Political Polarization (7): Polarization is the Business Model

Or why we need Russel Wilson jerseys

As I’ve worked my way through this series on political polarization over the last three weeks, I’ve looked at a variety of characteristics of people that help them take rigid positions and not make space for others. I’ve looked at how we read history, the media we consume, tribalism, identity, catastrophism, and geography. Over the last 15 years, we’ve seen these differences metastasize in ways that make Left and Right into cocooned blocks that are nearly impossible to navigate. Any attempt to ameliorate matters is met with staunch opposition. To offer but one example: because Rusty Bowers (speaker of the Arizona house) testified before the Jan 6th committee, the Arizona GOP formally censured him today saying that he “no longer a Republican in good standing”.

While those separated blocks of partisans are now deeply entrenched in our political world, they didn’t arise organically. There are a number of sources that helped feed that polarization. Those sources did so because it’s good for their bottom line. In this newsletter, I want to offer some observations about those sources and how they benefit from polarization and how compromise for the greater good isn’t in their business model.

Political Operatives

I recently read three books by political operatives to go along with one I read last fall. Two were by former Republicans reflecting on their past work and two were by Democrats working from 2008 to 2020. All four give interesting insights into campaigning and political communication. In order of recency, they are Lis Smith’s Any Given Tuesday, Tim Miller’s Why We Did It, Dan Pfeiffer’s Battling the Big Lie, and Stewart Stevens’ It Was All a Lie. Three of them have some sober reflections on the nature of the work they do.

Consider this reflection from Stewart Stevens:

I come to this not out of bitterness but out of sadness. It's not that I failed. I was paid to win races for Republicans, and while I didn't win every race, I had the best win-loss record of anyone in my business. So yes, blame me. Blame me when you look around and see a dysfunctional political system and a Republican Party that has gone insane. To be sure, others share blame, but if there is any sane path forward for something resembling a conservative governing philosophy in America-and I'm not sure there is--it must start with honesty and accountability. I have this crazy idea that a return to personal responsibility begins with personal responsibility. It is a strange, melancholy feeling to turn sixty-five and realize that what you have spent a good portion of your life working for and toward was not only meritless but also destructive (3-4).

Here’s Lis Smith:

It serves as a cautionary tale about the bunker mentality that can consume a campaign. To us, Christie was a bully. He was the enemy. He would routinely launch over-the-top attacks at Corzine and other political opponents. If he could dehumanize his opponents, why couldn’t we (79)?

Here’s Tim Miller:¹

I began to stare at my own work through a different light. Not the PR kingpin and badass dark artist engaging in shrewd subterfuge. But the putz who was being used by some of the forces that contributed to the latest wave of white nationalism in America and the election of a truly evil man. I was favor-trading with people who were causing real-world harm so I could get a pat on the head from some client who wanted self-serving scuttlebutt fed to the rubes. To what end? Shouldn’t I be doing something more productive and virtuous with my skills? I was making all the same mistakes that had gotten me and the party in trouble in the first place. I was compartmentalizing my bad actions and only focusing on the positives. I was not acting with the integrity I was demanding of others. I wasn’t taking the ramifications of my work seriously, but rather was cashing checks and acting as if it was all part of some big game devoid of real-world consequences (109).

I find these moral reflections fascinating. Recognizing the compartmentalization Miller says in necessary to do the work of a political operative is a brave step. Seeing that there is more than winning and losing is significant. But Stewart, Smith, and Miller are but a fraction of the political operatives out there. Most likely lack the moral reflection we see here.²

Those operatives need to keep the polarization going or their livelihood suffers greatly. Become the moral conscience of your party and you might not get hired for the next polarized (and polarizing) campaign.

Performative Politicians

One-term congressman Madison Cawthorne said when elected that he was more interested in communication than policy. Representative Marjorie Taylor-Greene (she without committee assignments) has her own Facebook Live page to record her daily rants. Others use the CSPAN daily orders that allow politicians to speak for a minute to get on the local news or feed their next newsletter.

Another place where performance drives polarization is in congressional hearings. Politicians’ questions hiding within monologues use information out of context to badger witnesses and score points for their side.³ An effective video hit will quickly be shared with supporters in the next (never-ending) fundraising drive.

This happen on the Democratic side of the aisle as well, but seems overall less strident (but watch out for Rep. Katie Porter’s Whiteboard!) I’d note in passing that the January 6th Select Committee provides a model of what congressional hearings would look like when stripped of their polarizing tendencies.

