Is political polarization worse than it's been in the past?

To answer whether political polarization is worse than in the past, political scientists and historians generally split the answer into two parts: Yes, it is worse than at any point in modern polling history (the last 50 to 70 years), but no, it has not yet reached the absolute physical extreme of the American Civil War.

However, today’s polarization has unique, scientifically measured characteristics that make it uniquely difficult to resolve.

1. The Modern Era: Worse Than Ever in Polling History

If we look at the period after World War II, political polarization in the United States is at an all-time high.

•Ideological Sorting and the Death of the Moderate: In the mid-20th century, political parties were ideologically diverse. There were conservative Southern Democrats and liberal Northeast Republicans. Today, the parties have "sorted." By analyzing every congressional vote since the late 1800s (using a metric called DW-NOMINATE), political scientists have found that Congress is more ideologically divided today than at any point since the Reconstruction Era in the late 1870s. Ideological moderates have virtually disappeared from Capitol Hill.

•Affective Polarization (Active Animosity): Perhaps the most alarming trend is not that the parties disagree on policy, but how they feel about each other. This is called affective polarization. In the 1970s and 80s, voters generally viewed members of the opposing party with mild disagreement. Today, animosity is personal. According to Pew Research, the percentage of Democrats and Republicans who view the opposing party as not just wrong, but "immoral," nearly doubled between 2016 and 2022.

•The U.S. is an International Outlier: While polarization is rising in many parts of the world, research from Brown University shows that the United States is polarizing much faster and more intensely than other comparable Western democracies (such as Canada, the UK, Germany, and Australia).

2. The Deeper Historical Perspective: The True Peaks of Division

If we look further back into the 19th century, the United States has experienced periods of division that were as bad as—or physically worse than—today.

•The Civil War (1861–1865): This remains the absolute peak of American political polarization. The polarization was so extreme that it broke the democratic system entirely, resulting in the secession of southern states and a war that claimed hundreds of thousands of lives.

•The Gilded Age (Late 19th Century): The late 1800s were characterized by massive economic inequality, bitter partisan media, and extreme political gridlock. In his book The Upswing, sociologist Robert Putnam charts a century of social data, showing that the U.S. went from a highly polarized Gilded Age to a highly cooperative, cohesive society in the mid-20th century, before sliding back down into the extreme polarization we see today.

•The Mid-20th Century "Anomaly": Many people look back at the 1950s and 60s as the "normal" standard for American politics, where bipartisanship was common. However, historians point out that this era of cooperation was actually a historical anomaly. It was forged by the shared national trauma of the Great Depression and WWII, as well as a post-war economic boom that temporarily quieted class and cultural divisions.

3. What Makes Today’s Polarization Uniquely Dangerous?

While we are not fighting a physical civil war, political scientists warn that today’s polarization has structural elements that make it harder to reverse than the divisions of the past:

•Mega-Identities: In the past, a person’s political party was just one of many identities. Today, political parties have aligned perfectly with other deeply personal social identities: race, religion, geography (urban vs. rural), and cultural lifestyle. When political identity becomes a "mega-identity," a defeat for your party feels like an existential threat to your entire way of life.

•The Digital Echo Chamber: In the 19th century, partisan newspapers were common, but their reach was localized. Today, social media algorithms, partisan cable news, and internet echo chambers amplify outrage nationally and instantly. Outrage is highly monetizable, meaning media business models are financially incentivized to keep Americans angry at one another.

•The "Misperception" Trap: Recent studies have found that much of modern polarization is driven by false perceptions. Everyday citizens tend to assume that ordinary voters on the other side hold the same extreme views as the loudest, most radical politicians and commentators they see on social media. While most Americans actually hold relatively moderate or centrist positions on many issues, they harbor deep animosity toward the other side based on these caricatures.

Summary

If the metric is physical violence and institutional collapse, political polarization was worse during the Civil War. But if the metric is how much citizens actively dislike each other, the total absence of moderate politicians, and the degree to which political parties have divided every aspect of social and cultural life, the United States is currently experiencing a level of polarization that is unprecedented in the modern era.

