Read broadly, across the disciplines, and it is amazing what can be found. There might be a narrow monograph here or an obscure treatise over there, but scholarship can surprise and enlighten in so many ways and fields. Come across a tight, well-reasoned work that resonates? One has to share.
Matthew Levendusky is a political science associate professor at the University of Pennsylvania. In 2023 he wrote Our Common Bonds: Using What Americans Share to Bridge Partisan Divides. A straightforward book with clear and compelling arguments, it goes far in explaining what can be done to bring together Americans from across the political spectrum. In addition, it calls into question – indirectly – the extraordinarily contentious political landscape in which we live. The path to this is through a study and research on what scholars call “affective polarization.”
Affective polarization is distinct from ideological difference and rabid partisanship. It is marked by extremely high negativity towards the other party and its members. When rates of affective polarization are strong, it is impossible to think of a “loyal opposition.” In the past decade, thanks to consistent polling and subsequent studies, scholars have learned that Americans increasingly dislike and distrust their political opposition. Moreover, those rates of negativity have been steadily increasing. Levendusky explains that affective polarization has consequences well beyond elections. It erodes trust in public institutions, in democracy, and our very basic relationships with our neighbors and fellow citizens.
Levendusky systematically sets out the problems and proposes a series of hypotheses to see if there are ways to decrease affective polarization. Through research we learn that priming people to think about shared American values can reduce affective polarization. So, too , do cross-party friendships and civil cross-party dialogue. Moreover, the effects of these exercises can remain over time. Party animus can decrease, and remain lowered, through attention and the right sort of environmental cues and structures. It is easily possible, too, to imagine how institutions of higher education could enable such activities. Fascinating, isn’t it?
Absent from Our Common Bonds is analysis of the how and why of increasing affective polarization. There must be good reasons why it is on the rise. For this reader, that is subsequent key issue for us to consider, individually and collectively. Cui Bono? Levendusky and others underscore the costs of affective polarization. It is up to all of us to raise awareness of who benefits, how the benefit, and why.
Back to the library stacks!
David Potash