Search

Begin New Search Topic Polarization Political Geography United States of America

1. The Deinstitutionalization of U.S. and Turkish Foreign Policy: Why Societal Ties Are an Anchor in Bilateral Relations

Author:
Andrew O'Donohue
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace
Institution:
Center for Foreign Policy and Peace Research
Abstract:
This paper challenges two prevailing narratives about U.S.-Turkey relations: first, that international and individual-level factors are responsible for volatility in the relationship and second, that bilateral relations are uniformly bleak. In contrast to these perspectives, this paper proposes a domestic and institutional explanation for the rising volatility of U.S.-Turkey relations and conceptualizes societal ties as an anchor in the bilateral relationship. This paper advances two inter-related arguments. First, I argue that a key driver of volatility in U.S.-Turkey relations since 2016 is the deinstitutionalization of U.S. and Turkish foreign policymaking. In the United States, the root cause of deinstitutionalization is intensifying polarization over foreign policy, fueled by the rise of populism. In Turkey, by contrast, foreign policy has deinstitutionalized through personalization: the steady concentration of decision-making power in the hands of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Second, against this backdrop of deinstitutionalization, I show that societal ties between the United States and Turkey provide a uniquely stable and enduring area of bilateral cooperation. I provide evidence for this argument in two key domains: 1) civil society and media and 2) higher education. These societal linkages, I argue, are often resilient precisely because they are disconnected from domestic politics and foreign policy. These societal ties should thus be understood not as agents that can reshape bilateral relations but as anchors that prevent the two nations from drifting apart.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Civil Society, Bilateral Relations, Media, Higher Education, Bureaucracy, and Polarization
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, North Africa, and United States of America

2. The US Presidential Election: Unprecedentedly High Stakes

Author:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Publication Date:
08-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Al Jazeera Center for Studies
Abstract:
A combination of unexpected factors has led to the nomination of Kamala Harris as a replacement for Joe Biden, ushering the US elections into a new phase. This development could enhance the mechanism of political integration, but it might also lead to further exclusion, which could cause extremism and chaos, and weaken institutions.
Topic:
Domestic Politics, Institutions, Donald Trump, Polarization, Presidential Elections, Kamala Harris, and Political Integration
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

3. The Polarized American Electorate: The Rise of Partisan-Ideological Consistency and Its Consequences

Author:
Alan I. Abramowitz
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Political Science Quarterly
Institution:
Academy of Political Science
Abstract:
Alan I. Abramowitz presents evidence from American National Election Studies surveys showing that party identification, ideological identification and issue positions have become much more closely connected over the past half century. He argues that as a result, the ideological divide between Democratic and Republican identifiers has widened considerably. The rise of partisan-ideological consistency has contributed to growing affective polarization as well as increasing party loyalty and straight ticket voting.
Topic:
Elections, Ideology, Political Science, Survey, Polarization, Republican Party, and Democratic Party
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

4. Polarization, Democracy, and Political Violence in the United States: What the Research Says

Author:
Rachel Kleinfeld
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The United States feels roiled by polarization, and the philanthropic world is seized with debates about what to do. Some scholars claim that Americans are so polarized they are on the brink of civil war. Other polls suggest that voters agree on plenty of policies and that polarization is an illusion. Some philanthropists call for pluralism and civility, while others lean into activism, believing polarization is a byproduct of change toward a more just world. So, is the United States polarized or not? If it is, what is causing the polarization and what are its consequences? Should polarization be solved or tolerated? This paper is intended to answer these questions. It opens with five facts about polarization in the United States today and what those imply for possible interventions. A literature review follows, organized chronologically to explain the scholarly shift from thinking of polarization as an ideological, policy-based phenomenon to an issue of emotion, as well as the emerging understanding of polarization as both a social phenomenon and a political strategy. This paper is organized as follows.
Topic:
Political Violence, Democracy, Ideology, and Polarization
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

