41–50 of 89 posts
Think America was divided in the 1970s? Try the 1860s. And if you somehow think that the US Civil War doesn't count because it was soldiers fighting, remember that one of the precursors to the war occurred in Kansas. In the 1850s, civilians from both sides invaded and fought to kick the other side out so they could rig Kansas' vote on slavery. It was violence between civilians and obvious attempts to manipulate a dem…
There may have been more violence among various radical and extremist factions in American politics in the 70s but that doesn't mean that America was more divided politically over all. There wasn't nearly as much partisanship in the upper-echelons of power in 70s and I suspect that there was more consensus among people in more moderate circles. There also wasn't this huge epistemological divide running right through…
Everyone was watching the same network news and reading the same newspaper. Once niche news sources started to become widely available, everyone went to the news source that gave them the news how they wanted to hear it. Over time these news sources grew more and more polarized as they continued to cater to their specific niche audience (some sources are certainly more brazen and intentional with this approach, but it happens naturally if you aren't actively working to stop it). There is only so much polarization that can happen when we all agree on the same basic set of facts. But now we are all stuck in our own bubbles, only listen to news that reinforces our world view, and we continue to spiral further and further into polarization.
There may have been more violence among various radical and extremist factions in American politics in the 70s but that doesn't mean that America was more divided politically over all. There wasn't nearly as much partisanship in the upper-echelons of power in 70s and I suspect that there was more consensus among people in more moderate circles. There also wasn't this huge epistemological divide running right through…
Terrorism in the United States.[2] Other than 9/11 and Oklahoma City, few non mass shooting incidents have killed many people.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_S...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States...
There may have been more violence among various radical and extremist factions in American politics in the 70s but that doesn't mean that America was more divided politically over all. There wasn't nearly as much partisanship in the upper-echelons of power in 70s and I suspect that there was more consensus among people in more moderate circles. There also wasn't this huge epistemological divide running right through…
This is mostly a myth. Conspiracy theories for example, often taken as an example today of how flimsy reality is, always had an immense impact on American politics. Many American presidents were committed believers of conspiracy theories, Nixon was openly paranoid, of course with an extremely political bent.
The absurdity of the cold war and its influence on division in politics and what is actually real or not is well documented in just about every film made in the era.
Insofar as American politics actually is more divided today I wouldn't even frame it as a bad thing. It's just the result of vastly different people wanting vastly different things and having significantly more opportunity to express it. This desire for consensus among moderates is just an expression of another age-old American tradition, fear of the upper-middle class of everything that is political.
Think America was divided in the 1970s? Try the 1860s. And if you somehow think that the US Civil War doesn't count because it was soldiers fighting, remember that one of the precursors to the war occurred in Kansas. In the 1850s, civilians from both sides invaded and fought to kick the other side out so they could rig Kansas' vote on slavery. It was violence between civilians and obvious attempts to manipulate a dem…
The article includes most of that.
Right now I feel like the Civil War is an apt comparison since we have state governors making pacts between themselves to act a certain way regardless of what the federal government says to do.
There may have been more violence among various radical and extremist factions in American politics in the 70s but that doesn't mean that America was more divided politically over all. There wasn't nearly as much partisanship in the upper-echelons of power in 70s and I suspect that there was more consensus among people in more moderate circles. There also wasn't this huge epistemological divide running right through…
>There also wasn't this huge epistemological divide running right through the middle of the country; people were generally working from a common understanding of reality. Not so, today. Everyone was watching the same network news and reading the same newspaper. Once niche news sources started to become widely available, everyone went to the news source that gave them the news how they wanted to hear it. Over time the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
Doesn't quite cut it, does it? "Go read some history books" is not a reference. The parent comment made a bunch of statements. Asking the reader to read an entire book to verify the validity of any of them is wrong. References come with page numbers for a reason.
I can't claim to know how today compares to our past, but what strikes me about today is how close I feel we are in terms of values and ideas, yet how divided we are politically. Without saying my political beliefs, I've had conversations about immigration, taxes, race, and religion with people both on and against my side of the aisle, with people of diverse backgrounds. It's crazy to me how much we agree on and how…
My guess here is each person has an audience in mind and an applicability.
The dog whistle of saying the "American family" is being destroyed. To a conservative it means something about a god fearing hetero family. To a liberal it means anyone wanting to be in a consensual monogamous relationship.
Healthcare should be good and affordable. "For people like me." or "To everyone, even an illegal."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The political class may have been unified, but perhaps because so many people didn't participate in politics. Many religious people stayed away or at least did not vote along religious lines, and other large segments were disenfranchised altogether. So the separations may have existed but simply did not play out in the political arena because politics was in the hands of a homogeneous group.
Most people simply weren't exposed to a very wide spectrum of beliefs. Mass media focused on hard news, and it was either local and/or controlled by a few groups. The wider diversity of media that came later allowed more opportunity for people to 1) find a viewpoint they more closely identify with, and 2) become outraged about viewpoints vastly different than their own.