SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Political polarization among Americans has grown rapidly in the last 40 years—more than in Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia or Germany—a phenomenon possibly due to increased racial division, the rise of partisan cable news and changes in the composition of the Democratic and Republican parties.
That's according to new research co-authored by Jesse Shapiro, a professor of political economy at Brown University. The study, conducted alongside Stanford University economists Levi Boxell and Matthew Gentzkow, was released on Monday, Jan. 20, as a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper.
In the study, Shapiro and colleagues present the first ever multi-nation evidence on long-term trends in "affective polarization"—a phenomenon in which citizens feel more negatively toward other political parties than toward their own. They found that in the U.S., affective polarization has increased more dramatically since the late 1970s than in the eight other countries they examined—the U.K., Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Switzerland, Norway and Sweden.
"A lot of analysis on polarization is focused on the U.S., so we thought it could be interesting to put the U.S. in context and see whether it is part of a global trend or whether it looks more exceptional," Shapiro said. "We found that the trend in the U.S. is indeed exceptional."
Using data from four decades of public opinion surveys conducted in the nine countries, the researchers used a so-called "feeling thermometer" to rate attitudes on a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 reflected no negative feelings toward other parties. They found that in 1978, the average American rated the members of their own political party 27 points higher than members of the other major party. By 2016, Americans were rating their own party 45.9 points higher than the other party, on average. In other words, negative feelings toward members of the other party compared to one's own party increased by an average of 4.8 points per decade.
The researchers found that polarization had also risen in Canada, New Zealand and Switzerland in the last 40 years, but to a lesser extent. In the U.K., Australia, Germany, Norway and Sweden, polarization decreased.
More information: Levi Boxell et al, Cross-Country Trends in Affective Polarization, (2020). DOI: 10.3386/w26669
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday January 27 2020, @06:49PM (19 children)
In Canada, we currently have first past the post but still have at least 3 major parties: but yes... election reform IS needed here too.
Our current prime minister Trudeau ran on legalizing marijuana and election reform: guess which one we got (probably because he wanted to be able to toke legally).
Yeah...we need election reform more than we need marijuana.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday January 27 2020, @07:19PM (8 children)
>... guess which one we got
I'm guessing the one with less opposition. I don't know how legislation works there, but do you really think the Prime Minister would be able to pull off election reform without broad support from the legislature? When you attack the heart of the problem, you attack the heart of the current power structure. You hear "eliminate the systematic problems that keep the government from representing the people", the legislators hear "eliminate the gravy train that lets us do what we want without fear of losing our position"
You'd better believe marijuana legalization was the far easier battle to win.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday January 27 2020, @07:55PM (5 children)
Yeah: the system as it is seems to slightly favour the Liberals (Trudeau), so yeah: he fed us a line and we took it.
I'm hoping that in the future (near future) people will remember this and vote differently.
I've been supporting the Greens for about 10 years now and have seen them climb steadily.... basically I'm supporting anarchy against the current system while hoping the Greens will actually keep promises and enact electoral reform AND environmental reform.
Here in Canada, the province of Alberta had HUGE...and I mean BIGGLY amounts of oil money coming in...a surplus to choke Scrooge McDuck. Instead of spending it on researching green alternatives to oil, the changing provincial governments spent it on goodies for the people.
Now that the price of oil has dropped, the crying has begun about no money coming in: they COULD be in great shape with green patents and green jobs. Instead, they're stuck in a revenue model of the 70's.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday January 27 2020, @08:54PM (4 children)
Is it feeding you a line if he'd actually want to do it? (Not that I have any idea if he would) It's just not something in one man's power to push - you'd need huge support in the legislature as well - how many pro-election-reform legislators do you currently have? My guess is not many. And without that support the fight is dead before it even starts.
Politicians mostly fight the easy battles - victories make them look good, and if there's no real effect to the flow of money or power, then they'll mostly be fighting against politicians who wish to use the opposition to appeal to their base - and those may actually be best served by losing the battle.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday January 27 2020, @09:04PM (3 children)
Yeah: i think Canadians wanted election reform, but yeah: his fellow cabinet members (Liberal) knew that election reform would actual harm them so they quietly let it go away.
Which is why i support Green. They say they support reform: if they were to drop that, i would tell them what's what and drop support.
People need to be more vocal and aware and election 'woke' (although i hate the word, the idea is okay). Too many people vote Conservative, then hate the
Conservatives and vote Liberal, then hate the Liberals and vote Conservative.... too many people DON'T THINK.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by NickM on Monday January 27 2020, @10:07PM (2 children)
I a master of typographic, grammatical and miscellaneous errors !
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Gaaark on Monday January 27 2020, @10:55PM (1 child)
Read some of it and so far like it: the problem is, why do people STILL use Windows: because it is too difficult/no knowledge of other systems. "i can use windows or i can use apple.....i'm using Linux? Really??? I thought i was using android!Too many people are idiots and vote conservative, then vote liberal, then vote conservative, then vote liberal....or vote conservative with no idea, really, why they do.
People are stupid: BUT, i will look further into P3.... this looks interesting: i like the personal choice.
But the people who use windows because "What else is there"....... will they be smart enough to SEE a difference...a choice....another FECKING UNIVERSE.
"To paraphrase Mackenzie King, Canada has little history but a lot of geography."
VERY true: which is Alberta's problem right now because of a lack of forward thinking.
