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

To answer whether political polarization is worse today than in the past, political scientists and historians generally look at two different eras of comparison.

The short answer is no, it is not the worst it has ever been in American history (which culminated in a Civil War that killed hundreds of thousands of citizens). However, yes, it is worse than at any other point in living memory, and it possesses unique modern characteristics that make it exceptionally difficult to resolve.

To understand how today’s polarization compares to the past, it helps to look at different historical eras and understand what makes our current moment distinct.

1. The Historical Comparisons: Where We’ve Been

The Peak: The Civil War and Reconstruction (1850s–1870s)

The absolute peak of American polarization occurred in the mid-19th century. The polarization of this era was existential, revolving around the moral and economic institution of slavery, and it ultimately fractured the nation.

•The Legislative Measure: Political scientists use a metric called DW-NOMINATE, which maps the voting records of members of Congress to measure ideological distance. According to this data, the ideological distance between the Democratic and Republican parties in Congress today has reached levels not seen since the Reconstruction era in the late 1870s.

The Bitter Beginnings: The Early Republic (1790s–1800s)

The United States was highly polarized from its very birth. The battle between the Federalists (led by Alexander Hamilton) and the Democratic-Republicans (led by Thomas Jefferson) was incredibly vitriolic.

•Politicians routinely used partisan newspapers to anonymously smear their opponents as traitors, foreign agents, or monarchists.

•The polarization was so intense and personal that it resulted in the passage of the authoritarian Alien and Sedition Acts (which criminalized criticism of the government) and led to actual physical violence, most famously the duel in which Aaron Burr killed Alexander Hamilton.

The Anomaly: The Mid-20th Century "Consensus" (1940s–1970s)

When people today look back warmly on a "less polarized" past, they are usually remembering the mid-20th century. However, historians view this era of relative bipartisanship as a historical anomaly rather than the norm.

•During this period, the two major parties were highly diverse and not yet "sorted." The Democratic Party contained both liberal northern reformers and deeply conservative southern segregationists. The Republican Party contained both conservative midwesterners and liberal northeasterners.

•Because of this internal diversity, coalitions were constantly shifting, and bipartisan dealmaking was common. In the 1960s, there was roughly a 50% overlap in the voting records of the two parties. Today, that overlap is virtually zero.

The Turbulent 1960s and 1970s

While the 1960s and 1970s are remembered for immense social upheaval—fueled by the Civil Rights Movement, the Vietnam War, and the counterculture—partisan polarization was actually much lower than it is now. There was massive societal division and significant political violence (including assassinations and bombings), but these divisions did not cleanly map onto the two political parties the way they do today.

2. What Makes Modern Polarization Unique (and Arguably Worse)

While we are not fighting a civil war, political scientists point to several factors that make today's polarization uniquely toxic and historically distinct:

A. The Rise of "Affective" Polarization

Political scientists distinguish between ideological polarization (disagreeing on policy) and affective polarization (disliking and distrusting the other side). Today, affective polarization is at an all-time high in modern polling history.

•According to the Pew Research Center, the share of Democrats and Republicans who view the opposing party not just as "wrong," but as "immoral" and a threat to the nation's well-being, has surged dramatically over the last decade.

•In 1960, only about 4% to 5% of Americans said they would be displeased if their child married someone from the opposite political party. By the 2010s and 2020s, that number had jumped to roughly one-third of Democrats and half of Republicans.

B. Complete "Sorting" of the Parties

In the past, a person’s political party didn’t tell you everything about their identity. Today, political parties have become "mega-identities." Ideology, geography, race, religion, and cultural preferences have completely aligned with party lines:

•If you live in a rural area, attend church regularly, and watch college football, you are statistically highly likely to be a Republican.

•If you live in an urban center, are secular, and hold a postgraduate degree, you are statistically highly likely to be a Democrat.

Because of this sorting, political disagreements are no longer just about tax rates or highway spending; they are perceived as existential battles over lifestyle, culture, and values.

C. Negative Partisanship

Voters are increasingly driven not by a positive vision or love for their own party, but by a deep-seated fear and hatred of the opposing party. This "negative partisanship" makes compromise nearly impossible, as any cooperation with the other side is viewed by base voters as a betrayal or surrender.

D. The Modern Information Ecosystem

Unlike the Gilded Age or the 1790s—which also had highly partisan newspapers—today's media ecosystem is powered by social media algorithms, 24-hour cable news, and internet echo chambers. These platforms are optimized for engagement, and the most engaging content is almost always that which triggers fear, moral outrage, and division. This nationalizes every local political dispute and keeps the public in a state of constant, high-alert political anxiety.

