Paradoxical individualization: ideological polarization in the U.S. in historical-comparative and theoretical perspective

Abstract

ABSTRACT Beginning with Karl Marx, theorists have seen individual autonomy and ideology as opposing elements. Ideology was considered the product of mental, cultural or social constraints. People did not choose their world view – they fell victim to it. With the increase of individual autonomy, however, ideology would wither away. In the late 20th century, the advocates of individualization theory have similarly predicted the vanishing of clear-cut ideological divisions in a world in which any form of collective identity was difficult to sustain. Political eclecticism and the mixing of different political world views would become the new norm. Politics was now ‘beyond left and right’, as Anthony Giddens once famously argued. In my article, I show that this understanding of the relationship between individualization and ideological polarization is flawed. By discussing the extreme ideological polarization in the U.S., I disprove the notion that our need for ideology vanishes the more our freedoms expand. On the contrary, precisely the increase in individual autonomy – in terms of mobility patterns, media use and lifestyle differentiation – has helped to turn the country into a series of closed echo chambers and to deepen the ideological fault lines of American society.