Tracy Turner

The Polarization of the United States: From LBJ to Trump and Beyond

I. Introduction: The Roots of Polarization

Where exactly did the United States go from being the United States to a fractured political landscape that seemed more like a reality TV show? Some say it was with the rise of cable news, while others claim it was with the advent of social media, culminating in Donald Trump's now-infamous 2015 escalator descent. But the deep roots of America's entrenched divisions go much further back than today's modern technological influences, an era epitomized by bell-bottom pants, the ubiquity of the Vietnam War on the nightly news, and the expansive vision of the Great Society under President Lyndon B. Johnson.

America has always represented a bundle of contradictions founded on the proposition that "all men are created equal" by people who were themselves enslavers, governed by the motto "e pluribus unum" while finding deep and often violent discord. But in recent decades, ideological tensions that once served as constructive forces in political discourse have transformed into what appear to be insurmountable divides. The subtlety that once defined a balance between left and right has devolved into an unprecedented kind of ideological warfare, replete with propaganda, subterfuge, and cultural skirmishes driven by misinformation.

This polarization strikes at the very core of our identity, race, and socioeconomic class, tearing at the cultural values that have long held us together. The pressing question it raises is stark: Can a nation survive when its citizens no longer share common values or even a standard view of basic facts? This is not a distant problem; it is a clear and present danger that demands our immediate attention.

This analysis encompasses the evolution of polarization in the United States from Lyndon B. Johnson's presidency to the present, framing the historical, cultural, and economic vectors along which contemporary cleavages have emerged.

II. Identity Politics and Affective Polarization

A. Racial and Cultural Divides: The Southern Strategy and Beyond

In 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act into law—a decision that, while morally imperative, carried significant political ramifications for the Democratic Party. Johnson's prescient remark, 'We've lost the South for a generation,' has proven to be a profound understatement. This historical context is crucial to understanding the depth of contemporary polarization.

Seizing on this political realignment, the Republican Party developed the so-called "Southern Strategy," a plan to capture white voters uneasy about the civil rights movement. This shifted over the decades, culminating in the rhetoric of Donald Trump's 2016 campaign, calls for border walls, Muslim bans, and racially charged statements. Unlike previous iterations where racial appeals were implicit, Trump made them explicit.

However, the roots of racial and cultural division in American politics go deeper than Trump. From COINTELPRO's targeting of civil rights leaders to the far more passive language of 'law and order' and 'states' rights,' these have been divisiveness strategically planted over decades. The use of 'law and order' and 'states' rights' in political discourse has historically been associated with maintaining racial segregation and suppressing civil rights movements. And today, the result of that can be seen in how racial and cultural polarization in some quarters keeps fanning the flames of national discord.

B. Economic Disparity and Class Division: The Growing Wealth Gap

Economic inequality has grown to the level where it drives American society's contemporary centrifugal tendency. The country's top 1% owns more wealth today than the lower 90%. The middle class, a cornerstone of the traditional American Dream, is continually chipped away because of shifting economies, whether globalization or automation.

The gap between the very rich and everybody else has only widened because of policy decisions: tax cuts that favor the rich, deregulation of large corporations, and a minimum wage that doesn't keep up with inflation. Economic anxiety is gripping much of the country and has birthed populist movements from both the right and the left. Bernie Sanders ran as a candidate of economic justice, demonizing the "billionaire class," while Donald Trump co-opted working-class resentments and promised to "drain the swamp." Both candidates exploited the same elemental unrest for their profoundly different rhetoric and policy ideas.

The result has only been a harder urban-rural divide. City centers have actually done well amidst the knowledge economy, while other areas have simply struggled with dying industries, opioid addiction, and feelings of abandonment. All this has put politics in the zero-sum territory, where one deeply feels that any gain by his opponent is, in fact, and indeed, detrimental to his team's survival.

C. Affective Polarization: When Politics Becomes Personal

Affective polarization has reached unprecedented levels, where political opponents are not just seen as mistaken but as morally flawed. Surveys reveal that a significant minority of Americans view the other party's members as unpatriotic, even dangerous, rather than simply wrong. This personalization of politics has heightened the emotional impact of polarization.