Summary

If "worse" means political violence and the literal fracturing of the state, then today's polarization is not as bad as the Civil War or the turbulent founding of the republic.

But if "worse" means a total lack of social overlap, a media environment designed to exploit outrage, and a complete paralysis of the federal legislative process, we are living through an unprecedented era. Modern Americans do not just disagree on policy; they increasingly do not share the same facts, trust the same institutions, or view their political opponents as legitimate participants in democracy.

Citations (16)

1democracyproject.orgNonprofits and think tanks
democracyproject.org
Backs: “The short answer is no, it is not the worst it has ever been in American history (which culminated in a Civil War that killed hundreds of thousands of citizens).”
2brookings.eduNonprofits and think tanks
brookings.edu
Backs: “The short answer is no, it is not the worst it has ever been in American history (which culminated in a Civil War that killed hundreds of thousands of citizens).”
3pewresearch.orgNonprofits and think tanks
pewresearch.org
Backs: “However, yes, it is worse than at any other point in living memory, and it possesses unique modern characteristics that make it exceptionally difficult to resolve.”
4usc.eduAcademic
usc.edu
Backs: “However, yes, it is worse than at any other point in living memory, and it possesses unique modern characteristics that make it exceptionally difficult to resolve.”
5cpreview.orgNot yet classified
cpreview.org
Backs: “The polarization of this era was existential, revolving around the moral and economic institution of slavery, and it ultimately fractured the nation. The Legislative Measure: Political scientists use a metric called DW-NOMINATE, which maps the voting records of members of Congress to measure ideological distance.”
6pewresearch.orgNonprofits and think tanks
pewresearch.org
Backs: “The Legislative Measure: Political scientists use a metric called DW-NOMINATE, which maps the voting records of members of Congress to measure ideological distance. According to this data, the ideological distance between the Democratic and Republican parties in Congress today has reached levels not seen since the…”
7usc.eduAcademic
usc.edu
Backs: “In the 1960s, there was roughly a 50% overlap in the voting records of the two parties. Today, that overlap is virtually zero.”
8loc.govGovernment
loc.gov
Backs: “The Turbulent 1960s and 1970s. While the 1960s and 1970s are remembered for immense social upheaval—fueled by the Civil Rights Movement, the Vietnam War, and the counterculture—partisan polarization was actually much lower than it is now. There was massive societal division and significant political violence…”
9econlib.orgEncyclopedias and reference
econlib.org
Backs: “The Turbulent 1960s and 1970s. While the 1960s and 1970s are remembered for immense social upheaval—fueled by the Civil Rights Movement, the Vietnam War, and the counterculture—partisan polarization was actually much lower than it is now. There was massive societal division and significant political violence…”
10reddit.comForums and Q&A
reddit.com
Backs: “There was massive societal division and significant political violence (including assassinations and bombings), but these divisions did not cleanly map onto the two political parties the way they do today. ---. 2.”
11wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “The Rise of "Affective" Polarization. Political scientists distinguish between ideological polarization (disagreeing on policy) and affective polarization (disliking and distrusting the other side). Today, affective polarization is at an all-time high in modern polling history.”
12wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “The Rise of "Affective" Polarization. Political scientists distinguish between ideological polarization (disagreeing on policy) and affective polarization (disliking and distrusting the other side). Today, affective polarization is at an all-time high in modern polling history.”
13syr.eduAcademic
syr.edu
Backs: “Today, affective polarization is at an all-time high in modern polling history. According to the Pew Research Center, the share of Democrats and Republicans who view the opposing party not just as "wrong," but as "immoral" and a threat to the nation's well-being, has surged dramatically over the last decade.”
14brown.eduAcademic
brown.edu
Backs: “Today, affective polarization is at an all-time high in modern polling history. According to the Pew Research Center, the share of Democrats and Republicans who view the opposing party not just as "wrong," but as "immoral" and a threat to the nation's well-being, has surged dramatically over the last decade.”
15cam.ac.ukAcademic
cam.ac.uk
Backs: “Because of this sorting, political disagreements are no longer just about tax rates or highway spending; they are perceived as existential battles over lifestyle, culture, and values. C. Negative Partisanship”
16facinghistory.orgNonprofits and think tanks
facinghistory.org
Backs: “This "negative partisanship" makes compromise nearly impossible, as any cooperation with the other side is viewed by base voters as a betrayal or surrender. D. The Modern Information Ecosystem”