Pallavi Pundir, Finalist in the 2024 CoBS Student CSR Article Competition at Monash Business School, contends that political polarisation has long-existed, but its acceleration in recent years needs a collaborative, realistic and firm response from those who believe in democracy.

Divided We Fall: Exploring the surge of political polarisation by Pallavi Pundir.

The Political Polarisation Puzzle: From Grass Roots Level to Global View

How many times have you lately walked down the street and seen political campaign posters ‘gripping’ you with catchy slogans? Have you had your Sunday family barbeque lunch derailed by relatives’ opposing political views? How many friends have you had debates with over political topics before that has resulted in personal attacks? Why is that fine line so easy to cross? And where and why does such drastic political conflict originate from?  

Political polarisation, as defined by political scientist Andreas Schedler (2023), is a conflict that has gone beyond the boundaries of innate ‘benign’ democratic conflict. It is where basic democratic consensus is abandoned and is replaced with ‘anything goes’ approach. Essentially, political polarisation occurs when basic democratic trust between parties and societal groups is broken.

When we ask where and why political polarisation is increasing, then we realise that governments are adopting an increased extremism pattern, leading to detrimental global implications (Ashby, 2021). Political ideologies are starting to adopt ‘identities’ with media being at the centre of societal bias (Spinde et al., 2022). Unfortunately, our world is increasingly moving towards a politically polarised landscape. And something must be done to resist this.

The Radical Edge: Extremist Tendencies in Political Polarisation

On a global scale, take the well-known example of the US: every Presidential Election season, we see the Electoral Map with every state voting spread either in red (Republicans) or blue (Democrats). Dividing the nation in such a binary way began back in the 1960s with the introduction of an intense anti-communism movement (Carothers & O’Donohue, 2019).

With this, three major issues flourished into the US political landscape that persist to this day and prompt the growth of extremism. They are the struggle for racial equality, the question whether the role of government should be a facilitator of progressive change (big government) or conservative resistance (small government) and lastly, the potential drastic influence of religion on politics that alter lawmaking and perspectives on social norms (Carothers & O’Donohue, 2019).  

These three issues prompt the growth of extremism (Carothers & O’Donohue, 2019). In seeking to appeal to various societal groups in their campaigns, politicians lean towards more extreme positions such as The Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement of the Trump presidential campaign in 2016. As explained by the Britannica Encyclopaedia (2024), the MAGA movement believed that America had lost its status due to immigration and multiculturalism with Trump’s ‘solution’ to build a border wall to Mexico. This way, racial inequality appealed successfully to the target audience.

Then, Trump proclaimed that the federal government was controlled by democratic ‘elites’. His promise to prioritise national over international interests easily attracted conservative white working-class voters, promoting conservative resistance (McKinney, 2024). Thus, Trump singlehandedly created his own social movement (Carothers & O’Donohue, 2019). Part of this movement was religious discrimination with his bold call for the “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the US”. The trifecta was completed and the MAGA identity was born. 

An obvious consequence of such nationalistic views was the disruption it caused to collaborative international relations. The Paris Agreement, for example, was established as a “legally binding international treaty on climate change” (United Nations, 2015). The US entered the Paris Agreement in 2014 only to leave during the Trump government and then re-enter once more with another change in government in 2021 (Hefker & Neugart, 2023; U.S Department of State, 2021).

The implications of these radical changes fuelled by politics do not seem so severe until we discover that the US (1 out of 195 countries) is responsible for the largest share of historical emissions than any other country in the world (approximately one fifth) (Carbon Brief, 2021). This is twice more than China- the world’s second largest contributor (Our World in Data, 2019). A nation that decides its level of commitment to our dying earth’s ecological preservation based on opposing political perspectives is sure to be a setback for much-needed international collaboration. And it all trickles down to the level of your everyday barbeque conversation.

Distorted Narratives and Divisive Agendas 

So, who or what fuels the political debate at your Sunday family lunch? Why is there always an inconsistency in the ‘facts’ your family throw at each other? In truth, media, identity politics and economic inequality are present all around us, constantly influencing our perspectives that are based on false information.    

