Polarisation? ‘We have actually grown closer together,’ sociologist Quita Muis says

Climate activists are occupying highways, farmers are intimidating government officials, and news channels are forced to cover their logos. Dutch society is polarizing rapidly. At least, that’s how it seems. Sociologist Quita Muis undermines this persistent image in her PhD research.

Sire, the Foundation for Idealistic Advertising, launched a campaign last year: ‘Don’t lose each other when polarisation comes close.’ Because people increasingly seem to be diametrically opposed to each other when it comes to climate change, nitrogen, vaccination or asylum policy.

In May of this year, Groningen sociologist Rafael Wittek even received 30 million euros from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) for research into strengthening social cohesion. ‘You can see the polarisation increasing,’ says Wittek in NRC. ‘Different groups talk to each other less and judge each other more harshly.’

Self-fulfilling prophecy

Or does it seem that polarisation is getting worse? ‘We think that polarisation is increasing, but my research shows that this picture is not correct,’ says sociologist Quita Muis, who will defend her PhD research in the university’s auditorium on 27 September.

Yet it does feel like we are increasingly opposing each other. ‘That’s true,’ Muis agrees, ‘and that feeling can also lead to declining trust towards each other, and thus to polarisation.

‘At the same time, I’m trying to tone down the discussion a bit. Because this fixation on polarisation reinforces the idea that we are very different, so that we forget how much we have in common. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.’

The gap is not widening

In her research, Muis uses data from the long-term cross-national study European Value Study (EVS), a research programme in which universities and research institutes from all over Europe are involved. It is an initiative that originated in Tilburg, among other places.

Based on this data, Muis can conclude that we don’t have that many differences of opinion on many subjects: ‘In fact, people have actually grown closer to each other on many subjects.’

In the EVS study, this actual polarisation is measured on the basis of opinions on a wide range of topics, from abortion, women’s rights and gender to immigration, religion and trust in politics. The results over the years show that the gap between different groups is not increasing at all:

‘We often think the same, but we believe that others don’t think the same. That is ultimately my conclusion, hence the title of my thesis: Who are these people?‘

We don’t know each other anymore

So where does the image come from that we are polarising? Aren’t the discussions getting fiercer and certain groups are diametrically opposed to each other? Muis: ‘I also see that different groups judge each other’s opinions more harshly. But that’s about perceived polarisation, not actual polarisation, which is the definition I use in my research.’

‘Unfortunately, that wrong image is then the starting point for our actions,’ Muis concludes: ‘We move into a different neighbourhood, or send our children to a different school. Social cohesion is diluted because we no longer know each other. And that’s how our assumptions eventually become reality.’

Minor differences

Groups that are very similar to each other can have very different opinions about the aspects on which they disagree, for example in the mutual rivalry between neighboring villages and towns. In this way, mutual differences are magnified. Sigmund Freud called it the ‘narcissism of small differences’.

‘We are looking for a bigger story, for something that binds us, but we look for that common ground in the very small differences. People really want recognition for their individuality and their unique characteristics. I think the LGBTQ community is a good example,’ says Muis. ‘It’s increasingly divided into many small, fragmented boxes.’

Still, a little polarisation is not wrong in itself, because the idea of a democracy is that different opinions meet. Muis: ‘If people exclude others because of their opinions and avoid a conversation, that’s the wrong form of polarisation. What you should want is for people to debate and keep talking to each other. And it’s allowed to chafe from time to time. But in the debate you can find each other and make compromises.’

Europe

Polarisation also seems to be increasing in Europe. In the European Parliament, the radical right-wing bloc continues to grow steadily. ‘Populist leaders have a very clear answer and that’s what people vote for,’ Muis thinks. ‘People are experiencing economic instability, and an increasingly complex world with rapid changes. This creates a desire for strong leaders.’

‘But if we look at the differences in opinions on immigration between highly and poorly educated people in my research, for example, it is no different than it was 35 years ago. Higher educated people are more tolerant of it than lower educated people. This concerns the Dutch context, but even within Europe there are only a few countries in Central Europe where the differences are increasing somewhat.’

_Advertentie.