Photo credit: Lucas Foglia
Ezra Klein is an opinion columnist for the New York Times and host of The Ezra Klein Show. Prior to joining the Times, Klein co-founded the online news site Vox, of which he served as editor-in-chief. Why We Are Polarized, which examines the rise of political polarization in the United States.
TW: I’ve noticed a lot of other people saying, “All this polarization that we have now is because of Trump, and once he’s gone, we’re going to get back to normal. “In your e-book Why We Are Polarized, you reject this concept. How would you react to the concept that polarization has disappeared in a post-Trump America?
EK: There is an old article by Larry Summers that stands out in economics because it requires situating the concept of the rational economic agent. His first line, he noted, is “there are idiots. Look around,” and I would say, “there’s polarization, look around. “Look at Covid, see how it divides.
I think, if anything, I underestimated the strength of polarization. When I was writing my book, I would have said that a virus that right now kills nearly a million Americans would be the kind of thing that applies so directly to people’s lives. that political polarization might not have much impact. It’s one thing to be polarized on general policy issues you don’t understand: What’s going to happen to climate change, or does it deserve China to be classified as a currency manipulator?But a disease that can simply leave you in poor health and kill you or your circle of family, neighbors or friends?I had an idea that the incentive to get smart data and act on it would have been quite high, and I was surprised.
TW: How has pre-existing polarization impacted the U. S. ?Do you think about the U. S. people’s belief about the pandemic?
EK: I think a lot about a counterfactual Covid-19. Imagine that in 2012, Mitt Romney won the election. And in 2016, he was re-elected. So when covid-19 hits, he’s coming to the end of his momentary term with a Republican president who is the empirical, conscientious, mask-wearing type, no matter what you think of his positions on taxes and tariffs. Is covid-19 polarizing?as it has?Is it also polarizing even more than before?Do you have a more liberal reaction opposed to things like vaccines?
Go back a few years in the vaccine debate, and the view is that those are crackpots in California who might not vaccinate their children against measles and are putting everyone at risk. I don’t forget to cover that for a while. Evidently, this is not what turned out to be the central driving force of Covid-19 in vaccine skepticism. Therefore, it is very complicated for me to know to what extent what we have noticed reflects the idiosyncratic dimensions of Donald Trump’s reaction and his public personality and not. Public trends, as opposed to some kind of inevitable interaction of political coalitions and psychologies.
TW: On Trump, how do you think his excessive polarization has affected the reaction to the pandemic?
EK: So a fun and consistent question about Trump is, “Is he a symptom or a cause?And it is clear that both. But one trend that reflects and accelerates polarization is the grouping of other conspiratorial and low-confidence people in the Republican Party, and Donald Trump himself is one of the other people. This is a guy who, long before his political career, was constantly trafficking in conspiracy theories and all sorts of weird things. You are clearly not a user who trusts establishments or believes in their value. He is originally from the emerging Republican Party, so when he runs, he resonates with so many Republican voters, yet when he becomes the nominee, more untrusted people sign up for the Republican Party.
And I mention this to say that a Republican Party that has become structurally distrustful of establishments, complete with other people who would possibly not do anything the media says because it is the media that said it, is a party that is not well prepared for Covid-19 and similar situations. At critical moments, you have to differentiate yourself from other people who have done laboratory experiments. And the fact that EE. UU. se has polarized around conspiratorial thinking has not prepared us well for a Covid response.
OBP: A lot of this conspiratorial thinking is spreading on social media. How do you think social media intersects with polarization?If you had the power, how would you adjust social media platforms to decrease polarization?
EK: It’s worth saying that the massive mass of emerging polarization predates social media. Polarization is not a social media phenomenon, I think social media makes it worse. But social media also responds to a long structural replacement in American political life.
I would readjust the algorithms so that they have a downward trend when things start to go viral. One of the tactics that social media is turning politics into is through the expansion of emotional content. areas, this means that the content is funny. In politics, this means that content makes you very angry.
And we have a lot of them. Instead of social media avidly looking for things that go viral, I wish it wasn’t. I don’t think it’s smart to live our lives with this point of hyperstimulation. I think this is also true in spaces outside politics. But in politics, it would be better for alternating rhythms to prefer things that get a modest reaction from the other people reading them, rather than those who prefer anything that gets a super-strong reaction.
OBP: Since social media has become the non-public aspect of politics, what are your favorite spaces to communicate about issues that matter to you, such as veganism or reproductive rights?
EK: I’m basically communicating about the two things you mention in podcasts. I almost never communicate about these disorders on social media.
I don’t think abortion is something to discuss. Personally, I don’t think I’m putting the world in a better position when talking about abortion, the death penalty, or veganism on Twitter. I don’t think it’s going to create a constructive opinion. Reconsideration area. In my podcast, I believe that I am able to establish a relationship with the audience for long periods of time. with me there.
I appreciate places where you can be a total user (podcasts are one of them, but not the only one) or places that lend themselves to a healthier form of politics. I think if you can see me in my deepest humanity, you might be more willing to pay attention to what I say. And if you feel like I see you, you might be more willing to tell me what you think. This is a prerequisite for any kind of two-way persuasion.
*This interview has been edited for length and clarity.