Political scientist Lilliana Mason has challenged the prevailing narrative that polarization is the core issue plaguing American politics. In her essay titled “Polarization Is Not the Problem,” published in the October 2026 edition of the Journal of Democracy, she argues that the deep-seated political divisions in the U.S. reflect a more profound struggle over identity, power distribution, and equal rights.
Mason’s research reveals that simply addressing polarization may lead to ineffective remedies. She contends that merely advocating for civility and a return to political centrism fails to capture the true nature of the conflict, which she believes centers on who belongs in America and who warrants equal rights.
Her arguments are founded on extensive research into political identity, racial attitudes, and partisan dynamics. In a 2021 study co-authored with fellow political scientists Julie Wronski and John V. Kane, titled “Activating Animus: The Uniquely Social Roots of Trump Support,” the researchers examined survey data from 2011, well before Donald Trump’s presidential campaign began.
The study found that respondents who displayed negative attitudes toward minority groups were more likely to support Trump years later, regardless of their previous party affiliations. This suggests that Trump effectively mobilized individuals whose underlying prejudices had yet to manifest as strong partisan support. Mason asserts that this mobilization empowered an ethnonationalist faction within the Republican Party, raising concerns beyond mere political disagreements over policy issues.
Mason emphasizes that this movement’s emergence threatens the gains in equal citizenship achieved by racial minorities, women, and LGBTQ Americans. She points out that racism in U.S. politics is longstanding and maintains that a thorough understanding of these dynamics is crucial for accurately portraying the current political landscape.
Her analysis also extends to the role of journalism in framing the narrative of polarization. According to Mason, the tendency to portray both major political parties as equally extreme can mislead audiences about the nature of the conflict. Journalists are encouraged to scrutinize both Democrats and Republicans, but they should be wary of equating their actions and accountability when one party challenges democratic principles.
Mason argues that labeling the political struggle as polarization risks oversimplifying complex issues. She urges a shift in focus from merely identifying division to understanding the deeper issues at play, emphasizing that a genuine examination of these conflicts is vital for addressing the underlying challenges facing American democracy.
The implications of Mason’s argument call for a deeper discourse about the values and rights at stake in contemporary political disagreements. As the dialogue around polarization continues, her insights may influence how both the public and journalists approach future political discussions.
