![]() ![]() Affective polarization around partisan identities is as strong in the United States as it is around racial identities ( Iyengar and Westwood 2015). Political scientists call this ‘affective polarization’: the tendency of members of different groups to dislike, distrust, and hold negative stereotypes about each other. Polarization in the United States today focuses far more on social identities than on issues or policy differences ( Mason 2018). Such statements both express and amplify partisan polarization. some of those folks-they are irredeemable’ ( Reilly 2016). The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic-you name it. In response, Hillary Clinton claimed in her stump speech that ‘you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. He won enthusiastic cheers from many followers at his rallies for such racist statements. These are animals’ ( Phillips 2017 Korte and Gomez 2018). Donald Trump notoriously attacked undocumented Mexican immigrants as rapists and drug runners. Leading politicians have promoted this pattern of discourse. Conservatives often respond to such calls by attacking ‘cancel culture’ and ‘political correctness’. The video attracted numerous denunciations of the harasser as well as demands that the negligent police officer be fired. When Irizarry posted a video of the harassment on social media, it went viral. But he dismissed her concern ( Schmidt 2018).Ī common response on the Left to such incidents is mass public shaming and calls for punishment. … the world is not going to change the United States of America, period.’ Feeling threatened, Irizarry begged a nearby police officer, who was watching, to intervene to stop the harassment. … You’re not going to change us, you know that. Apparently unaware that Puerto Rico is a territory of the United States and that its citizens are US citizens, he told her, ‘You should not be wearing that in the United States of America. When she arrived at the park, a man followed her around and berated her for wearing a shirt depicting the flag of Puerto Rico. In 2018, Mia Irizarry rented a picnic area in a Chicago park for her birthday celebration. To sharpen our understanding of these problems, it is helpful to focus on some characteristic cases. I will call disinformation and harassment ‘toxic discourse’ because it is poisonous to truth-seeking, trust, and democracy itself. It also sows distrust and division, which obstructs the willingness of people to cooperate with others when joint action is necessary to solve urgent problems we face together. Such discourse often displaces measured, evidence-based discussion of the problems we face together. Call this class of discourse ‘harassment’. ![]() Second, people often respond to political differences with hate speech, insults, trolling, and threats, as well as mass public shaming at a scale and intensity grossly disproportionate to the alleged offense. In the context of the pandemic, some of this disinformation-including false claims about COVID-19 prevention and cures and about the purported dangers of COVID-19 vaccines-has been deadly. ![]() Call this class of discourse ‘disinformation’ for short. First, we are flooded with false and misleading claims, conspiracy theories, and propaganda. Political discourse in the United States and other democracies today is seriously awry. (2022) “Can We Talk?: Communicating Moral Concern in an Era of Polarized Politics”, Keywords: Democracy, communication, disinformation, toxic discourse These alternatives are part of an ethos of democratic communication, which ordinary citizens should practice to enable democracy to succeed. Yet, when the point of raising facts is to orient others to moral concerns, how can we communicate these concerns without blaming and shaming those who resist? Without denying that these practices are sometimes justified, I suggest alternative ways to communicate moral concerns so that those who resist shame and blame, and who fear those who raise concerns, can come to share them. When people interpret every concern raised by a different group as an attack on their own group’s standing, they resist consideration of the facts to avoid exposure to shame and blame. Such competition and antagonistic feelings derail democratic practices, including fact-based discussion of problems and policies to address them. These forms of discourse activate and express esteem competition among rival identity groups, as well as ethnocentric fear and resentment. Democracy is endangered by toxic political discourse, including disinformation, harassment, and mass shaming. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |