Politics

Why We're Polarized

Why We're Polarized

  • Downloads：5646
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2022-12-10 09:53:45
  • Update Date：2025-09-07
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Ezra Klein
  • ISBN：1788166795
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

America's political system isn't broken。 The truth is scarier: it's working exactly as designed。

In Why We're Polarized， Ezra Klein reveals the structural and psychological forces behind America's deep political divisions， revealing how a system filled with rational， functional parts can combine into a dysfunctional whole。 Neither a polemic nor a lament， this book offers a clear framework for understanding everything from Trump's rise to the Democratic Party's leftward shift to the politicisation of everyday culture。

Klein shows how and why American politics polarised in the twentieth century， what that polarisation did to Americans' views of the world and one another， and how feedback loops between polarised political identities and polarised political institutions drive the system toward crisis。 This revelatory book will change how you look at politics， and perhaps at yourself。

Download

Reviews

David Geller ，

Perspective ChangingAt last a book that gives real insights into why America is so polarized without demonizing the other side。 If you are frustrated and angered by the state of the American political system， this is a book that will give you a new perspective on how we got here。 No easy answers， and good to know those on the other side are not the negative characterizations we often place upon them。

Melissa Hernandez ，

It certainly put into words how I've been feeling these past few elections。 It certainly put into words how I've been feeling these past few elections。 。。。more

Trace Nichols ，

Love that Klein reads this important work。 As accessible and interesting as his podcast。

Tyler Standish ，

A great book by Ezra Klein that explores the reasons for the polarization in modern day politics and how we got here。 Things I learned: - Politics uses us for its own end， we are captives， not participants。- When it comes to politics people feel attacked when they think their identity is questioned。- The media only covers what is newsworthy no matter the validity of the material。

Sophie ，

Had difficulty truly getting into this book so had to stop but still marking as finished because I read more than half。 The book felt somewhat outdated or maybe even obvious。 I think a more action/future based take would have been more interesting。

Jesse Patoka ，

I enjoyed reading this book。 I suppose it was unrealistic to want more out of it。 On the one hand it was kind of cathartic hearing all the things that have lead to this huge chasm in politics that I've often felt but not been able to describe。 The book also gave me some empathy， in accepting the system as it is and not feeling so jaded or pessimistic about it。Below I'll just copy some notes I took while listening to the audiobook:（view spoiler）[Feedback loop of electing polarized politicians whi I enjoyed reading this book。 I suppose it was unrealistic to want more out of it。 On the one hand it was kind of cathartic hearing all the things that have lead to this huge chasm in politics that I've often felt but not been able to describe。 The book also gave me some empathy， in accepting the system as it is and not feeling so jaded or pessimistic about it。Below I'll just copy some notes I took while listening to the audiobook:（view spoiler）[Feedback loop of electing polarized politicians which then polarize the voters who then elect more polarized politicians。Negative partisanship， people vote more out of a fear of what the other party will do now than what they hope their party will do。 People who don't follow politics today， know more about where parties side on hot topics than the people who actually followed politics back in the day。Groupthink is a huge driver for polarization。 Think of football fans getting behind their favorite team and how passioned they are about something that matters little in their daily lives。 They are part of a group。 People are doing the same thing with politics， Science experiment has shown people choosing outcomes to benefit their group even if the benefits of the whole are decreased。 Even when the group bonds are very thin。Obama: Younger more diverse coalition taking powerTrump: Older whiter coalition taking the power back。If it bleeds it leads， at least for political coverage， is now "if it outrages it leads" Newsworthiness drives coverage。 Trump gets a majority of coverage。 News agencies choosing to report on what sells， what the people want， etc， leads them down towards gossip and controversy rather than reporting on the actual policies of politicians。 The news agencies want to act like they are just reporting what the people want but when they choose to chase views and popular titles they influence elections。Polarization begets polarization。 2004 Bush was the first presidential hopeful who stopped marketing to the independents， undecided， and started marketing to his base。 It worked。Politics has never been more competitive than now。"Imagine you work in an office， where your boss， who you think is a jerk， needs help to finish his projects。 If you help him， he keeps his job and maybe gets a promotion。 If you refuse to help him， you become his boss and he may get fired。 Now add in a deep dose of actual disagreement: you hate his projects， believe them to be bad for the company and even the world。 And add in a bunch of colleagues who also hate your boss and will be mad at you if you help him。" Why would you。 This is basically the state of American politics。Ezra ended the book with 3-4 bullet points suggestions/solutions on ideas to go forward but he didn't even seem to convinced by them。 Bomb Proofing， Democratizing， Balancing。 I didn't really feel anything was worth noting though。 （hide spoiler）] 。。。more