Take the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, as an example. His success in manipulating an entire nation has caused international political polarisation. Putin was able to falsify media coverage to indoctrinate the population of Russia and instil his beliefs in them. As stated by Andreas Schedler (2023), polarisation occurs when there is a crossing of the bounds of democracy. All basic democratic trust was broken when families began to personally experience the lies that infected their loved ones. Friends severed all ties, communities fought in Facebook comments and families broke apart. And when Navalny, a Russian anti-corruption activist and politician, criticised and exposed Putin, posting drone footage of Putin’s glamourous homes, all $1.3 billion of which was embezzled from the state procurement system, he was poisoned, imprisoned, and murdered (Time Magazine, 2021). All for exposing the truth. Navalny sought to restore true democracy using media and tangible evidence to a land that was already so polarised, that it was to no avail. 

Just as in war, where motive is based on ideology, identity politics also have a long history of painting diversity in opinion in a negative light. More recently, at the 2023 Conference on post-Brexit Britain held in France, polarised groups of the Brexit issue were described as the ‘Leavers’ and ‘Remainers’: “two tribes with an irreconcilable world view”. Notice how there was only one of two diametrically opposed categories. Granted, this was a simple binary question. Yet, other issues cannot have only one of two answers but are still forced upon voters to choose. The reason for this is identity politics. Politicians know a catch phrase, or an extreme ideology is more effective in gaining supporters, rather than balanced views.

In Australia, the simplest example is the Labor and Coalition parties dominating the government. Out of 150 members in the Federal House of Representatives, 78 are Labor, 54 are part of the conservative Coalition and only 12 are independent (Parliamentary Education Office, 2024). And how do the Labor and Liberal parties constantly win the Federal Elections one after the other? By using phrases like “We’ll put people first” (Labor Party) or “The plan for a strong new economy” (Coalition) in the 2016 election to create an identity (Workman, 2016).

In reality, to have a strong economy, people need to be valued and supported. And here lies the paradox within identity politics: people are continuously forced by institutions to idealise a distinct identity, contributing to polarisation, even though only the combination of both will achieve true prosperity. We all live in the same country, shop at the same grocery stores, but must, for some reason, debate about whether our leaders should prioritise either our population or our economy, but definitely not both! 

What do we see in all this? Distorted narratives and divisive agendas. Media is easily manipulated to fit political agenda, leaving whole nations with biased views and false information. Political identities segregate a nation further which fuels political controversy and division.  

Bridging Divides for a Balanced Tomorrow

There are not many existing solutions to this problem currently, however, there may exist initiatives that can act as preventative measures to avoid polarisation growth. Specific elements of institutional reform should be trialled (Schedler, 2023; Carothers & O’Donohue, 2019). This is in conjunction with restructuring media and journalism into a more unbiased industry.   

Institutional reform can be implemented in various ways. Diverse representation could become a compulsory criterion of all government representatives. A simple example- as of 2023, women hold only 26% of legislative seats globally (Statistics on Women in National Governments Around the Globe, 2023). It is impossible for policymaking to be unbiased with such outdated inequality in government. Therefore, institutional reform will produce much needed positive change and instil fairness to political environments.  

Given the significant influence media has on the polarisation of opinions amongst populations, removing clouded truth would cleanse the industry. International companies such as Facebook and Google have already begun to “reduce the partisan bubble effect of social media” (Carothers & O’Donohue, 2019). These are all steps in the right direction to exterminate misrepresentation and advocate for factual and evidence-based reporting of information. The final course of action remaining is to begin this reform on a global scale in the hope that this will lessen the effects of hazardous political polarisation.  

It’s time to transcend the polarised attitude and work together for a better tomorrow. The only question that demands an answer is: Are we, as humans, evolved enough to transcend our historically ingrained segregational mindset? 

Useful links:

• Link up with Pallavi Pundir on LinkedIn
• Read a related article: The ripple effects of political polarization
• Discover Monash Business School, Monash University Australia
• Apply for the Bachelor of Commerce programme at Monash.

Learn more about the Council on Business & Society

The Council on Business & Society (The CoBS), visionary in its conception and purpose, was created in 2011, and is dedicated to promoting responsible leadership and tackling issues at the crossroads of business and society including sustainability, diversity, ethical leadership and the place responsible business has to play in contributing to the common good.  

• Follow the CoBS on X and LinkedIn
• Download this magazine and others from the CoBS website downloads page.

Member schools of the Council on Business & Society.

• ESSEC Business School, France, Singapore, Morocco
• FGV-EAESP, Brazil
• School of Management Fudan University, China
• IE Business School, Spain
• Keio Business School, Japan
• Monash Business School, Australia, Malaysia, Indonesia
• Olin Business School, USA
• Smith School of Business, Queen’s University, Canada
• Stellenbosch Business School, South Africa
• Trinity Business School, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
• Warwick Business School, United Kingdom.