Rethinking Political Polarization

89Citations
Citations of this article
132Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The comparative study of political polarization has been central to current debates on the global crisis of democracy. It has been built on uncertain conceptual foundations, though. Established uses of the concept lack a distinctive semantic core as multiple meanings compete against each other. On the basis of a broad reading of the comparative literature, I seek to circumscribe the use and reconstruct the core of political polarization as an instance of extraordinary democratic conflict. In a first step, I delineate the basic parameters of debate by distinguishing between cluster-analytic and conflict-analytic approaches and by specifying the generic type of political conflict that characterizes the polarization of democratic polities. In a second step, I argue for political intolerance as the defining trait of both ideological and social polarization. In a final step, I introduce a third, democratic dimension into the debate: the breakdown of basic democratic trust that leads actors to view their adversaries as "enemies of democracy."Such perceptions spell the end of democratic consolidation. When played among "democratic enemies,"democracy stops being "the only game in town."

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schedler, A. (2023). Rethinking Political Polarization. Political Science Quarterly, 138(3), 335–360. https://doi.org/10.1093/psquar/qqad038

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free