w3

Question 1

• Between whom does polarization take place?

Answer 1

There are no such things as the groups that are polarized, u need to know the case to klnow which groups are polarized

Question 2

• Is too much disagreement problematic for democracy?

Answer 2

Yes,
- some level of disagreement is essential for healthy debate and representation,
- excessive disagreement can lead to affective polarization, eroding trust in democratic institutions and hindering constructive dialogue.
- This can create a hostile political environment, making compromise difficult and undermining democratic norms
- political gridlock

Question 3

• Is too much hostility between political camps problematic for democracy?¸

Answer 3

Yes,
- While some level of disagreement is essential for healthy debate and representation
- excessive disagreement can lead to affective polarization, eroding trust in democratic institutions and hindering constructive dialogue.
- This can create a hostile political environment, making compromise difficult and undermining democratic norms
- gridlock

Question 4

why od we use US as archetypical polarization

Answer 4

• has 2 clearly identifiable poles

Question 5

Where to look for the poles

Answer 5

• poles are shaped by our political identities
• partizan identities,ideological identities, issue identities, leader identities, populism-antipopulism divide

Question 6

what is a partisan identity

Answer 6

• occurs in 2(few) parties, its which party do you choose

Question 7

ideologica identity

Answer 7

worldwiev, its a set of ideas that aspired to explain the world and to change it

Question 8

whats more polarizing ideological identity or partisan identity

Answer 8

“identity-based elements of ideology are capable of driving heightened levels of affective polarization against outgroup ideologues, even at low levels of policy attitude extremity or constraint”
Identifying with an ideology creates polarization regardless of actual attitudes

Question 9

identities issues

Answer 9

• identity that forms abt a certain issue - Brexit

Question 10

leader identities

Answer 10

identities that form aroun a certain leader

Question 11

populims vs anti-populism

Answer 11

A special distinction between those that support populist parties (especially the populist radical right) and those that oppose them

populism - a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.

Question 12

are there 2 pols in the NL

Answer 12

no pols but there are blocks,
Mainstream left, mainstream right, populist radical right
But gradual, as (cultural) distance grows
Coldest feelings between mainstream and populist parties

Question 13

is ideological polarization a problem for democracy

Answer 13

1. ideological polarisation on the level of elites and citizens is inherent to democracy
2. its required to some degree for meaningful competition - so that we dont have cartel politics
3. but too much can make democrycy disfunctional - leads to a gridlock
4. the sweet spot of idelogical polarisation - dproductive disagreements without intolerance or gridlock

Question 14

ideological polarisation

Answer 14

The extent to which citizens become ideologically entrenched in their own values and political beliefs (group consensus), thereby increasing the divide between citizens who hold different values and beliefs”

Question 15

what 2 levels/types of ideological polarisation exist

Answer 15

Divergence in values and beliefs can occur among scitizens (“mass”) and politicians (“elite”)
so Mass vs elite ideological polarization

Question 16

what are the types of polarization

Answer 16

• ideological
• elite
• affective
• social

Question 17

what do we want from democacy

2 ways of thinking

Answer 17

2 ways of thinking abgt democracy
1. Technocratic and deliberative approaches
- Through democratic debate and procedures we arrive at the best solution (the common good) Or even the general will
2. Democracy as conflict
Disagreement is the reason behind democracy, rather than a problematic outcome
- Some disagreement is required to make democracy function

Question 18

how can lack of polarisation be the problem

Answer 18

By taking positions that are more ideologically dispersed, polarized parties also clarify to voters what their position is and how their position differs from the positions of their competitors”
the more ideologically polarized party systems have
(1) higher turnout rates
(2) increased proximity voting
The absence of a distinct political choice
…weakens the political linkage between citizens and representatives
…creates disillusionement

Question 19

dangers of ideological polarisation

Answer 19

Too much ideological polarization…
…can spark affective polarization
…erodes the middle ground needed to accept compromise
…can create political gridlock

Question 20

gridlock

Answer 20

is a situation when there is difficulty passing laws that satisfy the needs of the people. A government is gridlocked when the ratio between bills passed and the agenda of the legislature decreases.

Question 21

is affective polarization a problem for democracy

Answer 21

1. Affective polarization is to some degree inherent to democracy
2. Some see it as necessary for democracy (agonism)
3. Others emphasize it also has positive consequences (mobilization, backlash against illiberal actors)
4. Empically, affective polarization does not always erode democratic norms…
5. …but the dangers are real enough (but highly contextual)

Question 22

what do we want from democracy

Answer 22

democracy as an agreement to disagree
- no hard feelings
- citizenship requires accepting other positions
Democracy as conflict
* The stakes are high
* We want citizens to be involved
* We cannot expect them to refrain from emotions

Question 23

Why is politics (always) emotional and conflictual

Answer 23

Political conflict is an almost perfect form of intergroup conflict
* - Clear labels and symbols as basis for identities
* - Zero-sum outcomes, u win or loose
* - (Realistic and symbolic) threats

Question 24

Does affective polarization erode democratic norms

Answer 24

Affective polarization is to some degree inherent to
democracy
Some see it as necessary for democracy (agonism)
Others emphasize it also has positive consequences (mobilization, backlash against illiberal actors)
Empically, affective polarization does not always erode democratic norms…
but the dangers are real enough (but highly contextual)

Question 25

Angonism vs antagonism

Answer 25

- democracy is about moving societal conflicts inti the political realm - **Agonism**: the opponent as adversary (to fight within the rules of thegame) - **Antagonism**: the opponent as enemy (to defeat at all costs)