Citations (17)

1pewresearch.orgNonprofits and think tanks
pewresearch.org
Backs: “To answer whether political polarization is worse than in the past, political scientists and historians generally split the answer into two parts: Yes, it is worse than at any point in modern polling history (the last 50 to 70 years), but no, it has not yet reached the absolute physical extreme of the American Civil…”
2beyondintractability.orgNot yet classified
beyondintractability.org
Backs: “To answer whether political polarization is worse than in the past, political scientists and historians generally split the answer into two parts: Yes, it is worse than at any point in modern polling history (the last 50 to 70 years), but no, it has not yet reached the absolute physical extreme of the American Civil…”
3democracyproject.orgNonprofits and think tanks
democracyproject.org
Backs: “To answer whether political polarization is worse than in the past, political scientists and historians generally split the answer into two parts: Yes, it is worse than at any point in modern polling history (the last 50 to 70 years), but no, it has not yet reached the absolute physical extreme of the American Civil…”
4nih.govGovernment
nih.gov
Backs: “The Modern Era: Worse Than Ever in Polling History. If we look at the period after World War II, political polarization in the United States is at an all-time high.”
5reddit.comForums and Q&A
reddit.com
Backs: “The Modern Era: Worse Than Ever in Polling History. If we look at the period after World War II, political polarization in the United States is at an all-time high.”
6cam.ac.ukAcademic
cam.ac.uk
Backs: “Today, the parties have "sorted." By analyzing every congressional vote since the late 1800s (using a metric called DW-NOMINATE), political scientists have found that Congress is more ideologically divided today than at any point since the Reconstruction Era in the late 1870s.”
7emerald.comAcademic
emerald.com
Backs: “Today, the parties have "sorted." By analyzing every congressional vote since the late 1800s (using a metric called DW-NOMINATE), political scientists have found that Congress is more ideologically divided today than at any point since the Reconstruction Era in the late 1870s.”
8usc.eduAcademic
usc.edu
Backs: “Today, the parties have "sorted." By analyzing every congressional vote since the late 1800s (using a metric called DW-NOMINATE), political scientists have found that Congress is more ideologically divided today than at any point since the Reconstruction Era in the late 1870s. Ideological moderates have virtually…”
9brown.eduAcademic
brown.edu
Backs: “This is called affective polarization. In the 1970s and 80s, voters generally viewed members of the opposing party with mild disagreement.”
10wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “This is called affective polarization. In the 1970s and 80s, voters generally viewed members of the opposing party with mild disagreement.”
11syr.eduAcademic
syr.edu
Backs: “According to Pew Research, the percentage of Democrats and Republicans who view the opposing party as not just wrong, but "immoral," nearly doubled between 2016 and 2022.”
12cpreview.orgNot yet classified
cpreview.org
Backs: “The polarization was so extreme that it broke the democratic system entirely, resulting in the secession of southern states and a war that claimed hundreds of thousands of lives. The Gilded Age (Late 19th Century): The late 1800s were characterized by massive economic inequality, bitter partisan media, and extreme…”
13gmu.eduAcademic
gmu.edu
Backs: “The Gilded Age (Late 19th Century): The late 1800s were characterized by massive economic inequality, bitter partisan media, and extreme political gridlock. In his book The Upswing, sociologist Robert Putnam charts a century of social data, showing that the U.S.”
14pbs.orgNews and mediaquality 0.87
pbs.org
Backs: “In his book The Upswing, sociologist Robert Putnam charts a century of social data, showing that the U.S. went from a highly polarized Gilded Age to a highly cooperative, cohesive society in the mid-20th century, before sliding back down into the extreme polarization we see today. The Mid-20th Century "Anomaly": Many…”
15stanford.eduAcademic
stanford.edu
Backs: “rural), and cultural lifestyle. When political identity becomes a "mega-identity," a defeat for your party feels like an existential threat to your entire way of life.”
16carnegie.orgNonprofits and think tanks
carnegie.org
Backs: “When political identity becomes a "mega-identity," a defeat for your party feels like an existential threat to your entire way of life. The Digital Echo Chamber: In the 19th century, partisan newspapers were common, but their reach was localized.”
17berkeley.eduAcademic
berkeley.edu
Backs: “Today, social media algorithms, partisan cable news, and internet echo chambers amplify outrage nationally and instantly. Outrage is highly monetizable, meaning media business models are financially incentivized to keep Americans angry at one another.”