Chapter 1
Culture War?
The book, Culture War?: The Myth of a Polarized America sought to demystify the notion that America is a polarized country, divided into half by two different ideological factions. In the first Chapter of this book, Fiorina et al laid the foundation of the culture war narrative by referring to pronouncements by Pat Buchanan that there was a culture war for the soul of America as well as Pew Research’s observation that the red States could only get redder while the blue States were getting bluer. To counter this position, the authors indicate that such a conclusion is informed by wrongful interpretation of election results, shoddy analysis of research data and selective coverage by the media (Fiorina et al. 3).
In this Chapter, the authors do well in identifying the origin of what they call the myth of cultural war. However, with this information in mind they did not extensively attack the position of previous literature on the subject matter by dissecting the premise of their argument especially through examining a historical account of why a cultural or religious war could have developed. Instead, the authors go ahead to front their own ideology about cultural divisions and how it is exaggerated without having conclusively addressed all the elements of the opposing arguments.
Chapter 2
If America is Not Polarized, Why Do So Many Americans Think It Is?
In the second Chapter, Fiorina et al embarked on a mission to explain the rationale behind many Americans thinking that their country is polarized. The authors well captured this concept by first illustrating that a closely divided conception is different from a deeply divided one (Fiorina et al. 15). However, the argument that differences in opinions within the political class does not necessarily represent the strong opinions or affiliations that people on the ground belong to is flawed in my opinion. This is because most people endorse political leaders through voting majorly because they are agreeable to the philosophy of those leaders. Therefore, it is not prudent to distinguish between political votes and individual opinions.
Chapter 3
A 50:50 Nation? Red and Blue State People are Not That Different.
In this Chapter, a statistical approach is embraced to give an overview of whether the United States is a 50:50 state. By looking at the specific views held by individual party members, the authors were effective in a bid to decipher whether the division of opinion is so deep. The deduction that there is always a middle ground according to the statistical evidence gathered from members of both parties in states affiliated to both parties is also plausible (Fiorina et al. 26). It is also commendable that the research found out that the self-identified independents were the largest group of persons in the country. This means that it is safe to conclude that polarization in the country is just but an extrapolated myth.
Chapter 4
A 50:50 Nation? Beyond the Red and Blue States.
The Fourth Chapter has its focus beyond the red and blue States or factions and looks at other factors which might influence diametrically opposed opinions. At this point, the authors rightly make the observation that factors like age, education, religion race and gender can greatly help in depolarizing the nation (Fiorina et al. 44). However, there are outstanding controversial topics like gay marriages that would ideally have the people on extremely opposed sides. This was worth pointing out because it significantly influences the whole debate on culture wars and how heated they can be. It is however regrettable that there was no convincing evidence to illustrate to what extent do such factors lead to polarization.
Chapter 5
A Closer Look at Abortion
Chapter 6
A Closer Look at Homosexuality
There is not much contention about how this Chapter was written. It was a good move to seek the opinion of diverse age groups; parties and states so as to clear determine the distribution of opinion. However, having established that a majority of people were not in support of a blanket constitutional ban on gay marriages, the book fails to conclusively relate this finding with the fact that there exists a myth of polarization in the country (Fiorina et al. 214).
Chapter 7
Have Electoral Cleavages Shifted?
Deducing from their discussion in previous Chapters, the authors rightly observed that the focus of electorates while making significant political decision has greatly shifted. Electorates were no longer considering economic factors but rather cultural factors (Fiorina et al 239). There was an equally blurred distinction between the ideals held by parties and the general canons of various religions. Thus, it was right for the authors to observe that people are more concerned with transformation of cultures rather than the economy but this does not mean that the economy is considered less.
Chapter 8
The 2004 Election and Beyond
In a review of the manner in which George Bush was elected, Fiorina points out that he did not win merely because people voted basing on moral grounds. The book posits that the election was decided based on the ability of the person to secure the country in the most effective way possible. The book also acknowledges that women played a pivotal role in electing Bush and not the social conservatives (Fiorina et al. 256). From the discussion in this Chapter, the authors failed to precisely identify the point they sought to drive home with this proposition. As such, one is left to wonder whether they seem to suggest that moral convictions do not have a final say in the politics of the day on one hand; or whether they would hold eventually that the moral conception is not so much divided as to actuate any significant change in the political framework of the country.
Chapter 9
Reconciling Micro and Macro
In this Chapter Fiorina tries to establish a relationship between the divisions among political candidates and how this may ultimately influence the perception that electorates too are divided. The position of this book is that it is fallacious to say that political decisions could be solely informed by morality (Fiorina et al. 271). The argument fronted is that if an election was to be decided by two parameters; economy and morals, then even if both candidates agree on morality, the researchers are likely to portray it as if it was decided based on morality. This argument is plausible based on the tabulated evidence provided by the authors. It is however, out of perspective if other factors are in play during that election period and if this could determine the direction of the elections in question.
Chapter 10
How did it come to this and where do we go from Here?
The account of this book attributes the polarization problems to first, few incentives that would lead to political participation. The second one is the expanded role of government which means that many people can be brought on board to participate in political discourse and this could further tear the country apart. Finally, the fact that the government has increased its openness and the ability of people to participate in governance gives room for diverse opinions to come on board (Fiorina et al. 293). According to me, all the three reasons raised by the author do not clearly establish a nexus between polarization and the culture wars that the country is experiencing. Instead, the argument that is being fronted is that increased participation in government affairs by the elite highly contributes to polarization.
Works Cited
Fiorina, Morris P, Samuel J. Abrams, and Jeremy Pope. Culture War?: The Myth of a Polarized America. Boston, MA: Longman, 2011. Print.
