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

To answer whether political polarization is "worse than it has been in the past," political scientists and historians look at different eras, measurements, and definitions.

The short answer is yes, political polarization is worse than it has been in any living person’s memory (dating back to the mid-20th century). In terms of how much Americans dislike one another based on party lines, we are at modern historic highs.

However, if we look at the entire scope of American history, no, it is not the worst it has ever been. The ultimate peak of polarization remains the American Civil War (1861–1865), when the nation literally fractured, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths.

To understand where we stand today, it helps to break polarization down into its different forms and look at how they compare to the past.

1. Ideological vs. Affective Polarization

Scholars divide polarization into two distinct categories:

•Ideological Polarization: How far apart the political parties are on policy issues (e.g., taxes, healthcare, climate change).

•Affective Polarization: How much members of one political party actively dislike, distrust, and view members of the opposing party as a threat.

While ideological disagreement is a natural part of democracy, affective polarization is what makes the current era feel so toxic.

2. Is Ideological Polarization Worse? (Compared to the 19th Century)

To measure ideological polarization in Congress, political scientists use DW-NOMINATE scores, which track how lawmakers vote.

•The Mid-20th Century Anomaly: If you compare today to the 1950s or 1960s, the change is staggering. In that post-WWII era, political parties were highly overlapping. There were conservative Southern Democrats and liberal Northeast Republicans, which forced lawmakers to build cross-party coalitions to get things done.

•The Gilded Age and Reconstruction: If you look further back to the late 19th century (the 1870s to the 1890s), congressional polarization was just as high as, or slightly higher than, it is today. The Gilded Age was defined by fierce partisan gridlock, corruption, and massive economic inequality.

However, there is a key difference: during the Gilded Age, parties fought bitterly over power, patronage, and the "spoils" of office, but they did not always have deeply divided, cohesive ideological platforms. Today, we have "sorting"—where nearly all liberals have sorted into the Democratic Party and nearly all conservatives into the Republican Party, leaving virtually no moderates in Congress.

3. Is Affective Polarization Worse? (The Rise of Animus)

When it comes to how much everyday citizens dislike each other, the data shows a dramatic and unprecedented surge in hostility over the last few decades.

•Skyrocketing Animosity: Pew Research Center data shows that in 1994, only a small minority of partisans held "very unfavorable" views of the opposite party. By 2022, that had completely flipped: 72% of Republicans and 63% of Democrats viewed members of the opposing party as "more immoral" than other Americans.

•The U.S. is an Outlier: A landmark study from Brown University found that while political divisions have risen in many places, affective polarization in the United States has grown significantly faster over the last 40 years than in other major democracies like the UK, Canada, Australia, and Germany.

•A "Baked-In" Divide: In the past, political hostility would peak during election season and cool down afterward. However, research from the Polarization Research Lab indicates that partisan animus in the U.S. has become "baked in"—it remains consistently high year-round, regardless of whether an election is active.

4. What is Driving Today's Polarization?

Scholars point to several modern ingredients that make today's divisions feel uniquely intractable:

•The Media Ecosystem: The rise of partisan cable news in the 1990s and, more importantly, social media algorithms in the 21st century have created echo chambers. These platforms maximize user engagement by amplifying outrage and fear, making the "other side" look as extreme as possible.

•Megafiles and Culture Wars: In the past, a person’s political party was just one of many identities (alongside church, neighborhood, union, or local civic club). Today, political identity has swallowed up these other identities. Your political party now correlates heavily with where you live, what media you consume, your religious beliefs, and even your cultural tastes. When politics becomes a fight over your entire lifestyle and values, compromise feels like a surrender of identity.

•Asymmetry: A 2026 Cambridge University study tracking divisions since 1988 noted that the ideological gap has widened by 64%. Interestingly, the study found that on social issues, the American public's shift was asymmetrical: the left has moved significantly further to the left (socially progressive) over the last two decades, while the right's social views have remained relatively stable. Conversely, other political science data (like NOMINATE scores) shows that at the elite level in Congress, the Republican Party has experienced a more dramatic shift to the right compared to the Democratic shift to the left.

Summary

If you compare today to the Civil War, the U.S. is not as polarized; we are not on the verge of military secession or fighting a war that kills millions of citizens.

However, if you compare today to the last 80 years, we are living through a period of extreme, historically anomalous division. What makes the current era uniquely dangerous is not just that we disagree on policy, but that the tools of modern life—from social media to geographic sorting—have caused us to deeply dislike and fear those who vote differently.

Citations (11)

1usc.eduAcademic
usc.edu
Backs: “The short answer is yes, political polarization is worse than it has been in any living person’s memory (dating back to the mid-20th century). In terms of how much Americans dislike one another based on party lines, we are at modern historic highs.”
2cam.ac.ukAcademic
cam.ac.uk
Backs: “The short answer is yes, political polarization is worse than it has been in any living person’s memory (dating back to the mid-20th century). In terms of how much Americans dislike one another based on party lines, we are at modern historic highs.”
3syr.eduAcademic
syr.edu
Backs: “In terms of how much Americans dislike one another based on party lines, we are at modern historic highs.”
4wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “In terms of how much Americans dislike one another based on party lines, we are at modern historic highs.”
5democracyproject.orgNonprofits and think tanks
democracyproject.org
Backs: “However, if we look at the entire scope of American history, no, it is not the worst it has ever been. The ultimate peak of polarization remains the American Civil War (1861–1865), when the nation literally fractured, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths. To understand where we stand today, it helps to break…”
6brown.eduAcademic
brown.edu
Backs: “Affective Polarization: How much members of one political party actively dislike, distrust, and view members of the opposing party as a threat. While ideological disagreement is a natural part of democracy, affective polarization is what makes the current era feel so toxic.”
7upenn.eduAcademic
upenn.edu
Backs: “While ideological disagreement is a natural part of democracy, affective polarization is what makes the current era feel so toxic. 2.”
8gmu.eduAcademic
gmu.edu
Backs: “The Mid-20th Century Anomaly: If you compare today to the 1950s or 1960s, the change is staggering. In that post-WWII era, political parties were highly overlapping.”
9stanford.eduAcademic
stanford.edu
Backs: “The Gilded Age was defined by fierce partisan gridlock, corruption, and massive economic inequality. However, there is a key difference: during the Gilded Age, parties fought bitterly over power, patronage, and the "spoils" of office, but they did not always have deeply divided, cohesive ideological platforms.”
10cambridge.orgAcademic
cambridge.org
Backs: “However, there is a key difference: during the Gilded Age, parties fought bitterly over power, patronage, and the "spoils" of office, but they did not always have deeply divided, cohesive ideological platforms. Today, we have "sorting"—where nearly all liberals have sorted into the Democratic Party and nearly all…”
11researchgate.netAcademic
researchgate.net
Backs: “Scholars point to several modern ingredients that make today's divisions feel uniquely intractable: The Media Ecosystem: The rise of partisan cable news in the 1990s and, more importantly, social media algorithms in the 21st century have created echo chambers. These platforms maximize user engagement by amplifying…”