Okay: read teh meat of it. I like it: vote for WHO you want, plus the party you want, plus it opens competition between candidates! Makes good sense!
THIS should be part of the educational system. Period.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 27 2020, @11:47PM
Never mind that Trudeau promised electoral reform, then sent out surveys asking tricky questions that weren't "do you want electoral reform Y/N" or "which one of these options for electoral reform (including none) do you prefer", then throwing up his hands and saying the people didn't want it...
Never mind that for the 2019 election, Trudeau asked for strategic voting to avoid a conservative victory, whereas if he actually followed through with his electoral reform promise there would be absolutely no need for strategic voting...
On the other hand you have the conservatives that "solved" first past the post many years ago by their unite-the-right merging of the major parties right of center, because they weren't getting elected enough due to vote splitting. A solution to the first past the post problem that's simple, elegant, and wrong. So if you're slightly more right of center than the Liberals, your only option is the one conservative party, which admittedly has much more of a chance now because now only the non-conservative parties' votes are split. But there's no room for a range of conservatism, you're either with them or against them.
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Tuesday January 28 2020, @02:40AM
He ran the numbers and realized that if electoral reforms had already been in place, he would not have won. He's a lying coward. A faux feminist who didn't hesitate to blame the women in his cabinet when he was caught meddling in a legal case, after publicly dressing down the Chinese over Huawei, saying "In Canada, our justice system is independent of political meddling."
The only reason he heads a minority government is that, like the last US election, the opposition ran the worst candidate possible. You couldn't get more wishy-washy, or more pasty-faced a candidate, if you took an empty suit and hung it out in the rain.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @10:20AM
Two major reasons.
1. It would need constitution changes. Opening constitution is bad idea in Canada, since Quebec (the frenchies) didn't even ratify it. Last one someone tried to do this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meech_Lake_Accord [wikipedia.org]
it wasn't very good. Almost ended up breaking up Canada
2. people don't actually support these changes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_British_Columbia_electoral_reform_referendum [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_British_Columbia_electoral_reform_referendum [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Ontario_electoral_reform_referendum [wikipedia.org]
That's why Trudeau stopped. It sounded good but it's not something that people actually want or even care about. And that's why Canada will always have either a Liberal government or a Conservative government and sometimes a coalition government.
The only major polarization I see in Canada is the idiots at Fox News polarizing the Canadian conservative voters through their propaganda bullshit.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 27 2020, @09:46PM (9 children)
You might have first past the post, but you also have a Prime Minister instead of the US having a President with king-like power.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday January 27 2020, @09:54PM (5 children)
We also didn't have #NeverHillary, so yeah. Trump or Hillary was like Idiot or Douche-bag: not really a choice.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Tuesday January 28 2020, @12:53AM (4 children)
More like warmongering-bloodSoaked-psychopath vs. douchebag. We're lucky we got the douche.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @02:53AM (3 children)
Ah yes, thank GOD we got the narcissistic douche who almost kicked off WW3 a few times....
More like thank ALLAH and MOHAMMED that the Iranians know Trump is a crazy piece of shit and didn't up the ante.
Try again you crazy apologist, the only good thing that might come from Trump is a bunch of real reforms to reign in future abuses of power. I guess we should be grateful you're finally starting to realize the reality that is the Trump admin, but I won't hold my breath about you ever taking responsibility for the damage he has caused. Which is why you still say better than Clinton as that lets you stand by your decision and not feel the guilt for the damage he has caused.
Preeeeetty pathetic, but better than another Civil War!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Tuesday January 28 2020, @02:56AM (1 child)
Yes -- thank fucking spaghetti monster -- HRC would have succeeded at WWIII for sure. Trump's fucked it up so in fact, we are all better off.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @04:56AM
I do recall Trump making comments about nuking the middle east, also echoed all the time by his supporters. Then he drops the MOAB, doesn't pull out of the ME, and assassinates an Iranian general?
Yeah, so you bet on Mad Dog Trumpen and him being a fuck up is how you try to pretend putting him in office wasn't a total cock up?
The journey to reality is a slow one. I assume you're an older gent from the generation taught that admitting being wrong is a sign of weakness, and weakness is for liberal homosexual commies.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday January 28 2020, @05:29AM
And yet... can you images the consequences of Hillary doing the same and more [youtube.com]?
Now, honestly, tell me you don't feel lucky now,
pun...err, sorry, I take this one back(grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 5, Insightful) by NickM on Monday January 27 2020, @10:35PM (2 children)
A Canadian prime minister in a majority government is as powerful as a president thanks to the P.M.O. stronghold on the governing party caucus but in a minority government compromise is the name of the game.
In my opinion, a minority government is a better government: as the checks and balances works!
I a master of typographic, grammatical and miscellaneous errors !
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @12:09AM (1 child)
IMO the problem with Canadian minority governments is there are too many votes of confidence; too many opportunities for failed legislation to result in an election; after enough of these, people get tired of going to the polls and vote not for who they want but for who they think will get a majority so their votes can stick this time.
I'd much prefer for a failed confidence vote in a minority government to just mean "OK, that didn't work, what additional compromise do we have to make to get more votes for this piece of legislation?" instead of "flush the previous election results down the toilet and start over!"
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @12:56AM
A minority government only fails if it can't pass a budget or if it loses an explicit no-confidence vote, which is similar to a US impeachment vote, and frankly those are rare occasions. It has never been a problem.