boutons_deux
08-05-2013, 02:14 PM
The left’s gone left but the right’s gone nuts: Asymmetrical polarization in action
What seems to have happened is not a change in value systems but a sorting of those value systems into more ideologically cohesive political parties. Conservatives have become Republicans; liberals have become Democrats.
Cooperation across party lines used to be more possible because there were regional idiosyncrasies in the U.S., conservative Democrats in the South and liberal Republicans in the Northeast. Those idiosyncrasies are being ironed out and the parties are becoming more internally homogenous. What’s more, the process appears to be inexorable and irreversible. Polarization is the new normal.
Americans are also sorting geographically (http://www.thebigsort.com/home.php), so personal exposure to other points of view is declining.
http://grist.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/dw-nominate-1973-2004.png
Two things jump out. First, over the 32 years leading up to 2004, the mean Dem moved six points to the left and the mean Republican moved 22 points to the right. Much farther! And second, there is virtually no overlap left between the parties. The humps have almost entirely separated. In short, the chart shows asymmetrical polarization.
For kicks, here’s another way to view it, focused on the House of Representatives (the Senate graph looks much the same). It shows the mean of each party over time and its distance from center:
http://grist.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/dw-nominate-house.jpg
Today, the national Democratic Party contains everything from the center-right to the far-left. Economically its proposals tend to be center to center-right. Socially, its proposals tend to be center to center-left. The national Republican Party, by contrast, has now been almost entirely absorbed by the far right. It rejects the basic social consensus among post-war democracies and seeks to return to a pre-New Deal form of governance. It is hostile to social and economic equality. It remains committed to fossil fuels and sprawl and opposed to all sustainable alternatives. And it has built an epistemological cocoon (http://grist.org/article/2010-09-09-the-rights-climate-denialism-is-part-of-something-much-larger/) around itself within which loopy misinformation spreads unchecked. It has, in short, gone loony (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/15/opinion/15krugman.html).
However awkward it may be for the traditional press and nonpartisan analysts to acknowledge, one of the two major parties, the Republican Party, has become a resurgent outlier: ideologically extreme; contemptuous of the inherited social and economic policy regime; scornful of compromise; un-persuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence, and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.
Maddeningly, when pundits actually lay out what that sensible middle course would look like, they end up describing Obama’s agenda. Benjy Sarlin at TPM put it best: “Pundits Urge President Obama To Back President Obama’s Proposals (http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/pundits-urge-president-obama-to-back-president-obamas-proposals.php?ref=fpnewsfeed).”
Jonathan Rauch urged (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-plan-that-offers-obama-a-fighting-chance/2012/07/05/gJQAFNvPQW_story.html?tid=pm_pop) Obama to adopt a plan of short-term stimulus, long-term debt reduction, and an extension on the debt limit. Ezra Klein notes (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/06/can-obama-save-his-campaign-by-rereleasing-his-policy-proposals/) that this is exactly what Obama has proposed.
Thomas Friedman urged (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/opinion/friedman-go-big-mr-obama.html) Obama to “go big” by raising taxes on the rich and endorsing a balanced long-term debt reduction plan. Greg Sargent notes (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-centrist-dodge/2011/11/16/gIQAmIFTRN_blog.html), again, with feeling, that this is exactly what Obama proposes
.
David Brooks argues (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/29/opinion/modesty-and-audacity.html?ref=opinion) that Obamacare ought to limit the tax exclusion for employer-provided healthcare plans and offer subsidies for individuals to buy into regulated health insurance markets. Josh Bivens notes (http://www.epi.org/blog/david-brooks-aca-provisions/) that Obamacare already does both those things and virtually everything else Brooks advocates.
Michael Gerson says (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/michael-gerson-obama-can-finesse-his-failure-no-longer/2012/07/09/gJQAgoqCZW_story.html) Obama should stop denying the economic crisis and propose a plan to address it, but not a plan that raises the deficit. Jonathan Chait notes (http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/07/bush-speechwriter-gerson-unable-to-read-speeches.html) that he isn’t, he has, and it doesn’t.
http://grist.org/politics/asymmetrical-polarization-the-lefts-gone-left-but-the-rights-gone-nuts/
As I've said many times here, there is a false equivalence between the Repug and Dems, and their respective media supporters. eg, where is the Dems' NRA, Limbaugh, Fox Repug Propaganda, and various right-wing hate megaphonics?