Laythan Oweis ，

Such an incredible book

Jan ，

Intelligent， original but ultimately loses itself in a self absorbed and meandering apparently in order to avoid a conclusion

Sarah ，

DNF。 Too similar to other books I’ve read

Matthew Barmack ，

A very good explanation of our current political polarization。 Packed full of citations to interesting poli sci literature without feeling overly academic。 Highlights how the parties have become more ideologically and culturally uniform while media， especially social media， has amplified those differences and our institutions have encouraged antagonistic/zero sum behavior。 Doesn't give me warm fuzzies about the prospects for finding our way out of the current mess but also provides historical co A very good explanation of our current political polarization。 Packed full of citations to interesting poli sci literature without feeling overly academic。 Highlights how the parties have become more ideologically and culturally uniform while media， especially social media， has amplified those differences and our institutions have encouraged antagonistic/zero sum behavior。 Doesn't give me warm fuzzies about the prospects for finding our way out of the current mess but also provides historical context， e。g。， we are arguably less polarized than during Reconstruction。 。。。more

Abby Turner ，

Every American should read this book

Rick ，

Toughest time I’ve ever had getting through a good book。 I think I need a big break from all political books。 This was a great reminder of how our Democracy has become so ugly。 The bad news is that it’s most likely not going to get better soon。 The good news is that despite our current state of affairs， we as a country， are way better off than we were at other times in our history。 It’s important to remind ourselves of that fact when we feel like things are hopeless。 All said， the bottom line is Toughest time I’ve ever had getting through a good book。 I think I need a big break from all political books。 This was a great reminder of how our Democracy has become so ugly。 The bad news is that it’s most likely not going to get better soon。 The good news is that despite our current state of affairs， we as a country， are way better off than we were at other times in our history。 It’s important to remind ourselves of that fact when we feel like things are hopeless。 All said， the bottom line is that we， as individuals can do little to impact a broken system。 What we can impact is our role in that system & the personal impact of this polarized nature of our political system by engaging less in national politics and more in local politics & by managing our exposure to information in the news & in particular on social media。 This is something I have been meaning to do since reading Digital Minimalism by Cal Newport。 After reading Why We’re Polarized I’ve just dusted Digital Minimalism off my shelf & will be tackling the Digital Cleanse that its author recommends。 。。。more

