There is no obvious solution to polarization
Bloomberg is the rare publication that I read because of the opinion section and not in spite of it. When reading this opinion piece from Sunday though something happened that almost never does. I got mad.
Before getting into the piece itself, it’s worth briefly explaining why I reacted so negatively to it. The reason I reacted that way has everything to do with what I expect from someone. At the risk of stating the obvious, the greater expectations I have of someone, the more likely I am to be unhappy when they fall short of them. Conversely, I don’t ever get mad at those who I expect nothing from even though that by definition means I don’t think well of them.
To make things more concrete, despite my strong dislike of Trump, I’m not mad at him. He cares only about himself and always has. He has no interest in governing and policymaking and thrives by being a jackass. None of that is a secret and there is virtually nothing that I would put past him. Because of all that, I don’t expect anything from him and I can’t be mad at someone who I feel that way about.
The same is true for people like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz and Paul Gosar. They’re all terrible people, but that’s no secret either. I don’t expect them to be voices of reason or to provide competent leadership. Their goal is to get attention for themselves and put on a show, which they’re very good at. That is all I ever expect them to do so I can’t be mad at them for it.
The reason the piece from Bloomberg irked me is because the author is someone who I think well of and respect. He has been around the block, is well-versed in policy matters and is a serious person by any definition. For someone like that, I have expectations of them. I expect them to be grounded in reality and to not fall for delusions. The piece isn’t disconnected from reality, but it does seem to fall for a delusion that many others seem to believe as well when it comes to dealing with the heavy polarization we have today.
The myth of the White Knight
What drove me off the wall about the piece is that the author implies that he believes in what I call the White Knight Theory. That is the idea that some white knight will come out of nowhere and rescue the country from the rabid partisanship and polarization (I will call it tribalism for brevity) going on. The theme of the piece is lamenting that the presidential election next year could feature a rematch of Trump against Biden, which, on paper, few want to see.
The author says a rematch of Trump and Biden means American democracy is broken. The reason why that rematch is so likely is because of the primary system. I don’t disagree that the primary system we have is bad. If it was up to me we would go back to the infamous smoke-filled rooms and let the parties decide who their nominees will be. Whether the author agrees with that, I don’t know.
The problem with the tribalism we have today is that it isn’t something that will be solved by one neat trick. I have read and heard many people yearn for a fantasy candidate who will come down from the heavens and unify the country. In their telling, a white knight will bring us together, heal our divisions and solve our problems.
The White Knight Theory is similar to the false belief that the president is all mighty and powerful. Some writers and commentators seem to think that if the president just gave an inspiring speech, everyone would come together and act to solve our problems. All it takes is for the president to have the will to waive a magic wand to make everything wonderful and great.
According to that idea, for example, the only reason Congress doesn’t do much on gun control is because the president doesn’t act like Martin Sheen. In the fantasy world that idea assumes exists, there are no substantive disagreements, no legislative hurdles, no inertia, no status quo bias and no other barriers that a president’s will to get things done can’t overcome. The White Knight Theory, too, rests on some fantasy notions.
The White Knight Theory treats the president as if he/she has a monopoly on communications. The fact that there are many other sources of information, good or bad, doesn’t seem to occur to its believers. The White Knight Theory treats tribalism as if it’s all about substantive policy disputes and if a magic candidate just came along with all the right ideas, everyone would be friends and get along.
It’s not uncommon for a White Knight Theory believer to say the two parties are broken beyond repair. A common pipe dream is for a third party to be formed and to run someone for president. The dream ticket usually involves running a billionaire with a former military leader. An example of that clueless, delusional fantasy can be found here.
The tribalism that we have today is bad. Of all the concerns I have about the future of the US, that is currently the biggest. We have an economy that is dynamic, innovative and a jobs engine. The US is the richest country in the world with high living standards. Immigrants from all over the world want to come here, not to China. Those are things the US has going in its favor.
What worries me is the tribalism we have is so intense that hating the other side becomes the most important thing no matter what. We got a preview of that in 2016 with some in the US cheering the hacking of emails by Russia just because it was done to people they didn’t like. Only the tribalism we have today could get a significant number of people here to sing China and Russia’s praises.
As much as tribalism is bad, the reality is there is no white knight out there. I don’t know how we can resolve the impasse we are at, but it won’t happen by one person coming along and saving the day. It will not be solved by passing legislation either. The author calls Biden divisive, but I think he is very wrong on that. Biden has presided over tons of legislation getting enacted on a bipartisan basis, including laws dealing with semiconductors, infrastructure, guns, gay marriage and the postal service. That’s not even counting the omnibus spending bill passed at the end of last year.
The kind of fantasy candidate who works well with both sides of the aisle that the author and others hope comes along does in fact exist. He is president right now. Biden campaigned on working on a bipartisan basis with Republicans. He was often mocked for being naïve when he said that, but the joke was on those laughing at him.
