Most people view America’s two parties as the reason why we’re polarized, but what if they’re actually a solution to polarization? I had a thrilling discussion on this thesis with Stanford's Didi Kuo for the fourth episode of The Depolarizers podcast. Kuo argues that political parties play a central role in the democratic process: the problem is polarization, not partisanship. She makes the case that both major parties have been weakened by candidate-centered politics and that parties should be civic vehicles that prioritize the needs of individuals, helping them transcend narrow interests.
Kuo is a Center Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University. She oversees the program on American democracy and comparative perspective, which seeks to bridge academic and policy research on American democracy. She's the author of The Great Retreat: How Political Parties Should Behave and Why They Don’t and Clientelism, Capitalism, and Democracy: The Rise of Programmatic Politics in the United States and Britain.
The Historical Role of Parties
There is widespread cynicism toward parties today, but Kuo contends this is misguided. When she first entered academia, Kuo found that there was immense anti-party sentiment, even among those who consistently supported one party or another. She found this popular consensus to be directly at odds with the academic consensus, which argues that parties are essential building blocks for democracy.
She argues that parties are necessary for democracy to function and that reformers should focus on strengthening parties rather than trying to cultivate non-partisan politics.
American political parties were formed in the 18th century as part of the development of democratization. Parties provided a way to subordinate individual interests to a broader set of collective interests. Parties were also key aspects of the machinery of politics: they administered elections and printed ballots and pamphlets. Many of these responsibilities have been assumed by state and local governments, but we can see in the broad latitude that parties play a critical role in structuring primary elections, which means parties will continue to be core parts of the inner-workings of democracy.
Kuo states that one of the most important responsibilities of parties that has been lost over time is integrating and socializing voters into politics itself. This was done through civic spaces where people could come and discuss not just politics but other aspects of society.
The Weakening of Parties and Candidate-Centered Politics
While parties remain strong in terms of winning elections, Kuo argues they have become weaker in their representative and integrative functions. Parties have become more nationalized and professionalized, losing touch with local constituents. There's a tension between party-building and the increasing focus on individual candidates. Kuo notes this is especially pronounced in the Republican Party under Trump. She makes the case that as parties have become a means to simply winning power for an individual, they lose their role in organizing politics. Over the years, parties have developed ways to win elections without maintaining relationships with their constituencies, particularly between elections, and have failed to cultivate a strong presence within communities to really understand what communities need.
Partisanship vs. Polarization
Kuo distinguishes between partisanship (affiliation with a party) and polarization (increased ideological distance and animosity between parties). She makes the case that partisanship itself is not inherently problematic, but extreme polarization can be detrimental. Starting in the ’90s, a trend developed that is separate from intense partisanship: the rise of polarization. Strangely, as I discussed with Kuo, partisan identification has also decreased among voters.
The two parties used to be more closely aligned, willing and able to find common ground on an array of policy issues. But since the ’90s, they've diverged. Kuo points to measures like roll call votes in Congress and polls on how voters perceive members of the other party.
She says we even see it in their governing approaches. For example, Mitch McConnell once said that the goal of Republicans in Congress was to make President Obama a one-term president. That amount of partisan polarization – polarization that reflects hostility, antagonism and allergy to compromise – really turns off the majority of Americans.
And that brand of polarization, where the parties see each other as entities that must be existentially destroyed, is fundamentally bad for American politics.
The Importance of Local Engagement
Kuo says there is a need to revitalize local and state party organizations. The neglect of local and state offices by both parties created a vacuum in local power. She points to Steve Bannon, who has encouraged MAGA supporters to find their local Republican offices, then file some paperwork. The Trump followers assume a local political post, and in turn leverage that position to recruit volunteers for election administration and poll workers.
And, as we've seen in states like Arizona and Wyoming, the state Republican Party is out of step with the national party. That dynamic, however, is owed in part to down-ballot Republicans who have been able to step into largely vacant offices, then wield their newfound powers to do things like strip sitting senators of the party label. Parties need to have more energy at the local level rather than doubling down on purely national strategies if they're going to expand the map and intentionally and effectively appeal to voters.
How to Fix Democracy
To fix democracy, Kuo recommends starting with small steps that make one feel a little less powerless – even if that small step is as simple as writing a letter or making a call to your local representative about an issue you care about. That level of engagement can make one feel like politics can have a positive change in our lives. Kuo also suggests going local – attending a party meeting, or finding a local group you can support or engage with.
Kuo’s second recommendation is to talk to someone who you believe thinks very differently than you. She’s not necessarily indicating that you will depolarize America by finding all of our common ground and bridging all of our differences because these differences exist for a reason. However, it's often very easy to lean into the caricatures of people who are different from you. When you talk to them, you at least gain a better understanding of why they think the way they do, and you’re offered a reminder that we’re allowed to disagree on things. Understanding and learning where people are coming from is a valuable depolarizing tool as we work to lay the groundwork for a better America.
The Case Against Nonpartisanship
We’ll end on something that may be controversial to some less-engaged voters: Kuo argues that you should pick a party and not shy away from partisanship. She remarks:
“We tend to be a little naive in thinking that if we just got rid of the partisan label, we could get rid of these annoying power holders… But people with common interests in politics will always come together – you can’t wish away parties. No successful democracy has been able to. If you’re going to get parties or factional interests anyway, you might as well create long-term, lasting successful parties by not being afraid to work within that rubric and by not trying to dilute their [parties’] power through solutions that have sometimes been tested but have never been successful… We should think of partisanship as something that just describes how you participate in politics. You’re not doing something more noble if you are nonpartisan, and if we have goals that are partisan, that’s also fine. That’s just what politics is.”
Share this post