Date: 2025-08-24 Page is: DBtxt003.php txt00027923
USA
AN IMPORTANT OPINION
The US isn’t polarized — it’s fractured
Written by Brian Alexander
AN IMPORTANT OPINION
The US isn’t polarized — it’s fractured
Written by Brian Alexander
A tattered flag tips in the wind after Beryl moved through
the area, July 8, 2024, in Matagorda, Texas.
Eric Gay, Associated Press file
Original article: https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/politics/5111058-the-us-isnt-polarized-its-fractured/
Peter Burgess COMMENTARY
I am more than a little surprised ... much of what I see in this article resonates with me a lot more than I expected!
Ever since November 5th last year (2024) when Trump was elected for a 2nd time to be the American President, I have been revisiting how I understood the state of the world at the start of my adult life, and how it changed over time. I know I had little interest in 'politics' for most of this time, rather, I was interested in technology ... and business and global economic performance. It was only relatively recently that I took an interest in politics and especially the economic and social damage that was a result of politics.
Many probably would look at my career and consider it as something of a failure. In terms of building a huge amount of financial wealth, that might be a reasonable conclusion ... but beyond accumulating only a rather modest amount of financial wealth, I have been able to engage constructively in all sorts of initiatives with many different organizations to improve society and the quality of life for people in many different parts of the world.
Working in over 50 countries during my lifetime, I have a better understanding than most about the issues that the world's leadership should be addressing.
I am not at all happy that much of the progress that had been made during the decades up to 1980 has reversed in the 45 years since that time ... and I am deeply concerned that the USA under Trump policy choices will accelerate the decline of almost everything good in the time ahead.
Unfortunately, most people do not have a clear understanding of what 'everything good' really means ... especially in a global context.
Over time, my own understanding of 'everything good' has changed very substantially. Initially, I saw the world mainly from a British perspective, and was unhappy at the way in which the 'British Empire' imploded post WWII even though the allies had prevailed over German and the axis powers!
Visits to Canada and the United States during my student years showed me how wealthy the USA had become during the war, while the UK and much of the rest of the world had suffered huge physical and human damage! Slowly I got to understand how wealth transfer into the United States had gutted Europe and much of the world while delivering a huge amount of wealth for the United States. This was no accident ... in my view it was a critical policy choice by American political leaders like Dean Acheson and John Foster Dulles during the post WWII cold war with the Soviet Union but also very hard nosed negotiation that may or may not have been reasonable.
A few years later I chose to migrate to North America from the UK ... essentially as an economic migrant. I was able to earn more in North America ... Canada and/or the United States ... in two months than I could in a full year in the UK. This was not a difficult decision!
At that time, I was a very well educated healthy white male ... and various people with influence facilitated the process so that nothing got stuck in the bureaucracy ... but everything went well and quite quickly in spite some complcations discussed elsewhere.
Fast foward 60 years to the 2020s and the same immigration process is no long possible. The process has been overwhelmed by the number of people seeking to come into the USA ... and the failuire of multiple US governments to do anything about the problem. I am incensed by the idea that an essential part of national administration has been dysfunctional for decades and nobody from either political party has done much if anything of substance to fix the problem in decades. It makes no good sense ... but does confirm that big chunks of the US administative state are in need major maintenance!
The observations made by Brian Alexander in this article resonate with me. I have been observing for a long time that the political idea of left and right is far too simplistic and has not represented the political landscape in a useful way for a very long time ... maybe never. Brian Alexander describes the multitude of competing ideas that are the political reality and calls it 'hyperpluralism'.
The background that I have which includes being part of senior management in the corporate environment, suggests to me that there can be a huge improvement in the 'managment of the economy, society and the environment if we get some clarity about what progress looks like. An important part of this is that the result of almost everything that happens has both a good component and a bad component. This is reflected to some extent in the idea that is 'double entry accountancy' used universally in business. This idea applied to everything should be foundational for the 'management' of every aspect of the global socio-enviro-economic system that more than 8 billion people use for everything every day of their lives!
My thinking on the subject has been ongoing for a long time ... maybe most of my adult life ... and it has changed considerably over time. The changes have come about because both I have changed over time and because the world has changed over time as well.
In this regard, Trump is interesting ... I see him as a throwback to worldviews that are centuries out of date, but popular among his followers in large part because they don't understand very much of 'how the world actually works ... and especially the modern world'. Frankly ... Donald Trump is really nothing more than the classical schoolyard bully ... a bully that has never 'grown up'!
Throughout history there have been many 'empires' ... peoples that have come together under a charismatic leader to dominate other peoples. Many of their physical accomplishments are still visible today and what they were able to do is impressive. Clearly, the historical record shows that they had success ... and then they didn't.
I grew up in the UK and learned a lot about the British Empire. When I was a young adult and had the opportunity to travel the world I learned a lot that had nothing to do with Britain and Empire. Over time, I learned more and more about variety and possibilities that were not part of any single culture ... that different did not necessarily mean worse, but might actually mean better!
