Cross-issue solidarity and truth convergence in opinion dynamics

Abstract

How do movements and coalitions which engage with multiple social issues succeed in cross-issue solidarity, and when do they instead become fragmented? To address this, the mechanisms of cross-issue interaction have to be understood. Prior work on opinion dynamics and political disagreement has focused on single-issue consensus and polarization. Inspired by practices of cross-issue movement building, we have developed a general model of multi-issue opinion dynamics where agreement on one issue can promote greater inclusivity in discussing other issues, thereby avoiding the pitfalls of exclusivist interaction, where individuals engage only if they agree sufficiently on every issue considered. Our model shows that as more issues come into play, consensus and solidarity can only be maintained if inclusivity towards differing positions is increased. We further investigate whether greater inclusivity and compromise across issues lead people towards or away from normative truth, thereby addressing concerns about the non-ideal nature of political consensus.