Minervas Owl ，

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 Why we're polarized？ Ezra claimed in his eponymous book it all started in 1964， when LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act， and Goldwater， the Republican senator who opposed the act， ran a conservative campaign against him。 Goldwater lost in a rout， yet he won in the deep south。 Since then， the southern democrats， as the supporter of white supremacy， joined forces with Republicans and reshaped the political arena。The change in the parties intensified with a powerful tide: the change in demographics。 Why we're polarized？ Ezra claimed in his eponymous book it all started in 1964， when LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act， and Goldwater， the Republican senator who opposed the act， ran a conservative campaign against him。 Goldwater lost in a rout， yet he won in the deep south。 Since then， the southern democrats， as the supporter of white supremacy， joined forces with Republicans and reshaped the political arena。The change in the parties intensified with a powerful tide: the change in demographics。 American's foreign-born population rose from 5% in the 1970s to 14% in 2019。 When Obama took office， 54% of the US population was white and Christian。 By 2016， the number has fallen to 43%。 When white Christians feel their identity threatened， they seek a home to backlash。 Sensing the tide， republican politicians provided them one。When I write down these summaries， they feel like accusations。 But Ezra corroborated his thesis by studies， mostly conducted by political psychologists。 For example， researchers have sent Spanish speakers to randomly selected train stations and collected passengers' attitudes about immigration before/after observing the increase of Spanish speakers for three days。 They found this gentle exposure pushed liberal democrats toward immigration policy advocated by Trump。Ezra went on to introduce a few mechanisms that had pushed both parties and their supporters further apart on the political spectrum。 For example， as voters focus more on national rather than local politics， politicians are forced to stand with their party， rather than to exchange ideological loyalty for earmarks。 BTW， earmark was banned by Congress in 2011。 For another example， newspapers in the 19th century used to take a clear partisan stance， featuring "democrat" and "republican" in their title。 Later， as media outlets changed their business model from selling papers to selling ads， they started to depolarize themselves， so they could expand the audience and monopolize the local market。 Move forward to the 20th century， as digital news intensified the competition and shortened the distance between news/opinions and political hobbyists， however， the media once again started to take sides。 The result is， the more political media people consume， the more mistakes they make about the other party。I find the mechanisms Ezra introduced convincible。 But I have one issue with him。 He called the mechanisms "feedback loops，" with this underlying assumption: the more voters are polarized， the more politicians/judges/parties/media become polarized， which in turn makes voters further polarized。 I think this assumption makes sense in certain situations。 But are there any negative feedback loops in effect？ For example， as politicians break again and again the bottom line of decency， is there a point at which the majority of voters become so disgusted by them， such that they want some return to the sobriety？Theoretically speaking， I understand that the variation in turnout rate makes the outcome of real elections deviate from the equilibrium of the Hoteling-Downs Model。 But politicians face a decreasing marginal return in mobilizing their base instead of the middle voter。 Advance in the technology for politicians to identify and reach out to their base （social media， customized political ads） may have prevented this marginal return from falling and kept politicians in investing。 Still， mobilizing capacity has an upper limit， which will stop the polarization process。 Anyway， this is just my wishful thinking in a vacuum， not considering democratic changes， urbanization， unbalanced electoral college， and so on。At the end of the book， Ezra provided a few prescriptions: make institutions bombproof to intensified partisan fights; reform electoral rule to make votes count and allow a third party to survive; rebuild the supreme court nomination/confirmation process to create a path for moderates; and so on。 I find the last advice most relevant。 We should spend less time fuming over Trump's latest tweet--this is what he wants you to do， to "suck up all the media oxygen so he retains control of the conversation。" Instead， we should spend more time checking in with things in the neighborhood， fight less symbolic wars， and make a constructive impact。Side notes:When people talk about polarization， it is often unclear whether they are talking about extremification， clustering， or sorting。 Ezra claimed that the polarization we observe is not extremification。 For example， we scream polarization when we saw no republican congress member voted for Obamacare in 2010， while most republican senators joined democrats in 1965 to create the Medicare。 But Obamacare， with its roots in Romney's experiment in Massachusetts， is not more radical than the single-payer Medicare system。Instead of extremification， Ezra claimed that the polarization is mainly about sorting， or in other words， the fusing of preference/identities among voters。 It is more likely to predict someone's attitude on tax/regulation/immigration/global warming， given they are going to the Whole Food for groceries。 Or， let me put it in mathematics。 The first principle component of people's preference is becoming more dominant in explaining the population variance。I find this idea interesting， even though I doubt whether it's important。 Are there empirical evidence of this claim？ And what are the implications， if polarization is caused by fusing or identity instead of extremification？ It's a pity that Ezra answered neither of these questions。 。。。more

DJ Jeffries ，

This book perfectly captures the American political system today and offers smart and thoughtful potential solutions。

Jacob ，

Vote in state and local elections because they matter to you more personally is my main takeaway from the book。 Very interesting and backed by many different studies， a good synthesis about why America is so polarized。

