Polarization, diversity, and democratic robustness
- PMID: 34876525
- PMCID: PMC8685672
- DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2113843118
Polarization, diversity, and democratic robustness
Abstract
In the Madisonian Constitution, fragmented and overlapping institutions of authority are supposed to manage democracy's innate rivalry, channeling competition to serve the public interest. This system of safeguards makes democracy more robust: capable of withstanding and, if need be, adapting to challenges posed by a changing problem environment. In this essay, I suggest why affective polarization poses a special threat to democratic robustness. While most scholars hypothesize that polarization's dangers are that it leads to bimodality and extremism, I highlight a third hypothesized effect: Polarization reduces interest and information diversity in the political system. To be effective, democracy's safeguards rely upon interest diversity, but Madison took that diversity for granted. Unique among democracy's safeguards, federalism builds in a repository for diversity; its structure enables differences between national- and state-expressed interests, even within the same party. This diversity can be democracy hindering, as the United States' history with racially discriminatory politics painfully makes clear, but it can also serve as a reservoir of interest and information dispersion that could protect democracy by restoring the possibility that cross-cutting cleavages emerge.
Keywords: democratic decline; federalism; polarization; robust systems.
Conflict of interest statement
The author declares no competing interest.
Similar articles
-
Democracy's backsliding in the international environment.Science. 2020 Sep 4;369(6508):1192-1196. doi: 10.1126/science.abb2434. Science. 2020. PMID: 32883862 Review.
-
Democracy's Denominator: Reassessing Responsiveness with Public Opinion on the National Policy Agenda.Public Opin Q. 2016 Summer;80(2):437-459. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfv082. Epub 2016 Apr 22. Public Opin Q. 2016. PMID: 27274572 Free PMC article.
-
Democracy's limited impact on innovation: Panel data evidence from developing countries.PLoS One. 2024 Mar 15;19(3):e0297915. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297915. eCollection 2024. PLoS One. 2024. PMID: 38489256 Free PMC article.
-
COVID-19 and democratic resilience.Glob Policy. 2022 Sep 1:10.1111/1758-5899.13137. doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.13137. Online ahead of print. Glob Policy. 2022. PMID: 36247072 Free PMC article.
-
The Lutheran Imaginary That Underpins Social Democracy.Front Psychol. 2021 Sep 10;12:746406. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.746406. eCollection 2021. Front Psychol. 2021. PMID: 34566825 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
How digital media drive affective polarization through partisan sorting.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Oct 18;119(42):e2207159119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2207159119. Epub 2022 Oct 10. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022. PMID: 36215484 Free PMC article.
-
Quantifying the 'end of history' through a Bayesian Markov-chain approach.R Soc Open Sci. 2022 Nov 30;9(11):221131. doi: 10.1098/rsos.221131. eCollection 2022 Nov. R Soc Open Sci. 2022. PMID: 36465687 Free PMC article.
-
The dynamics of political polarization.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Dec 14;118(50):e2116950118. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2116950118. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021. PMID: 34876529 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
The roots of polarization in the individual reward system.Proc Biol Sci. 2024 Feb 28;291(2017):20232011. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2023.2011. Epub 2024 Feb 28. Proc Biol Sci. 2024. PMID: 38412967 Free PMC article.
References
-
- McCarty N., Polarization: What Everyone Needs to Know (Oxford University Press, 2019).
-
- Iyengar S., Lelkes Y., Levendusky M., Malhotra N., Westwood S. J., The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 22, 129–146 (2019).
-
- Pierson P., Schickler E., Madison’s constitution under stress: A developmental analysis of political polarization. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 23, 37–58 (2020).
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources