Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Your Take: Polarized thinking

Your Take: Polarized thinking

Recently, we published an op-ed about the connection between polarized thinking, depression and anxiety. Recognizing our thinking has become polarized is the first step to break the cycle – embracing that nuance and complexity are simply part of life instead of catastrophic and uncontrollable variables.

In conjunction with that essay, we asked our readers two questions:


1. How do you minimize your own polarized thinking?

2. What media do you consume and how does that increase or decrease your black and white thinking?

In dozens of responses, we heard from you on your own techniques for guarding against polarized thinking and your media consumption habits. Responses have been edited for length and clarity. Here’s a recap.

By debating others! I'm a founding member of my high-school's debate team, where I learned to listen to ideas, trying to find flaws in my opposition’s line of thinking while they do the same to me. My own opinions have been changed on multiple occasions due to debates, and advocating for resolutions that you oppose is a great way to broaden your way of thinking. ~Robert Hamblin

Most importantly, I try not to hang out among people or media sources that promote black and white thinking. In the last three months, I averaged less than four hours a month watching or listening to any news shows or viewing sports or other forms of electronic entertainment. I never let the radio or TV play in the background. ~Will Carter

When I catch myself getting worked up with self-righteousness or making sweeping, negative statements about "them," I know I'm in dangerous territory. Then, I remind myself of past times when I've been misled by those on my own side who've cherry-picked the facts, used out-of-date information, etc. I aim to replace self-righteous anger with a vaguely uncomfortable feeling that I may not have the whole picture. ~Riley Hart

I read a variety of magazines. I find that The New Republic offers critiques of a wide spectrum of political stances, including an insightfulness that wish Democrats would read and heed for the party's (and nation's) own good. ~James Rodell

My biggest struggle is trying to hear what people who may disagree with me are thinking. It is so hard to be still and listen for the whole thought. And, truthfully, often I find the thought wrong or illogical or missing something. But it pays to listen. ~Kathleen Finderson

I have a sincere commitment to understand the other side, and more importantly, the other person with the opposite side. It’s described as focusing on the third thought. First thought is our emotional reaction to whatever the person said. The second thought is to explain, rationally, why I am right and you are wrong. The third thought is to really understand that other person's point and, even better, that other person (aka who they are, what they care about, how we are similar). I look for solutions, I look for common ground, I try to make the best argument for the side I disagree with, and I read articles to help me do that. I often do some multisided research specifically on whatever issue catches my attention. Doing a balanced search on AllSides helps me do that – it pulls left, center and right articles from across the web on whatever I search.

~John Gable (founder of AllSides)

I think the best method for managing polarized thinking is the 5/5/2 test. Passing the test requires some self-awareness and introspection, as you noted, and puts some tangible targets in place. To pass, a person must have:

  • Five or more close friends who are on the opposite side of the aisle from them.
  • Five or more personal political beliefs that are on the opposite side of their typical political preference.
  • Two or more regular news sources that are on the opposite side of their typical political preference.

~Travis Monteleone

I recently realized my family and friends who have embraced the former president suddenly put me in an all-or-nothing bucket – if I didn't travel their road, I embraced the status quo. I was gobsmacked. I have been standing up to the status quo for over 50 years. I just think we form a more perfect union in a different way than they. So now, when I see myself feeling that all-or-nothing upset with others, I check myself. I listen differently. I speak to them, not a narrative. ~Jeanene Louden

I do not try to minimize my polarized thinking. I have consciously taken the side of keeping what democracy we still have in the United States and trying to make it work better for all the people of this country. I oppose reactionary conservatism, Christian conservatism, white nationalism and most of all the cult of Trumpism. I think human beings have the capacity for self-governance without a top-down authority to make them do what is right. ~Jack Noldon

I try to be open to looking at information from different ends of the spectrum. It does not eliminate polarized thinking but it decreases it. I have digital subscriptions to The New York Times, The Economist, The Epoch Times, The Telegraph. I read articles on the Deutsche Welle app and a news app called MxM for headlines, etc. I have a subscription to Die Weltwoche (Swiss) and listen to a 30-minute summary of the chief editor Roger Klöppel most mornings. I watch or listen to maybe 50 percent of War Room’s daily show, watch Tucker Carlson maybe four out of five days; record and watch two or three episodes of Greta van Susteren on Newsmax. I have a subscription to Victor Davis Hanson articles and podcasts (one of my favorites and I feel I learn a lot from him on real history). The newsletter from MoveOn.org because I want to know what goes on with the “other side.” So now you know why I get nothing done around here and why I’m never bored. ~Inge Schlegel

Media sources identified by our readers, alphabetically listed:

