Moving beyond us-versus-them polarization towards constructive conversations

Abstract

The global surge of political polarization poses a significant threat to liberal democracies. The prevailing “us-versus-them” mentality prevents leaders from effectively addressing societal issues. While intergroup dialogue shows promise in bridging divisions among diverse identity groups, the dynamics of real-life conversations between individuals with opposing political identities remain underexplored. This study investigates a unique case study of constructive face-to-face interactions among American political elites on a contentious issue. By examining how opposing leaders collaborate towards shared goals, the research identifies communicative actions that can reduce polarization. This study delves into the complex dynamics of polarization, as both an issue-based and identity-based conflict, focusing on interactional framing strategies leaders use to navigate their differences. The findings reveal that political leaders bridge ideological divides by embracing multiple frames, reconnecting conflicting frames, and developing neutral non-political frames. They also foster positive relations, use superordinate identities, and decrease social distance, thereby bridging their identity gap. By fostering convergence rather than accentuating differences, they effectively counteract polarization. Studying rare examples of constructive bipartisan collaboration offers valuable insights into reducing polarization, restoring political trust among the general public, and mitigating broader societal impacts, ultimately strengthening the foundations of a healthy democracy.