Markos Markakis ，

A very insightful analysis of what drives the current US political reality。 Klein cohesively defines and articulates the trends behind national politics。

Arthur ，

The book provides an interesting overview on the reasons that the US is polarized。 Some of the highlights are1。 US was politically homogenous c。 1950s with the two parties being non differentiable。 Partly this was because the Democrats were split between their northern and southern support bases， southern called "Dixiecrats"。 This meant that both parties had liberal/conservative wings and needed to compromise between them， esp re racial issues。 At some point the two split along conservative/libe The book provides an interesting overview on the reasons that the US is polarized。 Some of the highlights are1。 US was politically homogenous c。 1950s with the two parties being non differentiable。 Partly this was because the Democrats were split between their northern and southern support bases， southern called "Dixiecrats"。 This meant that both parties had liberal/conservative wings and needed to compromise between them， esp re racial issues。 At some point the two split along conservative/liberal lines and voters were then able to sort themselves according to the party as the southern Dixiecrats ceased to be。 2。 The US is undergoing a demographic shift from white to mixed。 The average baby being born now in the US is not white。 This makes for increasing friction between people looking for existing/previous way of life and people championing multicultural norms。 3。 News have become increasing more polarized since the rise of cable news and online media。 Previously large newspapers were careful to avoid alienating people of either political bend as they aimed to serve a large geographical area， for example an entire city。 However， the strategy of cable and online news is to excite people of a particular mindset to pay attention to them， causing for a more polarizing bend。 。。。more

Kate ，

I wasn't able to finish this in time for my book group， nor did I attend， and I am doubtful I will get back to it。 It's great writing， great info， and a fairly convincing argument -- that group identity makes us feel we have no option but to vote along party lines。 I should jump back in some time and see if he offers any solutions， but I'm not feeling too hopeful。 I wasn't able to finish this in time for my book group， nor did I attend， and I am doubtful I will get back to it。 It's great writing， great info， and a fairly convincing argument -- that group identity makes us feel we have no option but to vote along party lines。 I should jump back in some time and see if he offers any solutions， but I'm not feeling too hopeful。 。。。more

