Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by janrinok on Monday January 27 2020, @05:46PM   Printer-friendly

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

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @03:04PM (6 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @03:04PM (#950076)

    "Gee, sure is a nice life you've got here. Be a real shame if everyone found out about that abortion wouldn't it"

    "Gee, sure is a nice building you've got here. Be a real shame if it burned down wouldn't it"

  • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Tuesday January 28 2020, @04:05PM (4 children)

    by barbara hudson (6443) <> on Tuesday January 28 2020, @04:05PM (#950108) Journal

    Hey, they aren't willing to practice what they preach, - "what would Jesus do?" - even Jesus publicly condemned the hypocrites. If they don't like it, they can always rewrite the bible again.

    Or they can stop being hypocrites. Stand up for the rights of women to control their own bodies. Religions that don't allow that deserve to be publicly humiliated for their hypocrisy, same as politicians who publicly want lgbt to burn in hell but are themselves in the closet. Practice what you preach or STFU (stop preaching).

    I can't believe how cowardly people have become. 10 years ago I was walking my dogs (this is post-transition but before my eyes went, so at 143 pounds and 5'7" I wasn't exactly an imposing figure). I turned the corner and saw what I first thought was a gang of people around one individual kicking a dog. Well, can't have that ...

    As I got closer, I saw that it was a black guy pounding the crap out of another black guy, surrounded by about 20 other blacks cheering him on. So I got in the face of the guy doing the beating, while all the other white folk going home from the commuter train just turned their heads away as they passed by, studiously avoiding even being seen as noticing it.

    What is wrong with you people? You only do right when it's at no personal risk? You won't intervene to stop violence because you might get hurt? Kind of stupid logic - someone else is getting hurt, wouldn't you want them to intervene if the situation were reversed?

    Or is there also an element of racism? "It's just the way those people are." "They're not one of us, so I'm not getting involved." "We don't behave like that, so they deserve what they get."

    Bullies always need to be confronted. When the cops showed up, they wanted me away from the mob, so I left, but what would have happened if I had done what cowards do and looked the other way because "don't get involved?"

    Every white person who walked by without even stopping made me ashamed to be white. "White privilege" so quickly becomes "white cowardice."

    SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
    • (Score: 2) by deimtee on Tuesday January 28 2020, @07:04PM (3 children)

      by deimtee (3272) on Tuesday January 28 2020, @07:04PM (#950183) Journal

      Hey, they aren't willing to practice what they preach, - "what would Jesus do?" - even Jesus publicly condemned the hypocrites. If they don't like it, they can always rewrite the bible again.

      I will stand by my assertion that group punishments are evil. You want to punish women who got abortions, for what other, probably unrelated, people are doing. You are evil.


      As for the rest of your post, wow, I don't often see that level of unconscious racism. It's lucky you were there to take care of them poor darkies. /sarcasm.

      If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
      • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Tuesday January 28 2020, @08:47PM (2 children)

        by barbara hudson (6443) <> on Tuesday January 28 2020, @08:47PM (#950217) Journal

        Groups that commit the crime, do the time. You drive the getaway car, you're still charged with the murder of the bank guard.

        We're social beings, and we understand collective responsibility. It's when collective responsibility collapses, as it has in the case of the hypocrites who push against women's right to get an abortion but themselves procure abortions, that the sense of collective responsibility collapses. It becomes "one law for me and mine, another for the rest of you dirty scum."

        The best way to deal with hypocrisy is to expose it. All the anti-abortionists who like the thump the bible need to learn that Jesus exposed the hypocrites because he hated them with a passion. You simply cannot be a hypocrite and a christian according to the bible.

        And if we throw away the bible, then where's their basis for undermining a woman's right to control her own body? There is none. Same as nobody is telling them that everyone has to get an abortion, nobody should be saying that nobody can have an abortion. It's my body, my life - abortion, euthanasia, sex change,sexual orientation, nobody else has a right to tell me what to do with my body.

        People who have had abortions or procured abortions for someone they got pregnant and still say that others don't have a right to an abortion are hurting those who want abortions. We see it all the time with both anti-abortion laws and withholding funding for sex education and contraception.

        The Hyde Amendment needs to go, as do all other anti-abortion laws. They are causing needless suffering. If exposing hypocrites is part of that process, "pour encourager les autres" to be a bit less hypocritical, hey, don't be a hypocrite. Be honest about why it was necessary in your case, and encourage compassion and abortion services for others in the same situation.

        Or don't. But this is 2020 - do you really believe that anything can be kept a secret? All those fake "family planning clinics" that are there only to try to coerce women into not getting abortions by such devious tactics as showing other people's unltrasounds and saying "see - this is your baby, you're too far along to get an abortion anyway" are committing fraud.