Biden’s tenure has shown that our government is capable of acting and partisanship isn’t an insurmountable barrier to it. Legislation that was talked about for years was acted on under his leadership. He alone didn’t make it happen, but there are few others in politics who have the personal connections in Congress that he does. Call him a creature of the past all you want, but the fact that he has been in politics for 50 years helped him build relationships with people like Mitch McConnell that made passing those laws possible.
Despite Biden’s many bipartisan accomplishments, the country is still divided. People are still mad at each other and are still fighting. Sure, Biden is not perfect and has made mistakes as everyone does. He could have done things differently on rhetoric, priorities and substance at times.
That applies to every president though. Tribalism has continued to get worse no matter who the president is. Every president makes mistakes and could have done things differently. Even if they had been perfect, there would still be tribalism because it doesn’t depend on who the president is.
Our political system is not the problem or the solution
What is in my view both a relief and a source of frustration about the tribalism we have is that it is based on cultural rather than substantive policy differences. Believe it or not, under Trump, policy differences actually lessened. It wasn’t his intention, but it was during his term that the Affordable Care Act became widely accepted and stopped being something we argue over. Because of his opposition to entitlement cuts, the desire on the part of congressional Republicans to push for draconian spending cuts is much less ambitious.
We were arguing over the size of government as recently as a decade ago. Today, that debate barely exists. There is now a consensus that government is fine. Republicans don’t come out and say that, but their actions tell the story. Trump was and still is a very polarizing figure, but that is largely because of how he acts. The most impactful things under his watch, the pandemic and January 6, happened towards the end of his term, long after he had alienated most of the country.
Despite my concern over the tribalism we have and the fact that I see no clear way out of it, I don’t think our democracy is broken. As much as we are divided, there is a solid majority of the country that cares about being able to elect their leaders. The midterms last year made clear that candidates who are seen as hostile to democracy are severely penalized for it.
As for the primary system we have, it works as it’s designed to. Voters who identify with the Democratic or Republican Party get to pick who their nominee is. The rules for who can vote in which party’s primary aren’t uniform, but it’s clear what the rules are in each state. The author is dismayed that so many Republicans want to renominate Trump, but that is the choice they’re making. The primary system doesn’t force anyone to do that.
The author is from the UK and so is certainly familiar with the different political system they have over there. I don’t know if he wishes the US had the same kind of system. I wrote over the summer about why I think parliamentary systems are better than presidential systems. It doesn’t matter which system I or the author prefer because the US has a presidential system and that won’t change.
Regarding whether the tribalism we have today is caused by our having a presidential system, I’m highly skeptical. We have had the same system for more than 200 years, but the tribalism we have today is fairly recent. Our political system is designed to make it harder for legislation to pass. That is often frustrating because a solid majority can support a law and it still doesn’t get enacted. Because the tribalism we have now is not really about substantive policy matters, a political system shouldn’t be the source of blame or relief.
Since there is no white knight coming to the rescue and our political system isn’t going to change or save us, how can we solve the problem of tribalism? I wish I knew, but I have no idea. It is not going away any time soon and it may get worse, stay the same or get better at some point. That is a very unsatisfactory answer, but that is the only honest one.
There is no obvious unifying event that would bring people together. As the author correctly notes, the pandemic only further ripped everyone apart. There was unity after 9/11, but that has long since worn off. If, god forbid, we have another attack like that, I have a hard time seeing that unity repeating.
The author worries that our political system can’t handle the tribalism we have today. I can’t answer whether that is right because that would require me to predict the future, which I can’t do. The primary system we have can certainly encourage extremism. Our veto-heavy system of government has many anti-majoritarian features that, if taken to extremes, can create a crisis of legitimacy. The reliance on norms and customs that much of our system depends on to function works well until someone stops abiding by them and pays no price for it. Those vulnerabilities are a problem, but because the tribalism we have today is rooted in culture, not policy, it’s not clear that another system would be able to deal with it effectively.
The reason I favor a parliamentary system (with proportional representation) is because it is simpler, avoids major anti-majoritarian pitfalls while making it clear who is in charge and who should be held accountable when policy screwups happen. I think that would help at the margin with tribalism, but would hardly eliminate it because we would still have the non-policy sources of it. Cable news, social media and talk radio and other things that exacerbate it would still exist. People who want to live in their own world could still do it.
I want to end this post on a more positive note. The US has so much going in its favor and so many strengths. Our weaknesses are not inherent to us or any system we have, but exist because of choices we choose to make. I don’t believe the US’ best days are over. Despite the heavy tribalism today, the US is still very much the dominant global power. Tribalism is bad, but hardly fatal.
The US has endured much worse periods than what we are going through today and has come out stronger. Nothing is set in stone, but there is no reason that can’t happen again. The tribalism we have today is not unprecedented. We have been polarized before and made it through. As disconcerting as it is, tribalism is just one of those forces that comes and goes in cycles. It is just a part of human nature. There is no obvious solution to it, but it may just be something that has to work its way through our system like a virus. Suffering from a virus is bad while it’s there, but you come out stronger for it.