Partisanship and polarization are necessary evils in politics. On the one hand, without partisanship there is no debate and no freedom of choice. On the other, extreme polarization has historically led us to war and violence. In an ideal world, the ideological gap that causes polarization would be wide enough for creative thought and discussion without leading to hyper-partisanship and violence. In reality, though, this gap and the polarization it causes, specifically in the United States, have always led to extreme outcomes.
A prime example of this extreme political polarization is the American Civil War, when the divide over slavery between the North and South became too great, leading to a war of devastating violence. The Civil War was critical in finally expelling the practice of slavery in this country, thus it can be viewed a moral necessity.
Many years after the end of the Civil War we faced the inverse effect of polarization in the attack on the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. In the aftermath of the attack Americans from both sides of the aisle united to take immediate action. Due to this rare moment of unity, both Democrats and Republicans supported the bloody invasions of Afghanistan, and later Iraq. These invasions, at first seemingly motivated by a patriotic claim for justice and American safety, quickly turned into bloodthirsty regime change wars. The voice of dissent was too late to emerge, and hundreds of thousands of innocent people died during the war.
Would polarization have been such a bad thing in this instance?
Statistics have shown time and time again that in our modern-day politics, Democrats and Republicans are the most divided they’ve been in decades. However, the question of what this means for the country is still up in the air; polarization is not necessarily a bad thing.
Certainly, it has its downsides. The rise in polarization within Congress has made it a lot harder for bipartisan deals to be struck and for policies to be passed. Even more pressing is the effect it has on the public. The heightened political tension has led to more awkward Thanksgiving dinners than ever before. And yet, is that so bad?
It’s impossible to discuss this topic without mentioning the fast-approaching election. Both sides are accusing each other of becoming too radical– but how true are these bipartisan accusations?
One side has advocated for comprehensive maternal healthcare, common sense gun laws and more equitable tax policies. The other has prided themselves on the removal of one of the most fundamental freedoms women necessitate, all while attempting to overthrow our election. There are two vastly different attitudes towards the future in our politics. One aims to keep us in the past, while the other wishes to push forward to a brighter future. This all begs the question: is it really worth working with the other side when one is so wildly different from the other?
While we must condemn extreme examples of polarization, like political violence, which have become all too common in our society today, we don’t have to like each other. While those of an older generation may constantly talk about how in the good old days Democrats and Republicans used to be friends despite ideological differences, the gap has now become too wide for friendship in many cases. This isn’t true for every situation, as moderate Democrats and Republicans can still find some common ground. But the outer edges of both parties have clearly reached a level of incompatibleness—and that’s okay.
As one side goes completely off the deep end it is critical not to sacrifice our morals and beliefs for some non-existent common ground. There is no compromise to the side that tried to overthrow an election and is currently trying to elect a man who stated that he’ll “be a dictator on day one.”
Felipe Sathler can be reached at [email protected].