  • AllSides.com (who also hosts a publicly sourced media bias chart here.)
  • The Associated Press
  • Axios
  • BBC
  • Bridge Alliance Daily Resource
  • Broadcast news
  • The Christian Science Monitor
  • CNN
  • C-SPAN
  • The Dispatch
  • The Economist
  • The Epoch Times
  • The Federalist
  • Fox News Channel
  • The Fulcrum
  • Le Monde
  • Local news via papers and TV
  • The Marginalian
  • The Motley Fool
  • MSNBC
  • NPR
  • National Review
  • The New Republic
  • The New York Post
  • The New York Times
  • Newsmax
  • Newsweek
  • PBS
  • Reason Magazine
  • Sheryl Atkisson
  • The Sun (monthly magazine)
  • The Telegraph
  • Wall Street Journal
  • War Room
  • The Washington Post

We sincerely thank everyone for sharing “your take” on polarized thinking, for reading and including The Fulcrum in your media diet.


Read More

The History of U.S. Prevention Through Deterrence: Effective Border Policy or Humanitarian Risk?

The History of U.S. Prevention Through Deterrence: Effective Border Policy or Humanitarian Risk?

A Brief History of Prevention Through Deterrence

The U.S. Border Patrol agency has evolved greatly over the years, shifting its focus to address changing national security concerns. It was originally established in 1924 to restrict illegal immigration by Chinese and European immigrants before moving to restrict alcohol smuggling during Prohibition. The agency adopted its current focus on illegal immigration from Mexico during the 1970s, when immigration pressures coincided with a severe economic recession in the United States. In 1994, the Border Patrol released a strategy document with the support of the Clinton administration which introduced an approach to immigration known as Prevention Through Deterrence. This tactic aimed to discourage border crossings by funneling immigrants through border entry points with harsh terrain, in contrast with previous policies based on arrest and apprehension post-entry.

Successful Prevention Through Deterrence is measured by fewer encounters and apprehensions at the border, indicating that illegal attempts to enter the country have been prevented and deterred. Barriers to entry are policed by a range of physical infrastructure like fences, vehicle barriers, and other blockades designed to stop illegal foot and vehicle traffic. These measures are supported by camera- and thermal-based surveillance systems as well as measures like deportation and criminal charges which impose legal consequences on migrants. The focus of Prevention Through Deterrence operations themselves is twofold: establishing control of high-traffic border sectors and using security measures to enable the seizure of contraband.

Keep ReadingShow less
A microphone in the foreground and a crowd, blurry in the background.

INC ‘26 gathered independent leaders in D.C. to unveil a seven-candidate slate, a Fulcrum Caucus strategy and new tools for corruption-free governance.

Getty Images, uschools

Independent Movement Unites at INC ’26 to Build National Power

From September 23–25, leaders from across the American independent political movement gathered at the JW Marriott in Washington, D.C., for the fourth Independent National Convention (INC ’26). Produced by United Independents, the event brought together hundreds of participants representing political reform organizations, independent campaigns, alternative parties, civic initiatives and grassroots organizing efforts.

The gathering reflected the breadth of activity outside the traditional two-party system while addressing a persistent challenge: translating America's large independent constituency into greater political representation, institutional capacity, and coordinated action.

Keep ReadingShow less
Meeting, handshake and business people with deal in office for funding approval and success.

Four Reds and four Blues reached unanimous Points of Agreement on immigration, then presented them to Reps. Fitzpatrick and Suozzi. Here’s how it worked.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

On Immigration, Common Ground May Be Closer Than We Think

Immigration has become one of the issues pulling Americans apart. Earlier this month, at a constituent conversation in Bristol, Pennsylvania, I watched eight Americans with very different political views offer a glimpse of how it does not have to stay that way.

Four “Reds” and four “Blues” — terms used for participants on the political right and left — sat across from Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.), the Republican and Democratic co-chairs of the House Problem Solvers Caucus, to present something increasingly unusual in our politics: unanimous Points of Agreement on immigration developed through an earlier Common Ground Workshop.

Keep ReadingShow less
Automobiles wait in line to cross the São Sebastião Channel in Brazil

Automobiles wait in line to cross the São Sebastião Channel in Brazil

Hugo Balta

How a Brazilian Island's Automation Model Offers a Blueprint for Overwhelmed U.S. Hotspots

Hugo Balta is currently reporting from Brazil, exploring how the country's efforts to strengthen democracy, expand civic participation, and address environmental challenges may hold valuable insights for the United States.

For decades, some of the world's most popular ecotourism destinations have faced a simple but persistent challenge: a relatively small local tax base must support infrastructure and environmental protection for millions of visitors. When tourism costs fall disproportionately on residents, roads, sanitation systems, and natural resources can become strained. Increasingly, governments are addressing that imbalance through "user-pays" conservation fees that shift a portion of those costs to travelers.

Keep ReadingShow less