Most of us grasp what this means, and understand it's implications, but the importance, particularly with today's Global jihad, cannot be understated or ignored.
The first thing to realize, is that polar opposites, are not in intrinsicly different, but are in fact, the furthest extremes of the same entity.
Think of opposite sides of the same coin, or a magnet, with Positive at one end, and Negative at the other. But it's not always so clear cut.
Ask most men about the opposite of love, and they will mostly say hate, but ask a woman, and she may instinctively say indifference, for while the polar opposite of a positive feeling is a negative one, the actual opposite of strong feelings, is to have no feelings whatsoever.
Ask most men about the opposite of love, and they will mostly say hate, but ask a woman, and she may instinctively say indifference, for while the polar opposite of a positive feeling is a negative one, the actual opposite of strong feelings, is to have no feelings whatsoever.
When polarization takes place among people, many dangerous and unforeseen things may happen as natural constraints are removed; for people are not objects, but complex mixtures of ideas and emotions.
Polarized societies are very dangerous and unpleasant places to live.
Those who seek to polarize populations for profit and power, offer nothing more than chaos and ultimately, destruction, because by messing with our beliefs and understandings, we mess with the very fabric of humanity.
Perhaps the clearest way to see polarization at work, is to examine familiar instances in a slightly mathematical way.
Below we look at the sets of USA's two main political parties.
Clearly these are neatly separated and can be classed as fully polarized, with no overlap. In reality, many voters will be undecided, and could eventually vote for either party, depending on the candidates and issues of the time, so the actual graphic would look more like this:-
So there are two choices to swing the undecided voters, either place more emphasis on the things that one party has in common with the other and attract the wavering; or pull their centres apart in the hope of bringing the undecided voters along i.e. polarize the electorate.
History has shown that appealing to the middle ground is the more successful political strategy, but the winner is always vulnerable to the other party doing the same thing at a later time, thus swinging the vote in their direction, which is exactly what happens when democracies are working properly, because, once in power, all parties tend towards their own agendas and gradually lose their appeal to the less committed voters.
So the intersection of voters acts as a stabilizing force, a kind of anchor which prevents either side from drifting too far into extremism, because, when we look again at the polarized circles further above, we can see that when there is no overlap, i.e. nothing holding them together, then there is nothing at all to prevent them drifting further apart into who knows what direction.
It's probably no exaggeration to declare polarization as the enemy of democracy, and it should also be clear, that polarized societies will inevitably end up at war with themselves.
We and they, are what creates and sustains, war.
Placing people into our circles, we can see that war is not possible when there is a significant overlap within a given population. This is all the more apparent because, although a person may switch their political vote from time to time, they are unlikely to fight for one side, and then survive to fight for the other. It can and does happen, but it is by no means a significant circumstance, and having occurred once, is very unlikely to be repeated.
Looking again at our little picture, with the protagonists blue and red, there are many other colours, and also within the intersection, there are many lighter shades of blue/red. This represents those, who although nominally on one or other side, are unwilling to kill or be killed for their particular cause, which is a realistic representation of people. It should be clear, therefore, that polarization in the context of war, requires not just for populations to take sides, but to heighten and solidify their ideological commitment, to the extent that they are prepared to take another's life, or sacrifice their own.
Civil war is often described as the most destructive conflict, and is completely reliant on polarization for to happen. Today, the greatest fear of our leaders, is of just such an event, but now it is not restricted to one nation or state, because the mass migration of an entirely alien civilization threatens many nations.
This is called civilizational war.
But it might more properly be called Jihad, which we will deal with in good time.
Polarized societies are very dangerous and unpleasant places to live.
Those who seek to polarize populations for profit and power, offer nothing more than chaos and ultimately, destruction, because by messing with our beliefs and understandings, we mess with the very fabric of humanity.
Politics
Perhaps the clearest way to see polarization at work, is to examine familiar instances in a slightly mathematical way.
Below we look at the sets of USA's two main political parties.
Clearly these are neatly separated and can be classed as fully polarized, with no overlap. In reality, many voters will be undecided, and could eventually vote for either party, depending on the candidates and issues of the time, so the actual graphic would look more like this:-
So there are two choices to swing the undecided voters, either place more emphasis on the things that one party has in common with the other and attract the wavering; or pull their centres apart in the hope of bringing the undecided voters along i.e. polarize the electorate.
History has shown that appealing to the middle ground is the more successful political strategy, but the winner is always vulnerable to the other party doing the same thing at a later time, thus swinging the vote in their direction, which is exactly what happens when democracies are working properly, because, once in power, all parties tend towards their own agendas and gradually lose their appeal to the less committed voters.
So the intersection of voters acts as a stabilizing force, a kind of anchor which prevents either side from drifting too far into extremism, because, when we look again at the polarized circles further above, we can see that when there is no overlap, i.e. nothing holding them together, then there is nothing at all to prevent them drifting further apart into who knows what direction.
It's probably no exaggeration to declare polarization as the enemy of democracy, and it should also be clear, that polarized societies will inevitably end up at war with themselves.
War
Placing people into our circles, we can see that war is not possible when there is a significant overlap within a given population. This is all the more apparent because, although a person may switch their political vote from time to time, they are unlikely to fight for one side, and then survive to fight for the other. It can and does happen, but it is by no means a significant circumstance, and having occurred once, is very unlikely to be repeated.
Looking again at our little picture, with the protagonists blue and red, there are many other colours, and also within the intersection, there are many lighter shades of blue/red. This represents those, who although nominally on one or other side, are unwilling to kill or be killed for their particular cause, which is a realistic representation of people. It should be clear, therefore, that polarization in the context of war, requires not just for populations to take sides, but to heighten and solidify their ideological commitment, to the extent that they are prepared to take another's life, or sacrifice their own.
Civil war is often described as the most destructive conflict, and is completely reliant on polarization for to happen. Today, the greatest fear of our leaders, is of just such an event, but now it is not restricted to one nation or state, because the mass migration of an entirely alien civilization threatens many nations.
This is called civilizational war.
But it might more properly be called Jihad, which we will deal with in good time.