        On the other hand, since they're very careful not to go over the line into actually offering real medical care, they can sell their "client lists" - and if someone gets them one way or another it's not a HIPPA violation. So perhaps the best way to end that scam is to leak their client lists. Maybe that will get google to stop donating free advertising to them. At the very least, it will make people more aware that there are fake "clinics" out there who don't have women's best interests at heart, same as they don't have any other child's interest at heart after birth. When it comes to helping a woman and child, there are plenty of Christians who become ultra-libertarians. "Food stamps? Quit sponging off my tax dollars" - even though poor nutrition early in life results in a lifetime of extra costs to society.

        The anti-abortionists are bullies, and deserve to be treated as such. That includes the women who, by their silence, encourage the curtailment of a basic civil right - the right to control your own body.

        They're in the same boat as someone who sees violence in front of them and yet doesn't intervene, but still says they're against violence. They're not, not really.

        Which brings us to your final innuendo. I was not wrong to intervene when I saw a mob beating on one person. The fact is, when it's black-on-black violence, most whites are chickenshit. The bystander effect [] (better labelled as bystander apathy) kicks into high gear.

        People are sometimes asked how they would act in hypothetical situations, such as when someone if being attacked. Oftentimes, it's "I would have acted differently." But that's just wishful thinking. I know I would act because I don't even hesitate to weigh out the pros and cons - and neither should anyone else. Someone is getting beaten up - you need to try to stop it, end of discussion. Same as if you're the one getting beaten up, you want others to try to intervene, not dither about whether it's too risky. When you dither, you put yourself at greater risk because you can't catch everyone else off-balance. You certainly don't want to give them the chance to assess the situation and realize that you're alone. And you don't want to give yourself the chance to be afraid and perhaps reconsider your options.

        I intervene because it is the right thing to do. I learned as a kid that bullies will beat the crap out of you either way, so might as well do the right thing. It makes them think twice the next time they want to beat up on someone.

        After all, bullies are the second-biggest cowards going. The biggest? Those who try to defend not intervening, because they know deep down that they would cut and run in a second.

        SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
        • (Score: 2) by deimtee on Tuesday January 28 2020, @09:34PM (1 child)

          by deimtee (3272) on Tuesday January 28 2020, @09:34PM (#950244) Journal

          That's a big wall of text, which entirely misses the point.

          I don't care about the bible, and I am a pro-liberty, pro-choice, atheist.

          I have an ethical objection to group punishments.

          You are advocating ruining peoples lives for something other people are doing. Do you really think some young girl who was raped and had an abortion has any control over what the bible thumpers are doing? Your blackmail won't work because she doesn't have that control. So you want to out her and fuck up her life because you can't tell the difference between an individual and some nebulous group you object to.

          Let's get a bit more personal here. You've repeatedly stated in the past that many transsexuals are sex workers. I don't know if it's legal where you are, but if it isn't, should the cops arrest you for soliciting? Or if it is legal, should we just call you a whore?

          If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
          • (Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Tuesday January 28 2020, @10:06PM

            by barbara hudson (6443) <> on Tuesday January 28 2020, @10:06PM (#950267) Journal
            No, only those who did it and lied about it, and condemn others for doing the same. It's a very specific group - anti-abortionists who have procured abortions for themselves or a family member. If someone got an abortion in the past or aided someone to, and still condemns others today, they are lying hypocrites. If they got or procured an abortion in the past and are now not against abortion, they are not lying hypocrites. It's only the hypocrites, who continue to deny others what they in secret had themselves, who merit being called out.

            You totally missed the point. There are two different groups, and only one are hypocrites. As for calling me a whore, I've been called far worse, and no, I've never been a sex worker. Though one of my sisters did say I dressed like a prostitute because I had the top 3 buttons of my top open in 90 degree weather. Or maybe it was the 2" hoop earrings? Probably both. My reaction? "Works for me." When it's 90 degrees in the shade I'm going to dress for the weather. Top and skirt. Maybe a sun hat. Sandals or barefoot in the grass beside the sidewalk.

            Hardly makes me a whore. But it also doesn't invalidate that many transsexuals engage in the sex trade. Two different groups - those who do and those who don't. Same as anti-abortionists who have procured abortions, and those who haven't. Only the first group are self-entitled hypocrites.

            SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
  • (Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday January 29 2020, @09:27AM

    by sjames (2882) on Wednesday January 29 2020, @09:27AM (#950563) Journal

    You're making assumptions not suggested by OP.