Social media has further perpetuated this, creating echo chambers where users are fed content that reinforces their biases while filtering out opposing viewpoints. Self-reinforcing in nature, this cacophony has allowed extremism to flourish, turning political discourse into a battle of memes, conspiracy theories, and ideological purity tests.

III. Cultural Wars and Institutional Breakdown

A. Cultural Divisions: Abortion, Guns, and the Fight for America's Soul

Few issues are as polarizing as abortion, gun rights, and LGBTQ+ rights. These topics are not merely political but deeply personal and tied to individuals' identities and moral frameworks.

Politicians and the media have shamelessly exploited such cultural fault lines to promote their careers by simplifying complex debates into a contest of binary oppositions, each demanding absolute allegiance. The Supreme Court, previously considered an impartial adjudicator, has become ever more politicized with landmark decisions such as Roe v. Wade, Dobbs v. Jackson, and Heller v. D.C., sharpening partisan differences.

B. Media Fragmentation: The Death of Consensus Reality

Gone are the days of Walter Cronkite, when news was considered an unquestionably objective source. The fragmentation of media has created a world in which Americans consume vastly different narratives based on political affiliations.

Hyperpartisan outlets, algorithm-driven social media feeds, and foreign disinformation campaigns have contributed to a reality where even truth is contested. The consequences of lost shared reality are profound for democracy; it shifts policy debates to fundamental disagreements over basic facts.

C. The Supreme Court: A Catalyst for Cultural Conflict

The U.S. Supreme Court, in the eyes of many, was to be a dispassionate guardian of those principles of the Constitution, whereas it increasingly has become more of a platform in which over several decades its rulings on policy have also served to polarize American culture and politics. With lifetime appointments plus highly politicized confirmation battles, the Court has moved away from its role as an independent arbiter and closer to that of a partisan institution, where rulings often reflect the ideological leanings of the justices rather than broad national consensus.

From Roe v. Wade (1973) through to its overturning in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022), from voting rights, affirmative action, to gun control, the Court has issued decisions time and again that heighten polarization rather than resolve it. Each major decision serves as a flashpoint, fueling outrage on one side and celebration on the other. The highly strategic efforts by political parties to control judicial nominations, such as the blocking of Merrick Garland's nomination in 2016 and the rushed confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett in 2020, have further entrenched the perception that the Court is no longer an apolitical institution but rather an extension of partisan power.

The judicial system has, therefore, lost the trust of the people, and to many Americans, the Supreme Court is just another tool for political manipulation, not an unbiased interpreter of laws. The decisions are leaving deep cultural wounds as the decisions of the Court increasingly make up the social tissue of the country, often overriding efforts of legislatures and voter sentiment. During an age of great polarization, the part the Court is playing in enhancing division rather than building consensus does indeed pose one of the major threats to American democracy.

IV. Political and Electoral Polarization

A. Gerrymandering and the Erosion of Competitive Elections

This form of gerrymandering has given politicians the power to set congressional districts' boundaries in ways that practically guarantee reelection. The effects can be seen in the demise of moderate voices, as the political threat toward politicians in safe districts is not posed by their opponents but rather ideological purists within their ranks.

B. The Judiciary: A Political Battlefield

Once above the fray of partisan politics, the Supreme Court has become a high-visibility site of political struggle. Major decisions have increasingly been considered partisan in character, while confirmation battles have degenerated into rancorous ideological conflict. The perceived loss of the Court's impartiality further erodes trust in democratic institutions.

V. Civil Unrest and the Future of American Democracy

Historical analogies to the 1960s suggest this political instability is nothing new. Digital technology, economic uncertainty, and an unending news cycle all come together to make today's divisions louder. The forecasts of imminent civil war may well be a little premature; such incidents of political violence, mass protests, and extremist activity are continuing to grow and promise an auspicious future.

The current trajectory of American democracy is not sustainable. Without meaningful reform in economic inequality, political dysfunction, and media polarization, the nation's divisions can only continue to grow. The question now is whether the United States will take concrete steps toward bridging the divides or continue on a path toward entrenched polarization. 

As historian William Safire once said, "The American experiment is not over, but the lab is on fire." The time to act is now.

Is Civil War Inevitable? The Explosive Forces Behind America's Political Divide

© 2025 www.olivebiodiesel.com    
http://olivebiodiesel.com/American-Polarization-LBJ-to-Trump.html