Margherita Melillo ，

This is a great and educated reflection on the changes we're seeing in US politics。 It starts off with an important question: how did a candidate like Trump become one of the two leading contenders for the US presidency？ Since the 2016 elections， most people have focused on explaining why he won against Hillary Clinton， and lost sight of the question of how he got to that point in the first place。Ezra Klein answers this question with 3 complementary explanations: 1） a historical one， 2） a psycho This is a great and educated reflection on the changes we're seeing in US politics。 It starts off with an important question: how did a candidate like Trump become one of the two leading contenders for the US presidency？ Since the 2016 elections， most people have focused on explaining why he won against Hillary Clinton， and lost sight of the question of how he got to that point in the first place。Ezra Klein answers this question with 3 complementary explanations: 1） a historical one， 2） a psychological one， and 3） an analysis of current dynamics in party politics and in the wider society。 Being a foreigner， I found part 1） already very intriguing。 I had heard some general comments on the fact that the Republic party changed a lot since the early days of the Republic， and it was once a progressive party （it was Lincoln's， inter alia）。 I also know that， potentially， a Republican from New York can be no more conservative than a Democrat from Alabama。 But I didn't know to what extent until relatively recently the two parties lacked a proper ideological program。 And that Democrats were backed racist policies in the South until， almost by chance， Johnson decided to back the civil rights act and they became the civil rights movement's party。 I also had no idea that cooperation between the two parties used to be much better， and in fact， many of the progressive welfare measures that the US has have been adopted by modern-day Republicans like Reagan or GW Bush。 Basically， everything that I thought I knew about US politics is only about US politics since 2001。 Before that， there were no blue or red States， and in fact， no blue or red parties either。 I also enjoyed Ezra Klein's explanation of demographic trends， and the simple observation that white US citizens are soon to lose their majority status。 This does not excuse their racism， of course。 However， it reminds us that many people over 60 have witnessed monumental changes in their lives， and， as it often happens， they're scared。 Psychological explanations on group behavior under 2） were the least interesting part of the book for me。 Perhaps that's because I had already read quite a few things about this。 But it's also true that reading those pages I had the constant thought that it was not clear why these group behaviors would be so exasperating now and in this country - or， in other words， why universal dynamics become so entrenched in a particular moment or place。 Finally， I enjoyed some of the explanations focused on party dynamics and the current features of US society。 For starters， I was intrigued by Klein's observation that it's not the two-party system that makes the US polarized - I've always assumed it was one of the main drivers。 The argument that Ezra Klein uses is that many countries in Europe are equally polarized even if they have multi-party systems。 This is a good hunch， but I'm not yet fully convinced and would like to see more research on that。 Second， I've heard and read a lot about how media and social media are shaping political debates by chasing likes and visualizations， but I appreciated reading it from the perspective of Ezra Klein who （I didn't know） was one of the founders of Vox。 The argument on how both Republicans and Democrats are getting more extreme candidates was in my opinion a bit under-analyzed。 I understand it causes polarization， but in turn， it's also caused by polarization， and in this respect， it helps explain some of the dynamics but it does not get to the heart of the initial question of why we are polarized in the first place。 The last bit of analysis was probably my favorite one and one of those that I often think of。 Ezra Klein argues that， because the political landscape is so divided but at the same time close to a 50/50 split， political parties have less interest in cooperating and striking bipartisan deals。 All that the opposition does is block legislation， so that when they have the next elections （every 2 years！） they can blame the party in power and hope to regain power。 Again， this does not explain why polarization occurs in the first place， but it depicts very well （and enlightens， in my case） the toxic dynamics we see in Congress。 The analysis is complemented by observations on how the legal framework （the filibuster in Senate， but also the electoral system） perpetuates these dynamics。 Although in the last chapters Klein tries to end the book on a positive and propositive note， my overall feeling after reading it is that， sadly， those who really would need to do something about this problem have no interested in doing it。 I'm not sure where we're heading。 。。。more

K。 E。 Creighton ，

This book shed much-needed light on the history of our political parties and why we’re so polarized in the U。S。 now， and why those participating in politics haven’t always been as polarized as they are now。Just when you think you know why we’re polarized， a book like this is published。 And I mean that in a good way。 Klein is incredibly thorough and includes a lot of studies and data and research in this book， and luckily does it in a way that is easy to read and understand。 This book would appea This book shed much-needed light on the history of our political parties and why we’re so polarized in the U。S。 now， and why those participating in politics haven’t always been as polarized as they are now。Just when you think you know why we’re polarized， a book like this is published。 And I mean that in a good way。 Klein is incredibly thorough and includes a lot of studies and data and research in this book， and luckily does it in a way that is easy to read and understand。 This book would appeal to political junkies and nonpolitical junkies alike。Klein’s more objective approach to our political polarization in this book is invaluable， as he addresses the history of the political system itself and not necessarily the individual personalities within it， although he does use some individuals’ actions and speech as examples to demonstrate political pushes and pulls of power and how they influenced the different parties long-term。I especially appreciated the final chapter of the book， in which he discusses hopeful yet practical ways to move forward to mitigate but not necessarily eliminate political polarization。 This is certainly a book worth reading as soon as possible。 And I suggest that if you read the book， you read the ENTIRE book， up to the very last page。 。。。more

Daniel Fields ，

Picked up from Obama's reading list and it didn't disappoint。 Very good diagnosis of factors that have polarized although very few "what we can do" points， as the author declares。 The point that polarization is not necessarily bad is a good short section。 Picked up from Obama's reading list and it didn't disappoint。 Very good diagnosis of factors that have polarized although very few "what we can do" points， as the author declares。 The point that polarization is not necessarily bad is a good short section。 。。。more

Evelyn Petschek ，

A fascinating look。 Drawing on decades of political science research， the author provides a lot in interesting and thoughtful insights into why and how we got to where we are。 Interesting thoughts on the impact of social media and on group identity。 I intend to reread this fascinating analysis。 Excellent audio narration by the author。

