the case of alternative data sources, the correlation of the index of ethnic fractionalization, using these distances, with the original ELF index is very high, 0.82. * Montalvo: Department of Economics, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, C/Ramon Trias Fargas 25-27, Barcelona 08005 Spain, and Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Economicas (e-mail: montalvo@upf.es); Reynal-Querol: the World Bank, 1818 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20433 (e-mail: mreynalquerol@worldbank.org). We are grateful for comments by Antonio Villar, Joan Esteban, Paul Collier, Tim Besley, and two anonymous referees. We thank the participants of seminars at the World Bank, Institut de la Mediterranea, Toulouse, Brown University, the European Economic Association Meetings, and the Winter Meetings of the Econometric Society. We would like to thank Sergio Kurlat, William Easterly, and Anke Hoeffler for sharing their data. Financial support from the BBVA Foundation and the Spanish Secretary of Science and Technology (SEC2003-04429) is kindly acknowledged. Jose G. Montalvo thanks the Public Services Group of the Research Department (DECRG) of the World Bank, where most of the revision of this paper was done, for their hospitality. The conclusions of this paper are not intended to represent the views of the World Bank, its executive directors, or the countries they represent. 1 Measured by the ELF index using the data of the Atlas Nadorov Mira. 2 Montalvo and Reynal-Querol (2000), Alesina et al. (2003), or Fearon (2003). 3 See also Francesco Caselli and W. John Coleman (2002).