Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Patriotism over polarization

patriotism
Jelena Matvejeva/EyeEm/Getty Images

Murphy is the director of FixUS, the democracy reform advocacy arm of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a fiscal policy think tank of which he is also chief of staff. Henry is a program associate for FixUs and CRFB.

Patriotism is defined as “ love for or devotion to one’s country,” a value that, historically, Americans have shared very broadly. Yet one would not be criticized for questioning whether this trait is waning in the face of deep polarization, mounting national pessimism and politicization of the topic itself. In just the last few weeks, polls reminded us that rapidly growing majorities of Republicans and Democrats say their political counterparts are close-minded, dishonest, immoral, and unintelligent, and two-thirds of Republicans, Democrats, and independents alike fear American democracy itself is in danger of collapse.

Despite our national melancholy, however, American patriotism appears to remain alive and widespread; 72 percent of Americans are proud to be so, and 73 percent would, despite its faults, rather live in the U.S. than another country, according to the results of a poll we conducted with YouGov earlier this summer. At the same time, other polls, such as Gallup’s June American pride survey, suggest patriotism may simultaneously be on a decline.

Tapping into and restoring our shared sense of patriotism might be the critical element we need to overcome hyperpolarization, but if we hope to do this, we must better understand what drives our underlying love of country in the first place. We also should recognize how partisans think differently on these topics to prevent extremist voices from exploiting these divisions for their benefit.


In testing some hypotheses about what might drive our shared patriotism, our initial findings suggest three simple yet fundamental points:

We take pride in our shared story. Contrary to the divisive debates over the nation’s past, Americans, regardless of partisan affiliation, express pride toward many of the defining aspects of U.S. history, ranging from scientific and technological innovations to winning World War II, from the resolution of the Civil War and outlawing slavery to the adoption of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and to guaranteeing women’s suffrage in the 19th Amendment (the greatest source of pride among the list provided in our poll). More in Common has found this as well, with Americans expressing high levels of familiarity and warmness toward historical figures ranging from Benjamin Franklin and George Washington to Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr.

We stress the importance of our ideals. Americans are unequivocally united in their belief in America and what America should be. Regardless of party, Americans declare that each of our fundamental ideals is especially important to them, including America’s striving to be a land of opportunity and liberty, a melting pot and a country of equal justice for all.

We are not blindly allegiant. Some have feared the possibility of a growing pernicious form of nationalism taking root in America. Yet sentiments associated with blind patriotism are low in the aggregate, whereas huge majorities support the concept that criticizing and working to improve the country is in and of itself patriotic. For example, 85 percent of Republicans, 86 percent of independents, and 88 percent of Democrats think you should notice and work to correct America’s problems if you love the country.

With Americans having a common sense of history, a shared sense of ideals and the need to achieve them, and a belief that criticism of our nation’s problems is the task of a true patriot, it would appear the country has a foundation for building a shared patriotism.

Of course, we are a long way from realizing that goal. Our research and that of many others have found that despite our shared values, we suffer from a profound mistrust of “the other.” For example, despite majorities professing a belief that those who express their love of country differently (even through criticism) are valued community members whose freedom of speech and right to protest injustice should be protected, only 43 percent of Americans agree that people who protest U.S. policy are generally good, upstanding people and valued members of society. This severe mistrust of the motives of others – so long as their criticism is different than what we would likely give – is further compounded by a substantial perception gap where people ascribe different beliefs to others than they genuinely hold.

But what if the root of these divides lies with the American story itself – our perpetual struggle to achieve our founding ideals? What if, instead, we recognized that we all agree on the same ideals, but we just differ on how close (or not) we are to achieving our full realization?

For example, 83 percent of Republicans believe we are more than halfway to becoming the ideal land of opportunity, “where if you work hard and play by the rules, you can achieve success and a happy life for yourself,” while only 57 percent of independents and 51 percent of Democrats do so. Similarly, 73 percent of Republicans believe we are more than halfway to achieving the “equality and justice for all” ideal for the country, “where all groups in society are respected and treated fairly,” compared to 51 percent of independents and 43 percent of Democrats.