Maryam Hye ，

An insightful psychological explanation of the relationship between polarization trends and political identities in the United States。 A book that is more relevant than ever。

Ann ，

Very insightful， every page is packed with insightful analysis。 He does an amazing job of pulling together tons of research into a coherent framework that makes sense of our current situation。Definitely worth reading and considering carefully。

Steve Ernst ，

Fascinating look at why our politics are as polarized as they are。 Really makes you think deeply about why people think and vote the way they do。

Maureen ，

How appropriate to finish this on Election Day！ That is no joke， because this book does attempt to explain how the US has come to such nastiness and divisiveness in its national politics。 And don’t we need some explaining…One note of enlightenment for me was when the author pointed out that when majorities were lopsided in Congress earlier in the 20th century， there was incentive to work with the other side。 When control flips and then flips again， supporters just want their voters to hate the o How appropriate to finish this on Election Day！ That is no joke， because this book does attempt to explain how the US has come to such nastiness and divisiveness in its national politics。 And don’t we need some explaining…One note of enlightenment for me was when the author pointed out that when majorities were lopsided in Congress earlier in the 20th century， there was incentive to work with the other side。 When control flips and then flips again， supporters just want their voters to hate the other side and thus be more motivated to get out and vote。 Hmmm。 He also discussed how politics is fairly backwards-looking in contrast to marketing。 “Brands want to be where the culture is going not where it’s been” （ch 5）。 Thus you’ll see diversity in advertisements on tv， but not in a Republican appeal。 And sadly， Klein talked about how so much of today’s political animosity is still mired in resentment about race。 A number of times he mentioned the inequities in the Senate and Electoral College， with rural areas having huge multipliers of power and representation over those in urbanized and more populated states。 Alas / where’s that remedy coming from？？？This book is very much worth the read/listen （the author reads it himself）。 I only wonder how many devoted Republicans would read it。 Klein talked about “identity-protective cognition “ where even really smart people （hello， Ginny Thomas！） can justify a blindness to facts。 （And it happens at both ends of the political spectrum！）。 。。。more

Jade Cohen Pike ，

Interesting and easy to read if you’re curious about politics。

Tabitha Driver ，

My review will post on December 15， 2022: https://ultimatemetaphor。blogspot。com。。。 My review will post on December 15， 2022: https://ultimatemetaphor。blogspot。com。。。 。。。more

Brandur ，

Klein's thesis around polarization and some of its roots is generally correct， but if you stop to think about what's being written， some of the disingenuity comes into closer focus。 For example， the book starts out talking about Trump （what else）， but immediately lays down the premise that the reason for Trump's rise is that the electorate is bad。 Not touched upon at all is the Democratic Party putting its thumb on the scale to jam their favored candidate in place， a person with decades worth of Klein's thesis around polarization and some of its roots is generally correct， but if you stop to think about what's being written， some of the disingenuity comes into closer focus。 For example， the book starts out talking about Trump （what else）， but immediately lays down the premise that the reason for Trump's rise is that the electorate is bad。 Not touched upon at all is the Democratic Party putting its thumb on the scale to jam their favored candidate in place， a person with decades worth of dubious behavior in DC that practically nobody in America likes。 Klein is obsessed with identity politics， or rather the idea that it doesn't exist， and if it did， it's something that everybody is doing， gaslighting by fiat that there isn't something quite toxic that the modern left has made a major part of their core platform。 The book tries to appear mostly unbiased throughout， but by the back third Klein is into overt theses of "the Democratic Party is fundamentally good and the Republic Party is fundamentally bad"， which he "proves" by showing that more of the mainstream media favors the Democratic Party。 Just amazing。 。。。more

grace copps ，

read for my u。s。 political systems seminar。 wrote an essay on it。 will update with grade once i get it back。

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Why We're Polarized

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Why We're Polarized&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Why We're Polarized&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0