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

The answer to whether political polarization is worse than in the past depends entirely on which past you are comparing it to.

If you compare today’s political climate to the mid-to-late 20th century, the answer is an unequivocal yes—polarization is significantly worse. However, if you compare today to the mid-19th century, the answer is no; the United States was far more polarized during the Civil War era, which resulted in actual secession, a war that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans, and physical violence on the floor of Congress.

To understand where today’s polarization stands in historical context, political scientists look at three different dimensions: legislative (elite) polarization, affective polarization, and party sorting.

1. Legislative Polarization: The Worst in Over 140 Years

To measure how polarized politicians are, political scientists use DW-NOMINATE scores, which track every roll-call vote in Congress since 1789 to place politicians on an ideological spectrum.

•The Historical Peak: According to this data, the ideological gap between Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Congress is wider today than at any point since the Reconstruction Era (the late 1870s).

•The Death of the Moderate: In the early 1970s, there were roughly 160 moderate Democrats and Republicans in Congress who frequently crossed party lines to pass legislation. Today, that middle ground has virtually vanished, leaving only a handful of moderate lawmakers.

•Asymmetrical Shifts: While both parties have moved away from the center, researchers note the shift is asymmetric. Over the last 50 years, Republicans in Congress have moved significantly further to the right. On the voter level, however, a 2026 study from the University of Cambridge found that much of the voter-level polarization since 2008 has actually been driven by the left becoming 31.5% more socially liberal, while right-leaning voters' social positions remained relatively stable.

2. Affective Polarization: Disliking the "Other"

Polarization isn't just about disagreeing on policy (ideological polarization); it is also about how partisans feel about each other (affective polarization).

In this category, polarization is arguably at historic highs for a peacetime era. Data from the Pew Research Center reveals a dramatic rise in partisan hostility:

•In 2016, 47% of Republicans and 35% of Democrats viewed the opposing party as "immoral."

•By 2022, those numbers had skyrocketed to 72% of Republicans and 63% of Democrats.

•Today, a majority of partisans do not just disagree with the other party’s economic policies; they view the opposing party as a threat to the nation’s well-being, and many express reluctance to marry or even socialize with members of the opposite party.

3. Why the Mid-20th Century Was an Anomaly

When people nostalgically look back at a "golden era" of bipartisanship—such as the 1940s through the 1970s—they are looking at a period that was actually a historical anomaly.

During that era, the two major parties were not sorted. Because of the legacy of the Civil War, the Democratic Party was a highly unstable coalition of Northern liberals and Southern conservative segregationists. Meanwhile, the Republican Party had both Rockefeller liberals in the Northeast and conservatives in the West.

Because both parties had internal ideological mixtures, conservative Democrats routinely voted with conservative Republicans, and liberal Republicans voted with liberal Democrats. This created the illusion of a highly cooperative, unpolarized government. However, this bipartisanship was largely maintained by keeping highly contentious civil rights issues off the legislative table.

Once the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 passed, a decades-long realignment occurred: Southern conservatives migrated to the Republican Party, and Northern liberals consolidated in the Democratic Party. Today's polarization is partly a result of the parties finally being cleanly sorted by ideology, geography, and race.

4. How Today’s Division Compares to Other Fractured Eras

•The 1960s: The late 1960s were incredibly polarized, featuring the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy, race riots in major cities, and massive, violent protests over the Vietnam War. However, that polarization was social and generational rather than strictly partisan. Congress itself was still able to pass major bipartisan legislation, whereas today the division is deeply institutionalized within the political parties themselves.

•The Gilded Age (Late 19th Century): The late 1800s featured intense political gridlock, mudslinging, and high partisanship, similar to today. However, the media landscape was vastly different, and the federal government played a much smaller role in daily life, meaning the federal gridlock had less of a direct psychological impact on ordinary citizens.

Summary

If you compare today's polarization to the 1860s, we are not in our most divided state—we are not fighting a shooting war against ourselves.

However, compared to the lifetime of almost any American alive today, yes, political polarization is worse than it has been in the past. Politicians are further apart than they have been in over a century, and the level of mutual distrust and personal animosity between everyday citizens of opposing parties is at modern highs.

Citations (11)

1syr.eduAcademic
syr.edu
Backs: “The answer to whether political polarization is worse than in the past depends entirely on which past you are comparing it to.”
2pewresearch.orgNonprofits and think tanks
pewresearch.org
Backs: “If you compare today’s political climate to the mid-to-late 20th century, the answer is an unequivocal yes—polarization is significantly worse. However, if you compare today to the mid-19th century, the answer is no; the United States was far more polarized during the Civil War era, which resulted in actual secession,…”
3brookings.eduNonprofits and think tanks
brookings.edu
Backs: “However, if you compare today to the mid-19th century, the answer is no; the United States was far more polarized during the Civil War era, which resulted in actual secession, a war that killed hundreds of thousands of Americans, and physical violence on the floor of Congress. To understand where today’s polarization…”
4wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “To understand where today’s polarization stands in historical context, political scientists look at three different dimensions: legislative (elite) polarization, affective polarization, and party sorting.”
5wikipedia.orgEncyclopedias and referencequality 0.83
wikipedia.org
Backs: “To understand where today’s polarization stands in historical context, political scientists look at three different dimensions: legislative (elite) polarization, affective polarization, and party sorting.”
6usc.eduAcademic
usc.edu
Backs: “Legislative Polarization: The Worst in Over 140 Years. To measure how polarized politicians are, political scientists use DW-NOMINATE scores, which track every roll-call vote in Congress since 1789 to place politicians on an ideological spectrum. The Historical Peak: According to this data, the ideological gap between…”
7newyorkfed.orgNot yet classified
newyorkfed.org
Backs: “Legislative Polarization: The Worst in Over 140 Years. To measure how polarized politicians are, political scientists use DW-NOMINATE scores, which track every roll-call vote in Congress since 1789 to place politicians on an ideological spectrum. The Historical Peak: According to this data, the ideological gap between…”
8cam.ac.ukAcademic
cam.ac.uk
Backs: “On the voter level, however, a 2026 study from the University of Cambridge found that much of the voter-level polarization since 2008 has actually been driven by the left becoming 31.5% more socially liberal, while right-leaning voters' social positions remained relatively stable. 2.”
9pewresearch.orgNonprofits and think tanks
pewresearch.org
Backs: “In this category, polarization is arguably at historic highs for a peacetime era. Data from the Pew Research Center reveals a dramatic rise in partisan hostility:”
10annualreviews.orgAcademic
annualreviews.org
Backs: “Today, a majority of partisans do not just disagree with the other party’s economic policies; they view the opposing party as a threat to the nation’s well-being, and many express reluctance to marry or even socialize with members of the opposite party. 3.”
11facinghistory.orgNonprofits and think tanks
facinghistory.org
Backs: “Because both parties had internal ideological mixtures, conservative Democrats routinely voted with conservative Republicans, and liberal Republicans voted with liberal Democrats. This created the illusion of a highly cooperative, unpolarized government.”