These divides are not just deserving of recognition but are worth elevating and reconciling. For, as 85 percent of Americans indicate in their appreciation of criticizing our country's flaws and problem-solving, true patriotism is not just a feeling or a sense of nationhood but a constant action thereof. One reflection of this duty is countering misperceptions, both our own and those we interact with. But more importantly, it is building trust by building bridges, and our data suggests the emerging bridge-building movement has an enormous opportunity to bring people together by focusing on the foundational task of closing the gap between the America of today and the America we dream of. We believe a shared patriotism will provide this bond: a patriotism that is not an act of worship but one of love for our fellow citizens and faith in the common ideals that have brought us this far, and one that compels us to account for our national flaws, collaboratively respond to the critical disputes of today, and continue working toward a more perfect Union tomorrow.

Read More

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., January 29, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chen Mengtong/China News Service/VCG via Getty Images)

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Summary

On June 9, 2025, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), dismissed all 17 members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Secretary Kennedy claimed the move was necessary to eliminate “conflicts of interest” and restore public trust in vaccines, which he argued had been compromised by the influence of pharmaceutical companies. However, this decision strays from precedent and has drawn significant criticism from medical experts and public health officials across the country. Some argue that this shake-up undermines scientific independence and opens the door to politicized decision-making in vaccine policy.

Background: What Is ACIP?

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is a federal advisory group that helps guide national vaccine policy. Established in 1964, it has over 60 years of credibility as an evidence-based body of medical and scientific experts. ACIP makes official recommendations on vaccine schedules for both children and adults, determining which immunizations are required for school entry, covered by health insurance, and prioritized in public health programs. The committee is composed of specialists in immunology, epidemiology, pediatrics, infectious disease, and public health, all of whom are vetted for scientific rigor and ethical standards. ACIP’s guidance holds national weight, shaping both public perception of vaccines and the policies of institutions like schools, hospitals, and insurers.

Keep ReadingShow less
MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border
Way into future, RPA Airmen participate in Red Flag 16-2 > Creech ...

MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border

FT HUACHUCA, Ariz. - Inside a windowless and dark shipping container turned into a high-tech surveillance command center, two analysts peered at their own set of six screens that showed data coming in from an MQ-9 Predator B drone. Both were looking for two adults and a child who had crossed the U.S.-Mexico border and had fled when a Border Patrol agent approached in a truck.

Inside the drone hangar on the other side of the Fort Huachuca base sat another former shipping container, this one occupied by a drone pilot and a camera operator who pivoted the drone's camera to scan nine square miles of shrubs and saguaros for the migrants. Like the command center, the onetime shipping container was dark, lit only by the glow of the computer screens.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Trump 2020 flag outside of a home.

As Trump’s second presidency unfolds, rural America—the foundation of his 2024 election win—is feeling the sting. From collapsing export markets to cuts in healthcare and infrastructure, those very voters are losing faith.

Getty Images, ablokhin

Trump’s 2.0 Actions Have Harmed Rural America Who Voted for Him

Daryl Royal, the 20-year University of Texas football coach, once said, “You've gotta dance with them that brung ya.” The modern adaptation of that quote is “you gotta dance with the one who brought you to the party.” The expression means you should remain loyal to the people or things that helped you succeed.

Sixty-three percent of America’s 3,144 counties are predominantly rural, and Donald Trump won 93 percent of those counties in 2024. Analyses show that rural counties have become increasingly solid Republican, and Trump’s margin of victory within rural America reached a new high in the 2024 election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules
white concrete dome museum

Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules

Trust in elections is fragile – and once lost, it is extraordinarily difficult to rebuild. While Democrats and Republicans disagree on many election policies, there is broad bipartisan agreement on one point: executive branch interference in elections undermines the constitutional authority of states and Congress to determine how elections are run.

Recent executive branch actions threaten to upend this constitutional balance, and Congress must act before it’s too late. To be clear – this is not just about the current president. Keeping the executive branch out of elections is a crucial safeguard against power grabs by any future president, Democrat or Republican.

Keep ReadingShow less