Political polarization is increasing among Canadians, affecting their ideologies and social circles.
Assistant Professor of political science at the University of Toronto, Eric Merkley, said in a Humber President’s Lecture Series speech on Oct. 30 that affective polarization is the growth of warmth toward one’s own political party while growing hostile feelings toward the opposition and their supporters increase.
Political polarization is the further divide of competing parties with wider boundaries between "us and them," Merkley said in the lecture.
According to a 2019 University of Toronto study, affective polarization has increased by more than 126 per cent.
In the study, 25 per cent of people said they showed no warmth toward an opposing party in 2019
However, only four per cent of people had zero warmth in 1993.
The study said the change in political issue beliefs and ideology played a role in the polarization of the nation.
Liberals, Conservatives and the NDP have taken a stronger stance on modern political issues, Merkley said.
Humber Polytechnic Liberal Studies professor Blake Lambert said politicians have taken stronger stances to win the polarized vote, and the stances taken are a reflection of individual party supporters.
Merkley said the more polarized issues are mostly because of the reformed party funding initiatives under the Conservative Stephen Harper government from 2006 to 2015.
"The problem is that it's a story about elites, it's a story about politicians," he said in the lecture.
Merkley said citizens conversing with people who share opposing views may tame polarization among citizens if handled respectfully, but it is not enough to change the polarized political stances of the major parties. It is up to the current funding system, which relies on smaller donations from polarized voters.
Merkley said in the lecture that the blame shouldn't be on the citizens but on the system that incentivizes and rewards polarized rhetoric.
“People that donate to political parties in small amounts are very, very ideological and very, very polarized,” he said in the lecture. “We’ve created a system of incentives that encourages politicians to be much more toxic and much more inflammatory than they need to be and than they were in the past.”
Polarization motivates people to protect and defend their political identity and worldviews, leading to less socializing with opposing party supporters, Merkley said in the lecture.
Socially distancing oneself from an opposing party supporter is similar to other groups who are discriminated against, including Muslims and members of the LGBTQ+ community, the University of Toronto study said.
“People typically stay in their silos and don’t think of perspectives beyond their immediate ones,” Lambert said.
Motivation to protect and defend political commitments can lead to support for anti-democratic actions, Merkley said.
Forty-two per cent of people are comfortable with a prime minister of their own party refusing to resign after an election defeat if they claim election irregularities, and that number drops to 18 per cent when the prime minister is a political opponent, the study said.
Among polarized individuals, 64 per cent would support this action from a prime minister of their party, while 10 per cent would support the same action from an opposing party's prime minister.
Less polarized individuals remain equally supportive of this action at 38 and 39 per cent.
Polarized individuals reflexively reject or accept information quickly depending on its political leanings, Merkley said in the lecture.
The University of Toronto study said 66 per cent of polarized people preferred a news story that supported their political beliefs.
Polarized people protect their political identities and beliefs by cocooning themselves in social networks of like-minded individuals, Merkley said in the lecture.
Between 21 and 23 per cent of party supporters said they’re uncomfortable with neighbours, friends, or in-laws who support their political opponents, the University of Toronto study said.
This percentage rises to 33 and 40 per cent for those with high levels of polarization and drops to 13 and 15 per cent for those with low levels of polarization.
Merkley said the primary solution is a change in rhetoric and strong stances among politicians. However, people can do their part by engaging with opposing supporters from an understanding perspective.
Professor Alyson Renaldo brought her English class to the lecture to improve their understanding of the political landscape and engage in the importance of Canadian politics.
“What we’re primarily seeking to have students learn here is how to not only be good at their craft but also how to be good citizens,” she said. “Understanding how to take your place in this world, in our Canadian society and gaining insight into what that looks like is part of the educational process.”
Humber student Emmanuella Owusu said she thought the lecture was extremely relevant for broadening her horizons, but wouldn’t change the way she interacts with opposing supporters.
“I’m always going to speak my mind,” she said. Although “there’s (usually) nothing to speak to them about.”
