Our Problem Isn’t Polarization—It’s Sectarianism

Social Philosophy Today 39:139-163 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A common analysis of current U.S. politics identifies the main problem as ideological polarization leading to government dysfunction, and moderation as the main solution. But drawing from Martin Luther King Jr., I contend that the main problem is sectarianism or us-them thinking, leading to injustice, and the main solution a social movement of love and justice. Notably, while many call for deemphasizing ideas, my solution calls for more emphasis on ideas. The purpose of government is justice. The moderation solution, although superficially value-free, implicitly values the status quo or gradualism over justice, reflecting King’s “white moderate, who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice.” Sectarianism is bad for involving animosity toward outgroup members and undermining critical thinking, resulting in decision-making based on group power rather than rationality and justice. The moderation solution resembles sectarianism in encourag­ing decision-making based not on substance but relative to where others stand. Moreover, responding to injustice with moderation often involves capitulation to it. Counteracting sectarianism requires caring across group lines and making political decisions based on justice. A social movement, appealing to high ideals and broad solidarity—like King’s “extremism” for love and justice—is necessary to transform policies and our political culture.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,323

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Interthematic Polarization.Finnur Dellsén - 2024 - American Philosophical Quarterly 61 (1):45-58.
On the Cultivation of Civic Friendship.Myisha Cherry - 2021 - Journal of Philosophical Research 46:193-207.
An empirical perspective on improving trust in a polarized age.Diana C. Mutz - 2023 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 26 (4):585-592.
Misinformation and disagreement.Ritsaart Willem Peter Reimann & Mark Alfano - forthcoming - In Maria Baghramian, J. Adam Carter & Rach Cosker-Rowland (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Disagreement. Routledge.
Persistent Disagreement and Polarization in a Bayesian Setting.Michael Nielsen & Rush T. Stewart - 2021 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 72 (1):51-78.
The Law of Group Polarization.Cass Sunstein - 2003 - In James S. Fishkin & Peter Laslett (eds.), Debating Deliberative Democracy. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. pp. 80–101.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-07-27

Downloads
11 (#1,143,314)

6 months
5 (#648,315)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Tony White
State University of New York at Binghamton

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references