Is political polarization worse than it's been in the past?
To answer whether political polarization is worse today than in the past, it helps to look at which "past" you are comparing it to.
If you compare today’s political climate to the mid-to-late 20th century, polarization is vastly worse on nearly every metric. However, if you look further back to the Civil War era or the Gilded Age of the late 19th century, today's division is comparable to those deep historical crises—though it manifests in uniquely modern ways.
1. The Point of Comparison: The 20th Century vs. The 19th Century
Compared to the Mid-20th Century (The "Anomaly")
For many living citizens, the baseline for "normal" politics is the period between the 1940s and the 1970s. During this era, polarization was historically low.
Compared to the 19th Century (The Civil War & Gilded Age)
When looking at the broader arc of history, today's levels of congressional polarization are not entirely unprecedented.
2. Why Modern Polarization Is Uniquely Dangerous
While we may not be in a shooting civil war, researchers point out that modern polarization has several distinct, highly volatile characteristics that make it feel—and in some ways act—worse than past eras:
A. Affective Polarization (The Rise of Dislike)
In the past, polarization was largely ideological—people disagreed on policy issues like tax rates or highway funding. Today, polarization is highly affective, meaning voters do not just disagree with the other side; they actively dislike and fear them.
B. Complete "Sorting"
In the past, a voter's political party didn't tell you everything about them. Today, parties have "sorted" completely.
C. The Modern Media and Social Ecosystem
In the 19th century, newspapers were openly partisan. However, the scale and speed of modern media are entirely different:
3. Is This a Global Trend?
While political polarization is rising in several parts of the world, studies show that the United States is a significant outlier.
A landmark study by researchers at Brown and Stanford Universities found that while "affective polarization" has risen slightly in countries like Canada, Switzerland, and New Zealand over the last 40 years, it actually decreased in nations like the UK, Germany, Norway, and Sweden. The rise of affective polarization in the U.S. was found to be uniquely rapid and severe, driven in part by the American two-party system (which forces a binary "us vs. them" choice) and its decentralized media landscape.
Summary
Is polarization worse than in the past? Yes, in terms of modern memory. We have completely lost the bipartisan, cross-cutting political landscape that characterized the mid-20th century. While we have not reached the physical violence of the 1860s, our current levels of congressional gridlock, combined with a deep, emotional hatred of the opposing political party, place us in one of the most polarized eras in American history.
Citations (11)
- usc.edu
Backs: “If you compare today’s political climate to the mid-to-late 20th century, polarization is vastly worse on nearly every metric. However, if you look further back to the Civil War era or the Gilded Age of the late 19th century, today's division is comparable to those deep historical crises—though it manifests in…”
- pewresearch.org
Backs: “If you compare today’s political climate to the mid-to-late 20th century, polarization is vastly worse on nearly every metric. However, if you look further back to the Civil War era or the Gilded Age of the late 19th century, today's division is comparable to those deep historical crises—though it manifests in…”
- usc.edu
Backs: “However, if you look further back to the Civil War era or the Gilded Age of the late 19th century, today's division is comparable to those deep historical crises—though it manifests in uniquely modern ways.”
- democracyproject.org
Backs: “However, if you look further back to the Civil War era or the Gilded Age of the late 19th century, today's division is comparable to those deep historical crises—though it manifests in uniquely modern ways.”
- brookings.edu
Backs: “Ideological Overlap: The two major American parties were not ideologically pure. The Democratic Party contained conservative Southern Democrats, while the Republican Party contained liberal Northeastern Republicans.”
- wikipedia.org
Backs: “The Civil War (1860s): This remains the absolute peak of American polarization, resulting in literal secession, the collapse of the party system, and a war that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans. We are not at this level of physical warfare, though modern gridlock is severe.”
- carnegieendowment.org
Backs: “The late 19th century was also characterized by intense partisan media, deep geographical divides, and frequent shifts in party control.”
- wikipedia.org
Backs: “Affective Polarization (The Rise of Dislike). In the past, polarization was largely ideological—people disagreed on policy issues like tax rates or highway funding. Today, polarization is highly affective, meaning voters do not just disagree with the other side; they actively dislike and fear them.”
- brown.edu
Backs: “Today, polarization is highly affective, meaning voters do not just disagree with the other side; they actively dislike and fear them. According to Pew Research Center data, the share of highly unfavorable views of the opposing party has skyrocketed.”
- syr.edu
Backs: “In 2022, 72% of Republicans and 63% of Democrats viewed the opposing party as "more immoral" than other Americans—up dramatically from 47% and 35% in 2016. Politics has become a core identity.”
- cam.ac.uk
Backs: “Today, parties have "sorted" completely. Demographic, Religious, and Geographic Alignment: Political identity now correlates almost perfectly with other deeply held identities: geography (urban vs.”