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

Short answer: it depends what “polarization” you mean and which period you compare to. In the United States:

•Elite (in-Congress) polarization: Near modern-era highs. Since the late 1970s the two parties have sorted so completely that there’s almost no ideological overlap among their elected members. This is “worse” than most of the 20th century and drives sharper conflict and gridlock.

•Public ideology: The average voter isn’t dramatically more extreme on many policy scales than decades ago. What has changed is sorting: fewer cross-pressured “conservative Democrats” or “liberal Republicans,” so partisans line up more consistently across issues.

•Affective polarization (how much partisans dislike the other side): Very high by survey measures since the 1980s. People are more distrustful of, and less willing to socialize or compromise with, the out‑party than in recent memory.

•Geographic and social sorting: Stronger than a few decades ago (urban vs. rural, education, religion, race, media diets), which amplifies echo chambers and makes landslide jurisdictions more common.

•Political violence/norms: Not remotely at Civil War levels and generally lower than the late 1960s–early 1970s, but threats against officials, election‑administration pressure, and a few high‑profile incidents are higher than in the 1990s–2000s.

So compared with most of the post–World War II era, U.S. partisan conflict among elites and mutual dislike among voters are worse today; compared with the 1850s–60s or the turbulent late 1960s, overall societal conflict and violence are not. If you want, I can pull charts and recent studies to document each dimension, or zoom in on a specific country or time period.

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

Citations (0)