Political Polarization
In order to explain this phenomenon we must first observe the age distribution of Facebook users and the development of political opinions over the lifespan. As previously discussed, the Pew Research Center study found that there was a steady decline in Facebook use among adult Internet users as age increased. As the use of Facebook among the millennial generation is higher than all older generations, culminating in a 31 percent difference between millennials and Internet users 65 years and older, the exposure to the bridging social capital effects of Facebook is proportionately higher among 18 to 29 year olds. The development of opinions over an individual’s lifetime should also be considered when explaining why the decrease of polarization
…show more content…
due to the effect of Facebook as bridging capital is isolated to those between 18 and 29 years old. In Political Attitudes over the Life Span: The Bennington Women after Fifty Years, Duane Alwin and Ronald Cohen discuss Sears’ theory that over time individuals become more persistent in their opinions. They state that while opinions are malleable during adolescence, they gain stability relatively early and become increasingly solid as an individual ages. The decrease in malleability of general opinions over a person’s lifespan aides in the explaining why those between 18 and 29 years old are the sole generation to see the decrease in polarization due to bridging social capital, as they are the generation that is least grounded in their opinions. The solidification of opinions in the older generations has led them to become invested in their political party affiliation, thus when opinion formation is occurring these generations are more likely to reject information they believe to be out of line with their party, as explained by the Receive-Accept-Sample model previously.
The loss of bridging social capital in America over the last 40 years has led to an increased level of political polarization.
Through illustrating the correlation between social capital and political division using the works of Putnam and Kimball, Summary, and Vorst the two are shown to have a relationship. Defending the existence of polarization using Hare and Poole against claims of solely elite polarization made by Fiorina, Abrams, and Pope the idea is given legitimacy. Examining the loss of moderate participation as described by Putnam shows the environment that was created to allow for polarization to flourish. Creating an understanding of how bridging capital affects society using Putnam’s work allows for these effects to be applied to causes of polarization. Describing the causes of polarization laid out by Kimball, Summary, and Vorst, as well as Abramowitz allows for the examination of how bridging social capital once moderated these causes. Understanding the construction of political opinions as described by Kulkinski and Peyton gives an understanding as to how the loss of the moderating effect of bridging social capital has allowed for the entrenchment and polarization of ideas in society. Finally the thesis is given validity by discussing the emergence of new social capital in the millennial generation and how this has led to a decrease in polarization among this generation through the works of Shapiro, the Pew Research Center, and Alwin and Cohen. The thorough examination of bridging social capital’s effects on society and the causes of political polarization allow for the conclusion that not only does a relationship between the two exist, but that the loss of bridging social capital in society has directly increased political polarization in America throughout the last 40
years.
due to the effect of Facebook as bridging capital is isolated to those between 18 and 29 years old. In Political Attitudes over the Life Span: The Bennington Women after Fifty Years, Duane Alwin and Ronald Cohen discuss Sears’ theory that over time individuals become more persistent in their opinions. They state that while opinions are malleable during adolescence, they gain stability relatively early and become increasingly solid as an individual ages. The decrease in malleability of general opinions over a person’s lifespan aides in the explaining why those between 18 and 29 years old are the sole generation to see the decrease in polarization due to bridging social capital, as they are the generation that is least grounded in their opinions. The solidification of opinions in the older generations has led them to become invested in their political party affiliation, thus when opinion formation is occurring these generations are more likely to reject information they believe to be out of line with their party, as explained by the Receive-Accept-Sample model previously.
The loss of bridging social capital in America over the last 40 years has led to an increased level of political polarization.
Through illustrating the correlation between social capital and political division using the works of Putnam and Kimball, Summary, and Vorst the two are shown to have a relationship. Defending the existence of polarization using Hare and Poole against claims of solely elite polarization made by Fiorina, Abrams, and Pope the idea is given legitimacy. Examining the loss of moderate participation as described by Putnam shows the environment that was created to allow for polarization to flourish. Creating an understanding of how bridging capital affects society using Putnam’s work allows for these effects to be applied to causes of polarization. Describing the causes of polarization laid out by Kimball, Summary, and Vorst, as well as Abramowitz allows for the examination of how bridging social capital once moderated these causes. Understanding the construction of political opinions as described by Kulkinski and Peyton gives an understanding as to how the loss of the moderating effect of bridging social capital has allowed for the entrenchment and polarization of ideas in society. Finally the thesis is given validity by discussing the emergence of new social capital in the millennial generation and how this has led to a decrease in polarization among this generation through the works of Shapiro, the Pew Research Center, and Alwin and Cohen. The thorough examination of bridging social capital’s effects on society and the causes of political polarization allow for the conclusion that not only does a relationship between the two exist, but that the loss of bridging social capital in society has directly increased political polarization in America throughout the last 40
years.