Polarity

The Founding Fathers created the United States government believing in permanent liberty and democracy for America’s citizens. The Framers were highly opposed of political parties because it threatens unity among the country. Political parties develop people’s political opinions, resulting in polarization of government. Polarization is a large and defined division between parties. Congress’ polarization is growing, while American citizens’ polarization is less pronounced in most of the United States.

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, Polarization is defined as the “division into two opposites”. (Merriam-Webster) Political Polarization refers to the perceived division of ideologies espoused between the two major political parties in the United States. The topic of political polarization is one frequently referenced in the media and in political discussions. Does political polarization actually exist or is it a myth? In this paper, this question will be analyzed and examined and a conclusion will be reached.

Polarization is a bit hard to define because the term is used to describe several things that are related, but not the same. A helpful definition that clarifies this is the one used by Kenneth A. Schultz in his essay “Perils of Polarization for U.S. Foreign Policy.” Schultz points out four “interrelated phenomena” that are part of the definition of polarization. (8-9) First, a lack of ideological overlap in Congress. This means that Democrats are almost always voting for liberal policies and Republicans

One of the greatest challenges to the development and implementation of public policy has been the inability of Congress and the president to overcome partisan polarization. This is evident in the many partisan clashes over policy between Republicans and Democrats in Congress and between Congress and the White House. Partisan polarization has become increasingly evident

Polarization in politics is a conflict that both Is Polarization a Myth written by Alan I. Abramowitz as well as Kyle L. Saunders and Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America written by Morris P. Fiorina talk about. On a political scale it has either a republican side or a democrat side and in the articles they discuss whether or not people are in the middle of the scale, or on one side or the other. Alan and Kyle are trying to prove that people are beginning to choose one side or another and stated in Is Polarization a Myth, “Our evidence indicated that since 1970s, ideological polarization has increased dramatically among the mass public in the United States as well as among political elites”( Abramowitz and Saunders 542). Florina stated in chapter two that each election the votes came in 50:50. After reading the articles I came to a conclusion that I agree with Fiorina’s opinion on polarization.

"Democracy requires citizens to see things from one another 's point of view, but instead we’re more and more enclosed in our own bubbles. Democracy requires a reliance on shared facts; instead we’re being offered parallel but separate universes."- Eli Pariser. Polarization is part of life, from P.C and Mac, Pepsi vs. Coke to Xbox and PS4, humans tend to give an allegiance to the things they care about. In the past decade, the United States has seen a rise of political polarization in many aspects of life, from social networks to the election. Since the 2016 election polarization has been discussed more and more, there has been a spotlight on this current issue. This phenomena

James Campbell’s book is a political masterpiece that outlines how American voters are divided across the United States. Campbell provides a totally new perspective on the polarization with a historically context on how and why voters are politically divided. Campbell’s argument may seem indirect, but he provides circumstantial evidence and empirical evidence to support his claim of polarization. Polarized is significant to understanding American polarization, and surprisingly other books fail in comparison due to their lack of empirical evidence. Campbell’s book was written in 2016 which provides updated information that can help explain the cause of 2018 election polarization among voters.

There are many theories as to how or why political polarization was formed, and the impact it has on government in modern day. Polarization has varied significantly over the years ever since the 1970’s. However, what is the true cause and can it be explained? This paper will discuss some theories on how political polarization came about, and analyzes some accounts of polarization overall. Defining political polarization is vital into developing an understanding of how or why it was initially formed.

The red/ blue map shown in Figure one shows how modern Polarisation has manifested itself over the last four elections. The dark red and blue show that those states have voted Republican or democratic respectively all four times. Lighter shades show that party has won all but once, while purple shows states which have gone to the Republicans and Democrats twice each. On first glance this seems to back up the polarization theory, as Fiorina and Adams put it;

At times, rising polarization gives the impression that the American nation has disintegrated, but many political scientists argue that although our nation has its flaws, polarization is not the problem. Political scientist, Alan I. Abramowitz, is especially adamant about the manners in which polarization profits American democracy. He admits that polarization can lead to immature mudslinging, but presents this as a small downside to the important and essential benefits it provides. In his opinion, polarization can be a solution to legislative gridlock in congress. Polarization between different parties leads to “party discipline” within a party because it moves the moderates in a party further left or further right. Abramowitz claims that this can overcome procedures, such as the filibuster, that actually inhibit the law-making processes. Additionally he believes that polarization manifests party lines, making it less complicated for American citizens to associate with a specific side, which as a consequence, encourages them to vote and discuss their political views with others. Shaun Theriault adopts a similar view. He decries the name-calling and

We live in a world blanketed by the darkness of ignorance. Instead of blindly searching for the black or white answers, we must defeat the enemy by moving toward common ground. Currently in politics, we see the negative effect of polarization as the presidential campaign has become candidate centered rather than issue centered. We see the candidates resort to bully-like tactics where they attack each other personally, rather than focusing on the issues at hand. While it is said that polarity is an integral part of nature, we need our differences to bring us together as a whole, rather than drive us apart. Polarization is inevitable due to the unique design of every individual, but issues are seen as either black or white, when really

The area of team leadership attracts a lot of attention in the modern world because of the need to assemble and deploy diverse teams for the completion of projects. The future of many corporations relies more and more on the kind of team leadership they have for their projects. This paper explores a number of facets that constitute effective team leadership.

People use either side to approach solutions to a variety of problems with different outcomes.

According to John Maxwell’s article, “Vision determines the direction of the team”. These three strengths of empathy, analytics and vision have all helped in the leading of a group of people through a project.

As it has been mentioned in the case study, the Project management within the United States Department of Defense (DOD) has been aptly described as the one of the world’s most complicated processes due to the fact that various stakeholders involved from above and below are likely to besiege the project manager. Hence, there were various factors which led to organizational conflicts amongst project stakeholders which finally resulted in termination of the project.