Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Words & Phrases We Can Do Without -- Jennifer Rubin
https://contrarian.substack.com/p/words-and-phrases-we-can-do-without“Polarization” is not our problem
Pundits and politicians say it incessantly: Our political system is broken because we are so “polarized.” They tell us that “polarization” prevents us from passing legislation or reaching a compromise or getting along.
This is bunk, not to mention a dangerous false equivalence, which minimizes the threat of authoritarianism.
. . .
Other countries’ experiences help distinguish polarization from authoritarianism. Hungary’s problem is not polarization; it’s the authoritarian rule of Viktor Orban who suppresses dissent, silences the media, and strips the judiciary of independence. Many Hungarians want the return of the rule of law, free speech, and robust civil society while Orban does not. But who would call that a “polarization” problem? It’s a dictator problem.
Whether it is Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s police state in Turkey or neo-fascist parties in Europe or MAGA’s takeover of the Republican Party, the defining feature that should concern us is not mutual intransigence or a widening ideological gap. Rather, in the United States and around the globe we see ordinary democratic parties (warts and all) up against authoritarian movements (some successful, others not) that reject democracy, truth, decency, pluralism, and the rule of law.
The central feature in the U.S.—a cult of personality in which the erratic, chaotic, and unhinged leader runs roughshod over its people—has nothing to do with Democrats. We cannot blame the small “d” democrats (or the large “D” ones either) for extremism or intransigence simply for insisting their fellow countrymen recognize objective reality and respect democratic norms.
. . .
This is bunk, not to mention a dangerous false equivalence, which minimizes the threat of authoritarianism.
. . .
Other countries’ experiences help distinguish polarization from authoritarianism. Hungary’s problem is not polarization; it’s the authoritarian rule of Viktor Orban who suppresses dissent, silences the media, and strips the judiciary of independence. Many Hungarians want the return of the rule of law, free speech, and robust civil society while Orban does not. But who would call that a “polarization” problem? It’s a dictator problem.
Whether it is Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s police state in Turkey or neo-fascist parties in Europe or MAGA’s takeover of the Republican Party, the defining feature that should concern us is not mutual intransigence or a widening ideological gap. Rather, in the United States and around the globe we see ordinary democratic parties (warts and all) up against authoritarian movements (some successful, others not) that reject democracy, truth, decency, pluralism, and the rule of law.
The central feature in the U.S.—a cult of personality in which the erratic, chaotic, and unhinged leader runs roughshod over its people—has nothing to do with Democrats. We cannot blame the small “d” democrats (or the large “D” ones either) for extremism or intransigence simply for insisting their fellow countrymen recognize objective reality and respect democratic norms.
. . .
7 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
