A Polarized Nation?

A man who I am sure suffers from schizophrenia shot a number of people in Arizona. Since one of the people shot was a Democratic politician and there has been large amounts of aggressive and militaristic rhetoric from the right there have been many descriptions of the USA as a polarized nation. There have been calls to tone down the rhetoric, to heal the nation.

I'm not someone who thinks that you can just say someone is crazy, a lunatic, and then think that is a reasonable explanation of events. Having had nearly two decades of working with people with delusions I feel I can confidently state as a fact that the delusional can still hear and understand messages, and that the content of those messages can effect what they do. On the other hand I think it ludicrous to expect public figures to tone down their speech so as not to risk the most insane people doing something bad.

I think what is needed at this time is the same thing that is always needed, some perspective followed by a healthy dose of reason. Government should be run by first having a truthful and real concept of what is going on. Without that you cannot proceed to the next step. I think the main problem with the USA is that it is at the moment very bad at this first step. So let us look to see if this perception of the USA as a polarized nation that needs healing is correct.

I think the first thing to do is to look at the range of political parties in the USA and compare them to other countries to see if the USA is particularly polarized. I'm going to take large, wealthy countries from each of the other continents and examine their political parties and compare them with the two party system in the USA of Democrats and Republicans.

In Europe the wealthiest countries in GDP per capita are smaller countries, Luxembourg, Denmark, Switzerland, Norway etc.. Of the larger countries (over 50 million in population) France edges out Germany for the wealthiest. France is a multi-party state with no party large enough to sustain a government by itself and has settled into two coalitions: a center-right coalition based around economic liberalism, maintenance of french independence, and Christian moralism (this should seem a very familiar set of views to Americans) and a center-left coalition under the leadership of the Socialist Party with assistance from the Communist Party, the Greens, and The Radical Party of the Left (this should only seem familiar to left wingers in San Francisco). The range of views that people can vote for range from communism to Christian morality and economic liberalism. All of these views have representatives in government.

In Asia the wealthiest large country is Japan. Japan has a parliamentary democracy with two main parties making up about 90% of the Diet, and about 80% of the House of Representatives with a slough of smaller parties making up the difference. The Democratic Party of Japan currently is in government and was formed essentially in opposition to the Liberal Democratic Party which had been in power previous to 2009 for 54 years. The Liberal Democratic Party of Japan was a conservative party essentially formed to preserve traditional Japanese culture. It is not an idealistic party, rather an institutionalized party. The Democratic Party was formed in order to represent the interests of those not well served by the Liberal Democratic Party, essentially a platform very similar to those of Democrats in the USA running on behalf of the Middle Class. There are other smaller parties ranging from a Buddhist based party to a Communist based party.

South Africa is the richest large state in Africa. it is a democracy but only has one party with a sniff at any power, the African National Congress. The ANC holds two thirds of the seats in government. Its main focus is on economic development for the poor although it has become more business friendly over time. It has held traditional links with the socialist trade union party and with the communist party. There are minor parties representing everything from conservative moralists opposed to homosexuality etc. to a party committed to uniting all of Africa.

In South America there is only one really large country by population in Brazil, but it is the fifth wealthiest. It is difficult to decide which is closest to the USA in terms for comparison between a country with a GDP per capita of $15,000 and a population of 40 million, or a country of 190 million with a GDP per capita of $10,000. Brazil's political parties can be described best as coalitions of coalitions of coalitions with as many ideologies as there are local districts. Argentina is different with two main parties the Justicialist Party which has been in power for most of the last fifty years and the Radical Civic Union. The Justicialist Party's power base is with trade unions and the Radical Civic Union is more left wing than that. There are nearly thirty other parties that have representation in government.

In the USA there are the two parties and essentially only the two parties. The Democrats are center left (for the USA, that would be center right elsewhere) and the Republicans are center right (which would be a center right elsewhere). In terms of ideology, political activity, stated goals and actual policy there is little difference between the available parties when compared with all of the other nations. There is no socialist, communist, populist, fascist, or religious party. Both parties believe in liberal economic policies (to different degrees) the same system of government with similar foreign policy actions and goals.

When compared with other large, wealthier nations what can be said for the USA? Well, first of all the USA is substantially less diverse in its politics than other nations, the differences between Democrats and Republicans is actually less than is usual inside ruling coalitions of separate parties elsewhere. The USA is actually one of the least polarized countries politically in the world. The second thing to notice is that the USA is more right wing than most of the countries around the world.

So, with the USA as actually a politically non-diverse country in terms of actual governance why is there this perception of polarization? Why do Americans think that this is a country that is deeply divided? The first reason is that Americans simply have almost no idea as to what is going on in the rest of the world. Americans have no idea that there are successful countries with socialists as part of the government. Americans simply refuse to believe that France might be better at some things than the USA. Americans are unaware that what are called left wing radicals here are thought of as center left elsewhere. If all you are aware of politically are the differences within the USA the extent of those differences will seem enormous. The idea that you can go buy a Starbucks Mochaccino in a country with communists in the government is beyond imagining.

So the non-diversity of opinion leads to the idea that whatever differences there are in opinion are vast and insurmountable. The very non-polarized, non-diverse nature of American politics leads those who have nothing else to get information from believe that things are much more polarized than they are. The second feature that I think matters is that with just two parties that are nearly indistinguishable from each other in terms of the range of world politics in order to win elections you have to accentuate the differences between the two parties and dramatically increase the perception of the importance of these matters. The similarities in US politics requires that there be more screeching. The very lack of differences requires an increased level of aggressive tone in talking about differences.

With a lack of difference in opinion the idea of bailing out corporations can be labeled as socialist, and socialist can be a code world for communist tyranny. This despite the fact that politically, governments operating for the interests of corporations is fascism. Obama purchased corporation stocks and told corporations what to do (actual socialism) and also bailed out banks (actual fascism) but only temporarily to return to liberal capitalism. Barack Obama did exactly the same things that the previous administration was doing and yet each side was labeled everything from fascist to socialist.

The USA is politically the opposite of a polarized nation. It is only in rhetoric that it seems to be so. The USA has fooled itself about what it is and what people believe. What is needed in US governance is someone brave enough to actually tell it like it is, describe what the US is, where it is falling behind and where it can learn from the rest of the world just as the rest of the world has learned from the USA.