Podcasters, YouTubers, and Fringe Media

A great deal of Pfeiffer’s book deals with how these new media sources have dramatically changed the game. These new media sources have the luxury of low production costs combined with significant reach. Some are now aggregators whose sold purpose is to drive online advertising revenue using material from other outlets. Others, like Steve Bannon, run a daily diatribe on YouTube that fills the Rush Limbaugh vacuum. Turning Point Media, the Daily Caller, Brietbart, all have the ability to eventually drive coverage into mainstream news.

This connects with the performative politicians who can do a 20 minute podcast hit without every having to travel to public events. Our Covid-developed Zoom skills have turned audio events into YouTube events that are easily clipped and shared.

There is space for a middle-ground podcast but its much harder to manage than the polarized versions. And because they are dependent upon expanding subscription bases, they can’t effectively compete. The market rewards the extremists.

Think Tanks and 501C4s

In the last 40 years, the number of think tanks has increased, especially on the conservative side. So have 501C4s (issue advocacy groups). You know all of those television ads telling you to “call Senator [Name] and tell him not to support [Bill]”? Those likely are 501C4 organization or a SuperPac representing a particular industry segment. They don’t want polarization to lessen (or even to present a rational argument on the potential impacts of the proposal they are opposing).

They have a narrowly defined mission (e.g., drowning the federal government in the bathtub, selecting traditionalist judges, protecting vulnerable wildlife from industry impacts) and aren’t particularly concerned with the tradeoffs necessary to pursue good governance. Many of them are definitionally oppositional, designed to stop what “the other side” hopes to do.

Identitarians and Grifters

“Identitarians” is a high-powered word that Ezra Klein used in his book on polarization mentioned in second newsletter in this series. He means that there are people who have come to incorporate their partisan identity and the accompanying antagonism toward the other side deeply into their sense of self. This is, unfortunately, the natural byproduct of our polarized politics.

One of the recognitions political observers have come to in recent years is that it’s not just partisan politicians and media who are feeding polarization. It’s become part of the identitarian base. Stray from those identities (as Rusty Bower did) and your political future is bleak. Question those identities on social media or mainstream media and you face extreme pushback (and potentially declining subscriptions).

P.T. Barnum is said to have claimed that there is a sucker born every minute. In terms of this newsletter, every identitarian is a mark that can be exploited.

Identitarianism is necessary to sell Trump flags, Black Lives Matter flags, FJB signs, and Blue Lives Matter car decals. Somebody is readily cashing in on that market. There were reports in 2016 of mom-and-pop screen print operations that were making pro-Trump and anti-Trump t-shirts to sell at events.

That’s part of what we’re learning about the run-up to January 6th. If they believe deeply enough, they can be encouraged to travel to DC to a Stop the Steal rally.

They can be encouraged to give money to Build The Wall, even though the money didn’t build the wall but went to Steve Bannon and his partners (for which Bannon was pardoned).

They can even be encouraged to give money to the Official Election Defense Fund which, as we learned in the first January 6th hearing, never existed.

It’s tempting to draw the parallel between identitarianism and being a sports fan⁴. If you are rabid enough of a Broncos fan, you need to go buy a Russel Wilson jersey. But if the Broncos don’t make the playoffs, it’s not the same sentiment as political identity. Imagine that the only way to watch the sporting event required everyone to wear a jersey to get into the stadium. Sure team loyalty would be great, with all that Blue and Orange in the stadium. But underneath it all were thousands and thousands of jerseys being sold at upgraded prices.

It’s trite, I know. But sometimes we really do understand our political moment by following the money.

1. I’m going to see Tim give a book talk in Denver tomorrow night. I’ll add anything new I learn in the comments.

2. The second half of Miller’s book explores the motivations of some of those others who are compartmentalizing still.

3. I saw a good example of this on Twitter yesterday. Rep. Peters (R-PA) told Transportation Secretary Buttigieg that the average price of an electric car was $55,000 and that the electricity cost of charging one was $100 per month. Buttigieg had data from auto manufacturers putting the price $20,000 less. A quick internet search I did showed the cost of charging your electric car to be closer to $35 a month. I did see an article claiming what Peters argued, but that “average” includes high end Tesla models which drive up the average.

4. I did learn from her book that Lis Smith is a rabid Bengals fan, dating to back when they were perennial horrible.