5. The increase in partisan segregation in the United States

Author:
Jacob R. Brown, Enrico Cantoni, Ryan D. Enos, Vincent Pons, and Emilie Sartre
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Nottingham Interdisciplinary Centre for Economic and Political Research (NICEP)
Abstract:
This paper provides novel evidence on trends in geographic partisan segregation. Using two individual-level panel datasets covering the near universe of the U.S. population between 2008 and 2020, we leverage information on individuals’ party affiliation to construct two key indicators: i) the fraction of Democrats among voters affiliated with either major party, which reveals that partisan segregation has increased across geographical units, at the tract, county, and congressional district levels; ii) The dissimilarity index, which measures differences in the partisan mix across distinct sub-units and highlights that partisan segregation has also increased within geographical units. Tracking individuals across election years, we decompose changes in partisan segregation into different sources: voter migration, generational change, older voters entering the electorate, and voters changing their partisanship or their registration status. The rise in partisan segregation is mostly driven by generational change, in Democratic-leaning areas, and by the increasing ideological conformity of stayers, in Republican-leaning areas.
Topic:
Domestic Politics, Ideology, Polarization, Partisanship, and Voting Behavior
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

6. Why the American Public is Less Polarized on Foreign Policy

Author:
Matthew Rochat
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Council on International Policy (CIP)
Abstract:
It is no secret that American social and political life has become a house divided. Over the past several decades, Americans have gravitated increasingly toward politically like-minded clusters. Political ideology now plays a large role in determining the neighborhoods where we live, the friends and family with whom we spend our time, and the news media that we consume. This divisive trend is not limited to the American public, but also characterizes relations between political elites and has contributed to gridlock in congress. The United States has become divided between two camps of increasingly extreme positions, a phenomenon known as polarization. While public opinion has become increasingly polarized on domestic policy, foreign policy has not been susceptible to the same degree. Though foreign policy divisions are growing among political elites, they have not yet trickled down to the general population. The underlying logic is that party elites do not transmit sufficiently clear cues to the public, who in turn, do not effectively interpret these cues. In simpler terms, elites have failed to effectively distinguish Republican foreign policy from Democrat foreign policy. What explains this communication failure?
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Political Parties, Polarization, and Partisanship
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

7. Geoeconomics of Polarisation: Can BRICS eclipse western global economic power?

Author:
FARAS
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARAS)
Abstract:
The 14th BRICS summit concluded on June 24 amid Western sanctions on Russia and rising tension between China and the US over Taiwan. The two-day event took place via video and was hosted by Beijing.
Topic:
Economy, BRICS, Polarization, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, China, India, Taiwan, South Africa, Brazil, and United States of America