What seems to have happened is not a change in value systems but a sorting of those value systems into more ideologically cohesive political parties. Conservatives have become Republicans; liberals have become Democrats.
Cooperation across party lines used to be more possible because there were regional idiosyncrasies in the U.S., conservative Democrats in the South and liberal Republicans in the Northeast. Those idiosyncrasies are being ironed out and the parties are becoming more internally homogenous. What’s more, the process appears to be inexorable and irreversible. Polarization is the new normal.
Americans are also sorting geographically (http://www.thebigsort.com/home.php), so personal exposure to other points of view is declining.
http://grist.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/dw-nominate-1973-2004.png
Two things jump out. First, over the 32 years leading up to 2004, the mean Dem moved six points to the left and the mean Republican moved 22 points to the right. Much farther! And second, there is virtually no overlap left between the parties. The humps have almost entirely separated. In short, the chart shows asymmetrical polarization.
For kicks, here’s another way to view it, focused on the House of Representatives (the Senate graph looks much the same). It shows the mean of each party over time and its distance from center:
http://grist.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/dw-nominate-house.jpg
Today, the national Democratic Party contains everything from the center-right to the far-left. Economically its proposals tend to be center to center-right. Socially, its proposals tend to be center to center-left. The national Republican Party, by contrast, has now been almost entirely absorbed by the far right. It rejects the basic social consensus among post-war democracies and seeks to return to a pre-New Deal form of governance. It is hostile to social and economic equality. It remains committed to fossil fuels and sprawl and opposed to all sustainable alternatives. And it has built an epistemological cocoon (http://grist.org/article/2010-09-09-the-rights-climate-denialism-is-part-of-something-much-larger/) around itself within which loopy misinformation spreads unchecked. It has, in short, gone loony (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/15/opinion/15krugman.html).
However awkward it may be for the traditional press and nonpartisan analysts to acknowledge, one of the two major parties, the Republican Party, has become a resurgent outlier: ideologically extreme; contemptuous of the inherited social and economic policy regime; scornful of compromise; un-persuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence, and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.
Maddeningly, when pundits actually lay out what that sensible middle course would look like, they end up describing Obama’s agenda. Benjy Sarlin at TPM put it best: “Pundits Urge President Obama To Back President Obama’s Proposals (http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/pundits-urge-president-obama-to-back-president-obamas-proposals.php?ref=fpnewsfeed).”
Jonathan Rauch urged (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-plan-that-offers-obama-a-fighting-chance/2012/07/05/gJQAFNvPQW_story.html?tid=pm_pop) Obama to adopt a plan of short-term stimulus, long-term debt reduction, and an extension on the debt limit. Ezra Klein notes (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/06/can-obama-save-his-campaign-by-rereleasing-his-policy-proposals/) that this is exactly what Obama has proposed.
Thomas Friedman urged (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/opinion/friedman-go-big-mr-obama.html) Obama to “go big” by raising taxes on the rich and endorsing a balanced long-term debt reduction plan. Greg Sargent notes (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/the-centrist-dodge/2011/11/16/gIQAmIFTRN_blog.html), again, with feeling, that this is exactly what Obama proposes
.
David Brooks argues (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/29/opinion/modesty-and-audacity.html?ref=opinion) that Obamacare ought to limit the tax exclusion for employer-provided healthcare plans and offer subsidies for individuals to buy into regulated health insurance markets. Josh Bivens notes (http://www.epi.org/blog/david-brooks-aca-provisions/) that Obamacare already does both those things and virtually everything else Brooks advocates.
Michael Gerson says (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/michael-gerson-obama-can-finesse-his-failure-no-longer/2012/07/09/gJQAgoqCZW_story.html) Obama should stop denying the economic crisis and propose a plan to address it, but not a plan that raises the deficit. Jonathan Chait notes (http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/07/bush-speechwriter-gerson-unable-to-read-speeches.html) that he isn’t, he has, and it doesn’t.
http://grist.org/politics/asymmetrical-polarization-the-lefts-gone-left-but-the-rights-gone-nuts/
As I've said many times here, there is a false equivalence between the Repug and Dems, and their respective media supporters. eg, where is the Dems' NRA, Limbaugh, Fox Repug Propaganda, and various right-wing hate megaphonics?