Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Dec 14;118(50):e2113843118.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.2113843118.

Polarization, diversity, and democratic robustness

Affiliations

Polarization, diversity, and democratic robustness

Jenna Bednar. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. .

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author declares no competing interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. McCarty N., Polarization: What Everyone Needs to Know (Oxford University Press, 2019).
    1. 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).
    1. Perrings C., Hechter M., Mamada R., National polarization and international agreements. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 118, e2102145118 (2021). - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stewart A. J., Plotkin J. B., McCarty N., Inequality, identity, and partisanship: How redistribution can stem the tide of mass polarization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 118, e2102140118 (2021). - PMC - PubMed
    1. 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