8. How Inequality and Polarization Interact: America’s Challenges Through a South African Lens

Author:
Brian Levy
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Over the past decade, toxic interactions between persistent inequality, racial tensions, and political polarization have undercut the promise of South Africa’s so-called rainbow miracle transition from apartheid to democracy. South Africa’s recent history sheds light on the United States’ recent political travails. It illustrates how interactions between inclusion and inequality on the one hand and political ideas and entrepreneurship on the other can fuel positive spirals of hope, economic dynamism, and political legitimacy—but can also trigger vicious, downward spirals of disillusion, anger, and political polarization. South Africa was able to transition from a society structured around racial oppression into a nonracial democracy whose new government promised “a better life for all.” Especially remarkable was the speed with which one set of national ideas appeared to give way to its polar opposite. From a society marked by racial dominance and oppression, there emerged the aspiration to build an inclusive, cooperative social order, underpinned by the principles of equal dignity and shared citizenship. In the initial glow of transition, South Africa’s citizens could hope for a better life for themselves and their children. In time, though, the promise wore thin. It became increasingly evident that the economic deck would continue to be stacked, and that the possibility of upward mobility would remain quite limited. Fueled by massive continuing inequities in wealth, income, and opportunity, South Africans increasingly turned from hope to anger. In the United States, a steady and equitably growing economy and a vibrant civil rights movement had fostered the hope of social and economic inclusion. But that hope turned to anger as the benefits of growth became increasingly skewed from the 1980s onward. In 2019, the U.S. economy was more unequal than it had been since the 1920s. Younger generations could no longer expect that their lives would be better than those of their parents. Such economic adversity and associated status anxiety can trigger a heightened propensity for us-versus-them ways of engaging the world. In both South Africa and the United States, polarization was fueled by divisive political entrepreneurs, and in both countries, these entrepreneurs leveraged inequality in ways that added fuel to the fire. In the 2010s, South Africa went through a new ideational reckoning, in part to correct the view that the transition to democracy had washed the country’s apartheid history clean. But opportunistic political entrepreneurs also pushed an increasingly polarized and re-racialized political discourse and pressure on public institutions, with predictable economic consequences. South Africa’s economy slid into sustained stagnation. Paralleling South Africa, America’s divisive political entrepreneurs also cultivated an us-versus-them divisiveness. However, unlike in South Africa, political entrepreneurs and economic elites in the United States also used divisive rhetoric as a way to persuade voters to embrace inequality-increasing policies that might otherwise not have won support. By the late 2010s, the risks were palpable in both South Africa and the United States of an accelerating breakdown of the norms and institutions that sustain inclusive political settlements. For South Africa, the reversals were not wholly unexpected, given the country’s difficult inheritance—though a recent turn away from angry populism suggests that, paradoxically, the rawness and recency of the anti-apartheid struggle and triumph might perhaps offer some immunization against a further-accelerating a downward spiral. But for the United States, the converse may be true. Increases in inequality since the 1980s, and their attendant social and political consequences, have been largely self-inflicted wounds. Complacency bred of long stability may, for decades, have been lulling the country into political recklessness at the inequality-ethnicity intersection, a recklessness that risks plunging the country into disaster. But this paper’s analysis is not all gloom and doom. South Africa’s escape from the shackles of apartheid teaches that, even in the most unlikely settings, downward spirals of despair and anger can transmute into virtuous spirals of hope. The country’s first fifteen years of democracy also show that, once a commitment to change has taken hold, making the shift to an inclusion-supporting economy is less daunting than it might seem. Reforms that foster “good enough inclusion” can be enough to provide initial momentum, with the changes themselves unfolding over time—and an initial round of change can bring in its wake a variety of positive knock-on effects. But lessons can be overlearned. Mass political mobilization was pivotal to South Africa’s shaking loose the shackles of apartheid—and new calls to the barricades might seem to be the obvious response to current political and governmental dysfunction. However, different times and different challenges call for different responses. In both contemporary South Africa and contemporary America, the frontier challenge is not to overthrow an unjust political order but to renew preexisting formal commitments to the idea that citizenship implies some shared purpose. Renewal of this kind might best be realized not by confrontation but rather by a social movement centered around a vision of shared citizenship, a movement that views cooperation in pursuit of win-win possibilities not as weakness but as the key to the sustainability of thriving, open, and inclusive societies.
Topic:
Governance, Democracy, Inequality, Institutions, and Polarization
Political Geography:
Africa, South Africa, North America, and United States of America

9. Pushed to Extremes: Domestic Terrorism amid Polarization and Protest

Author:
Catrina Doxsee, Seth G. Jones, Jared Thompson, Grace Hwang, and Kateryna Halstead
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
There has been a significant rise in the number of domestic terrorist attacks and plots at demonstrations in the United States, according to new CSIS data. The result is escalating violence in U.S. cities between extremists from opposing sides, a major break from historical trends. In 2021, over half of all domestic terrorist incidents occurred in the context of metropolitan demonstrations. In addition, the most frequent targets of attacks were government, military, and law enforcement agencies, who are increasingly at the center of domestic terrorism by extremists of all ideologies.
Topic:
Terrorism, Violent Extremism, Polarization, and Domestic Terrorism
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

10. After Trump: Enemies, Partisans, and Recovery

Author:
Christopher J. Fettweis
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Political Science Quarterly
Institution:
Academy of Political Science
Abstract:
CHRISTOPHER J. FETTWEIS discusses what political polarization in the United States has in common with the relationship between the Cold War superpowers. He argues that in both cases the “enemy image” warps perception of the other side and prevents meaningful reconciliation. Applying insight from international relations to U.S. domestic politics, he discusses the pernicious effects of the enemy image and how to overcome it.
Topic:
International Relations, Domestic Politics, Donald Trump, and Polarization
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America