A few months ago, I watched the coronation of King Charles in the London UK and a few days ago I watched the inauguration of President Trump in Washington, USA. I like 'pomp and circumstance' and both of these events provided that satisfaction ... but there was something very different about the two events. The UK coronation had a history that was embedded in the ceremony while the US inauguration was more a case of Trump saying 'look at me' and see how fast I can mobilise 'my wrecking ball!'
Trump has some credibility ... because there are some things ... in fact, many things ... in the United States that do need fixing. For most people fixing something means making it better, but for Trump is tends to mean simply another opportunity for Trump to game the system and get more wealth for himself. At this, Trump is masterful ... brilliant ... and it has been on full display in the ten days since his inauguration!
It is not clear what is going to happen next ... but I am of the view that it could be very bad! I hope not ... but hope is not very powerufl in situations like this!
Peter Burgess
Written by Brian Alexander, opinion contributor
Brian Alexander, Ph.D., is an associate professor of politics at Washington and Lee University and director of the W&L Washington Term, an experiential learning program for college students. He is the author of “A Social Theory of Congress: Legislative Norms in the Twenty-First Century.”
01/29/25 1:00 PM ET
We hear almost constantly how Americans are more politically polarized than ever. Even in Donald Trump’s barnstorming return to the presidency, we see a battle between unified and triumphant Republicans, and demoralized Democrats plotting a comeback.
But partisan polarization fails to capture an even more important reality: We are not divided into opposing left-right camps. Rather, we are fractured as a society into numerous competing worldviews, policy positions and identities.
Beyond polarization, we live with a condition I call “hyperpluralism,” in which people are split into countless political factions, each with new capabilities to make policy demands and destabilize old centers of power.
We see hyperpluralism in social media, which makes political organizing easier and more disruptive than ever. We see it in the way we consume news, where media-choice has shattered common understandings of events.
We see this among lawmakers, where politicians previously beholden to party elites can now broker their own information and fundraising coalitions. A post on social media can directly reach political audiences and raise thousands of dollars.
Hyperpluralism is the outcome of the proliferation of political speech on social media, podcasts and news websites. It stems from the ability of people who previously might have been political outliers to achieve national audiences and to obtain essential financial support — whether Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) or Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Freedom Convoys or Black Lives Matter, Joe Rogan or the Young Turks.
Hyperpluralism is evident in the disruptive forces of American politics that are hallmarks of the 21st century: from Occupy Wall Street to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, the Tea Party and the Squad, and anti-vaxxers versus the medical establishment.
The consequences of hyperpluralism echo throughout our politics. When Americans disagree about whether the Russian invasion of Ukraine is a bad thing, whether vaccines are a good idea or if a violent attack on the U.S. Capitol is a peaceful protest, these are not signs of democratic deliberation between liberals and conservatives. They are bellwethers of a shattering society, a scatterplot of ideas, interests and identities.
James Madison, in defending the Constitution, spoke to the inevitable “mischiefs of faction,” where a “zeal for different opinions” is “sown in the nature of man.” In his solution, the American government was designed to check power among competing factions and centers of government authority.
“Ambition must be made to counteract ambition,” Madison wrote. This system would ensure the competition of interests and ideas, prevent tyranny of the majority and minority alike, preserve liberty and serve the ends of justice.
Pluralism was to be a good thing — an open society would encourage civil debate and solutions for the common good. Yet the explosion of public discourse and engagement on the internet, resulting in hyperpluralism, has torn us apart and fractured us into so many different interests and perspectives. It proves difficult to achieve the common good when conflict abounds and it is hard to agree upon what we have in common.
There are no easy solutions to what we might call the mischief of too many factions. Ideologically, there are no obvious schools of thought we could agree upon to bring us all together. The progressive left, neoliberal globalists and faith and flag conservatives, to name but a few major political divisions, share little in common in terms of political philosophy or policy preferences.
Passing laws or amending the Constitution for bold solutions — like instituting proportional representation or putting an end to gerrymandering — would be incredibly difficult to push through a divided Congress and an electorate that lacks consensus.
Meanwhile, the internet makes it easier than ever for people to disperse into their own political bubbles, and social media algorithms are designed to drive us further apart. Under these conditions of hyperpluralism, it is more likely than ever for Americans “to vex and oppress each other than to cooperate for their common good,” to borrow, again, from Madison
So here we are. Trump is blitzing the country in a honeymoon of Republican unity. But beneath this triumphant wave is a fractured society.
To many, Trump himself is challenging democratic institutions like no one in our lifetimes. An even greater challenge to those institutions may be the divisions among the people they are intended to unite.
The question remains whether, under such strains, Madison’s great solution can hold.
Tags Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez America divided Donald Trump Nancy Mace political polarization Politics of the United States
Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.