Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Reducing Political Divides Must – and Can – Occur at Massive Scale

Reducing Political Divides Must – and Can – Occur at Massive Scale

American flag, megaphone

Photo by Mikhail Nilov/pexels.com

Efforts to bring the country back together must collectively achieve massive scale, impacting at least 85 million Americans (and probably more). It may seem daunting, but the right efforts can plausibly achieve this goal.

These efforts include what is sometimes called “depolarization” or “bridge-building,” though initiatives must go well beyond today’s overwhelmingly conversation-based methods to achieve this scale. Structural reforms are another key element.


In terms of America’s democratic stability, the most pressing need for these efforts comes from dramatic misperceptions of the threat posed by everyday Americans from the other political party. Americans are much less supportive of breaking democratic norms than the other side believes, think members of the other party dehumanize them more than twice as much as in reality, and overestimate the share in the other party supportive of political violence by more than 10x.

This is coupled with both short-term and long-term increases in “affective” (emotional) polarization.

These misperceptions and negative emotions are widespread among the American public. Thus, any efforts to deal with them must also be widespread.

A low-end estimate for the number to target is over 85 million when looking at the number of 2024 voters, divided by political affiliation who have a “very unfavorable” view of the other party.**

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Add in some non-voting adults, soon-to-be voting teenagers, those with only unfavorable (instead of very unfavorable) views of the other party, and so on, and the target audience quickly blows past nine digits to over 100 million.

How can we meaningfully affect this many people?

Americans’ views of each other can change via either the information environment or conversations. The information environment offers much more obvious avenues for scale, though messaging about conversations can contribute.

Messaging and stories in the information environment from various sectors can directly correct negative misperceptions of each other. See social media content from Builders and All We Share, the goals of Bridge Entertainment Labs, and top-performing video interventions from the Strengthening Democracy Challenge led by Stanford. One of the authors, James, is Co-Founder and Executive Director of More Like US, which offers guidance for those in the Arts.

Messaging can also encourage conversations, as seen in videos produced with NFL players as part of StoryCorps’s One Small Step, or can give memorable conversation guidance, like the ABCs of Constructive Dialogue from Urban-Rural Action. However, many Americans may not want to engage in time-consuming conversations with uncertain benefits.

Messaging must be coupled with structural reforms to reverse the perverse incentives in electoral systems, news media, social media, and among special-interest groups that often reward demonization of others with money, fame, and power. Electoral structural reformers play an important role, as do key initiatives to try to change advertising flows for news, like the partnership between Ad Fontes Media and The Trade Desk or efforts of the Council for Responsible Social Media.

Meanwhile, conversation workshops are decently effective at reducing political divides among participants, but sufficient scale seems impossible. A daily workshop for 20 new people in each state would take well over 200 years to reach the low-end target of 85 million…a single time.

Attitudinal change on this scale may seem overwhelming but recognize that massive societal perspective changes are possible. Take interracial marriage, support for which was 4% in 1958 but is now at 94%.

We can change attitudes about each other across politics at society-wide scales. We need to start now.

** As of writing, there were 155.2 million 2024 voters, Pew found political affiliation around Republicans (32%), Democrats (33%), and Independents (35%), and YouGov found 74% of Democrats and 68% of Republicans had a “very unfavorable” of the other party, along with a low of 29% of Independents very unfavorably viewing Republicans. Multiplication across leads to a target audience of 87.4 million.

James Coan is the co-founder and executive director of More Like US. Coan can be contacted at James@morelikeus.org

Imre Huss is a current intern at More Like US.






Read More

Crowd Surfing Through Revolution
silhouette photo of man jumped off on top of people inside party hall
Photo by Zach Lucero on Unsplash

Crowd Surfing Through Revolution

Picture this: A person launches themselves into a crowd at a concert, and for a moment, everything hangs in the balance. Will they fall? Will they float? It all depends on countless hands moving in coordination, strangers united in a common purpose. Some push up while others stabilize, creating a dynamic, living system that defies gravity.

At this moment, we are all suspended between falling and flying, carried by a wave of global resistance that nobody controls but all can help shape. Think about what makes crowd surfing work. It's not just about the individual being carried – it's about the collective choreography happening beneath. With too much force in one direction, you fall. Not enough support in another, you crash. The magic happens in the balance.

Keep ReadingShow less
Threat Minimizes Compassion
Polarization and the politics of love
Polarization and the politics of love

Threat Minimizes Compassion

Threat minimizes compassion. This connection helps to explain two seemingly unrelated questions: Why do those who voted for President Trump seem not to publicly express much concern for the thousands of government workers fired since Inauguration Day? And why do liberals often seem not to talk as much about drug deaths as other issues like gun deaths?

The answers are multi-faceted, of course. This article will focus on one of many reasons: the potential victims of these actions and situations (government workers and drug users) are often directly or indirectly seen as threats by the other side, and it is hard to feel the pain of those who seem to threaten us. Institutions can also be threatening, based on the actions taken by people within those institutions.

Keep ReadingShow less