The Cost of Division: How Political Polarization Turns Deadly
Dr. Michael Donovan
9/9/20253 min read
Introduction: A Nation at the Brink
On September 10, 2025, Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative activist and founder of Turning Point USA, was fatally shot during an event at Utah Valley University. The assailant fired from a nearby rooftop, striking Kirk in the neck as he addressed a crowd. This act of political violence has been widely condemned across the political spectrum as an attack on democracy itself. (AP News)
While the immediate response has been one of shock and mourning, we must ask: Why did this happen? What forces in our society have cultivated an environment where political violence is not only possible but increasingly probable?
The Anatomy of Polarization
Political polarization in the United States has reached levels not seen since the Civil War. According to Pew Research, the share of Americans holding consistently liberal or conservative views has doubled over the past two decades, from 10% to 21%. This ideological sorting has led to a situation where 92% of Republicans are to the right of the median Democrat, and 94% of Democrats are to the left of the median Republican. (Carnegie Endowment)
This deepening divide is not just about policy disagreements; it's about identity. Political affiliation has become a core component of personal identity, leading to a phenomenon known as "affective polarization," where individuals not only disagree with but also harbor animosity toward those on the other side. This animosity erodes empathy and makes it easier to justify extreme actions against perceived enemies.
The Role of Social Media
Social media platforms have exacerbated political polarization by creating echo chambers that reinforce existing beliefs and amplify extreme viewpoints. Algorithms prioritize content that generates strong emotional reactions, often promoting outrage over reasoned debate. This environment fosters misinformation and radicalization, making it more likely that individuals will resort to violence to defend their beliefs. (Brookings)
While social media is not the sole cause of rising partisan hatred, its role in intensifying divisiveness is undeniable. The constant barrage of partisan content desensitizes individuals to the humanity of those with opposing views, making it easier to dehumanize and, ultimately, to harm. (Stern Center for Business Rights)
Historical Context: A Legacy of Violence
The United States has a long history of political violence. From the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln in 1865 to the violent events of the 1960s and 1970s, such as the Weather Underground bombings, political violence has been a recurring feature of American life. In recent years, incidents like the January 6 Capitol riot and the shooting of Representative Steve Scalise in 2017 have underscored the persistence of this threat. (TIME)
These events serve as grim reminders that political violence is not a new phenomenon but a persistent one. The conditions that give rise to such violence—deep ideological divides, dehumanization of opponents, and a culture that glorifies aggression—have been present throughout American history.
The Erosion of Democratic Norms
The rise in political violence is closely linked to the erosion of democratic norms. As trust in institutions declines and political discourse becomes more hostile, the willingness to use violence to achieve political ends increases. According to a 2024 survey, 35% of partisans believe that violence could be justified to advance their party's political goals. (Listen First Project)
This shift from viewing political opponents as fellow citizens with differing views to seeing them as enemies to be defeated is a dangerous development. It undermines the foundation of democracy, which relies on the peaceful resolution of differences and respect for the rule of law.
The Path Forward: Rebuilding Trust and Civility
Addressing political polarization and the violence it breeds requires a multifaceted approach:
Promoting Media Literacy: Educating the public on how to critically evaluate information and recognize misinformation can reduce the impact of divisive content.
Encouraging Civil Discourse: Creating spaces for respectful dialogue between individuals with differing views can help rebuild trust and understanding.
Holding Leaders Accountable: Political leaders must set an example by condemning violence and rhetoric that incites hatred.
Strengthening Institutions: Reinforcing the integrity of democratic institutions can restore public confidence and reduce the appeal of extremist solutions.
While these steps won't eliminate political polarization overnight, they are essential for creating a society where violence is not seen as a legitimate means of political expression.
Conclusion: A Call to Action
The shooting of Charlie Kirk is a tragic reminder of the dangers posed by political polarization. It is not just an isolated incident but a symptom of a broader societal issue. If we are to prevent future acts of political violence, we must confront the underlying causes: deep ideological divides, dehumanization of opponents, and a culture that glorifies aggression.
Rebuilding a more civil and cohesive society will require effort from all sectors—government, media, education, and individuals. It is a challenging task, but it is one that is essential for the preservation of our democracy and the safety of our citizens.
References:
https://apnews.com/article/charlie-kirk-conservative-activist-shot-546165a8151104e0938a5e085be1e8bd
https://time.com/6998406/political-violence-united-states-recent-history/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
https://www.listenfirstproject.org/toxic-polarization-data?utm_source=chatgpt.com