Question 26

how does context matter in affective polarizations effect on democratic norms

Answer 26

- Polarized against who? If the outgroup is the populist radical right, the (in)tolerance might already be fixed If the outgroup is undemocratic, an affective reaction might be a sign of resilience - In which system? In some societies, one can be more tolerant because your opponent is less threatening - How mobilized is society already? Affective polarization can involve and mobilize citizens (Harteveld & Wagner)

Question 27

in waht ways can affective polarization harm democratic norms

Answer 27

Affective polarization plausibly harm democratic norms, - it Increasing perceived threat - …and hence lowers acceptance of other’s rights - It Politicizes the norms - …by using motivated cognition to apply them selectively - …however, the empirical evidence is mixed

Question 28

what are some good questions to ask when dealing with political polarisation a political scientists guide to polarization

Answer 28

* Between whom does polarization take place? Which identities play a role? * Is polarization led by elites or does it emerge from society? * Is the disagreement productive, or does it create gridlock? * Do the antipathy and emotions involved stand in the way of tolerance?

Question 29

what are vertical and horisontal evaluations

Answer 29

Vertical and horizontal evaluations are concepts related to affective polarization and refer to the different ways citizens assess political groups, leaders, or other citizens. Vertical: Evaluations of elites or institutions. Horizontal: Evaluations of other citizens or partisans.

Question 30

do cultural or ethic issues lead to more affective polarization

Answer 30

cultural

Question 31

Democratic norms

Answer 31

are the unwritten rules and principles that support the functioning of democracy, such as respecting opponents' rights, accepting election results, and upholding free speech and fair political competition.

Question 32

Elite transgression

Answer 32

refers to actions by political leaders or elites that violate these democratic norms, such as breaking laws, undermining institutions, or using power in undemocratic ways to maintain control​

Question 33

How does ideological polarization differ from affective polarization?

Answer 33

Ideological polarization refers to a growing divide in political beliefs, while affective polarization involves emotional hostility toward opposing political groups

Question 34

Why is polarization seen as both necessary and dangerous for democracy?

Answer 34

Polarization is necessary for democracy because it fosters political debate and competition, helping to clarify different political options for voters. However, excessive polarization, especially affective polarization, can lead to democratic gridlock, undermine compromise, and erode the tolerance needed to accept political differences. This creates a risk for democracy when hostility between political groups overshadows constructive debate

Question 35

What are the consequences of excessive affective polarization on democratic norms?

Answer 35

Excessive affective polarization can lead to a breakdown of democratic norms, such as tolerance for opposing views, respect for democratic procedures, and willingness to accept electoral outcomes. It can make politics a zero-sum conflict where opponents are viewed as enemies, leading to a greater willingness to undermine democratic rights and processes to ensure victory

Question 36

In what ways does polarization manifest differently in two-party vs. multiparty systems?

Answer 36

In two-party systems like the U.S., polarization tends to create clear, opposing blocs with high levels of ideological and affective division. In multiparty systems like the Netherlands, polarization is more fragmented, with citizens expressing varying degrees of dislike toward multiple political groups, depending on ideological and issue-based distances. In the Netherlands, affective polarization is driven more by cultural issues and the populist radical right​

Question 36

How does affective polarization affect Dutch citizens’ views of political outgroups?

Answer 36

Dutch citizens exhibit stronger dislike toward political outgroups than toward non-political ones, such as those defined by region or ethnicity. The degree of dislike grows as the ideological distance between groups increases. For example, supporters of populist radical right parties are particularly disliked by those who oppose these parties, highlighting the emotional divide in Dutch politics

Question 37

Why are cultural issues more divisive than economic ones in fostering affective polarization?

Answer 37

Cultural issues, such as immigration and national identity, are seen as more morally charged and are tied to deeply held beliefs about identity and values. This makes them more emotionally divisive than economic issues, which may be viewed as negotiable or subject to compromise. Cultural conflicts trigger stronger emotional responses and contribute more to affective polarization​

Question 38

What role does the populist radical right play in deepening affective polarization in the Netherlands?

Answer 38

The populist radical right, with its strong positions on cultural issues such as nationalism and immigration, acts as a key driver of affective polarization in the Netherlands. Supporters of these parties are particularly disliked by others, and this group also dislikes mainstream political groups. This creates a sharper division within Dutch politics​

Question 39

How does affective polarization erode democratic norms?

Answer 39

by turning political opponents into enemies, leading citizens to support undemocratic actions such as limiting opponents’ rights or condoning rule-breaking by their own political leaders. When politics becomes a zero-sum game driven by emotions, citizens become more willing to disregard democratic principles in favor of winning at any cost​

Question 40

What mechanisms link affective polarization to support for political transgressions?

Answer 40

Affective polarization increases the perception of threat from political opponents, making citizens more likely to justify actions that undermine democratic norms. For example, highly polarized individuals are more likely to support leaders who break democratic rules to prevent the other side from gaining power. This selective application of democratic norms allows citizens to rationalize undemocratic behavior when it benefits their side

Question 41

How can affective polarization simultaneously threaten democracy and serve as a defense against illiberal actors?

Answer 41

Affective polarization can mobilize citizens against illiberal or anti-democratic actors, acting as a form of democratic resilience. For instance, citizens may withhold tolerance from parties they perceive as threatening democracy itself. However, this defensive posture can also spiral into a broader erosion of democratic norms if both sides view each other as existential threats, leading to a breakdown in mutual respect for democratic principles​

Question 42

What are some examples of how affective polarization manifests in different political contexts?

Answer 42

In two-party systems like the U.S., affective polarization manifests as deep hostility between supporters of the two major parties, often resulting in gridlock and an unwillingness to compromise. In multiparty systems like the Netherlands, affective polarization is more fragmented but still intense, particularly between mainstream and populist parties. In both cases, polarization can lead to increased intolerance and support for undemocratic measure