Democratic Polarization: A Necessity and a Threat

Polarization, vital for democratic discourse but harmful when extreme, is like the bubble in a carpenter’s level – if it veers too far either way, something’s wrong.

In recorded discussions with filmmaker Lauren Windsor on June 3, 2024, Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito and John Roberts offered contrasting views of America’s polarization. Alito, agreeing with Windsor’s interpretation of polarization as a win-lose situation, views it as dangerous because of uncompromisable fundamental differences. Conversely, Roberts takes a more optimistic stance, referencing historical periods such as the Civil War, the New Deal, and the Vietnam War as comparable levels of conflict.

Alito and Roberts: Contrasting Views on Polarization

Alito’s candid views on polarization are striking. Unlike Roberts, who compared judges to umpires in his 2005 Senate hearing, Alito is vocal about the ideological divide and indicates readiness to use his position to restore the country to “godliness.”

The justices’ differing perspectives could reflect their understanding of the Supreme Court’s role and influence their decision-making.

Fearful or Optimistic

The conservative Alito isn’t alone in finding polarization worrisome. Many on the left also express fears for democracy, especially with Donald Trump potentially winning the 2024 presidency. For Alito, compromise is unlikely and perhaps even undesirable – a sentiment shared by many on the left.

Roberts, meanwhile, refutes Windsor’s claim that current polarization might be irreparable. He likens extreme polarization to the Civil War and the Vietnam era where people were getting killed. This comparison raises the question – is the Vietnam war era comparable to today’s political climate?

Comparing Today’s Polarization to the Vietnam Era

In some respects, like party-line voting in Congress, there is greater polarization now than in the late 1960s and early 1970s. However, Roberts may be referring to the political violence of the Vietnam era, a context in which he is correct.

Political Violence in the 1960s and 1970s

The era was marked by political assassinations and violence in the streets. Notable figures, including President John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr., and Senator Robert F. Kennedy, were murdered. There were also numerous political uprisings and domestic bombings – an estimated 2,500 on U.S. soil in an 18-month period in 1971 and 1972.

Current State of Democracy

While present-day U.S. politics are deeply divided, they’re not characterized by widespread political violence. Although the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol was unprecedented, the perpetrators have faced prosecution and punishment.

In the recorded conversation, Roberts emphasizes that America has weathered troubled times before and emerged stronger. He suggests the same resilience should be expected now, despite the challenges posed by polarization. As history has shown, democracy often entails messy politics, but it is enduring and powerful.