What do you think?
Rate this book
Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America
Updated in a new 3rd edition and part of the "Great Questions in Politics" series, "Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America" combines polling data with a compelling narrative to debunk commonly-believed myths about American politics--particularly the claim that Americans are deeply divided in their fundamental political views.
Authored by one of the most respected political scientists in America, this brief, trade-like text looks at controversial and hot topic issues (such as homosexuality, abortion, etc.) and argues that most Americans are not polarized in relation to them.
Authored by one of the most respected political scientists in America, this brief, trade-like text looks at controversial and hot topic issues (such as homosexuality, abortion, etc.) and argues that most Americans are not polarized in relation to them.
288 pages, Paperback
First published July 14, 2004
5 people are currently reading
306 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 33 reviews
December 23, 2024
A decent argument for the state of the electorate circa 2004 but outdated in the age of Trump. I'd be interested to have some of the public opinion surveys replicated to see if the author's conclusions still hold. This book predates social media (nothing dates a 2000s book like words such as "blogosphere"), the Tea Party movement and Trump on the right, and the progressive movement on the left. It's just harder to buy the author's argument that we agree on more than we disagree on when a sizable chunk of the country spent the last four years believing the 2020 election was stolen. It's probably not fair to judge a mid-2000s book by mid-2020s metrics, but at this point, this is more of a historical artifact than a compelling political science work. If I were a librarian, this book would have been weeded some time ago.
February 25, 2017
This book provides a concise and clear assessment of the political statistical data that has previously been made oblivious to the public eye- proving that neither the Left nor the Right of the political spectrum have been quite as polarized as we have been made to believe. Even regarding the most controversial issues, like homosexuality and abortion, the data shows that it is not necessarily the voters themselves who have become so militant and polarized, but the political parties and their respective representatives. Fiorina raises a significant question central to the theme of this book:
"Even if citizen attitudes on most issues are not highly polarized, has the way such attitudes translate into votes changed? That is, even if Americans are not deeply divided on specific issues, could it be that their views translate into votes in new ways that somehow magnify the differences that exist?"
Fiorina emphasizes a number of deceptive tactics utilized by the political parties in order to make the political division between them appear that much more prominent, and why they succeed in persuading the majority.
"Even if citizen attitudes on most issues are not highly polarized, has the way such attitudes translate into votes changed? That is, even if Americans are not deeply divided on specific issues, could it be that their views translate into votes in new ways that somehow magnify the differences that exist?"
Fiorina emphasizes a number of deceptive tactics utilized by the political parties in order to make the political division between them appear that much more prominent, and why they succeed in persuading the majority.
March 4, 2016
Incredibly boring: at one point the author recites the data tables that he has printed on the page.
The other problem with this book is his hypothesis sets out to prove something we already know is true: media outlets sensationalize small contrasts to get headlines and attract viewers. Duh.
The book would have been more interesting if his slant would have tried to blame the audience for continuing to click on nonsense, rather than the media who is only providing them with what they desire.
The other problem with this book is his hypothesis sets out to prove something we already know is true: media outlets sensationalize small contrasts to get headlines and attract viewers. Duh.
The book would have been more interesting if his slant would have tried to blame the audience for continuing to click on nonsense, rather than the media who is only providing them with what they desire.
October 28, 2017
Interesting analysis, but imperfect and now quite outdated.
May 8, 2021
It makes me sad that this was not understood when it was published. I generally think it has become a prophecy that was fulfilled. We didn't listen that the war being preached by the political activists and media surrogates was a false one that in no way reflected the reality of the views of the public. But it dragged on long enough for most of public to become radicalized on one side or the other turning this cold war hot. I lament what might have been if we had understood better what was happening. Maybe if enough people understand now we could go back.
May 19, 2025
obama started this culture war crap in recent years, and made it wrong to dispute. Even though he was raised in white privilege, he fueled the fires that had been working toward a resolution. Students are allowed to say "It is because I'm black?" when they don't get their way. The media is nt allowed to report the truth about biden's health, stolen elections, etc. This book is fueling the problem. Alfred E. Newman style: Problem? What problem?
August 22, 2020
This book bored me to hell. So repetitive and on a topic which didn’t really interest me. Maybe I shouldn’t have taken AP Gov...
April 30, 2023
Easy to read and a good insight into pre-Obama America
February 24, 2014
Morris Fiorina's Culture War pushes back on the idea that America is an intensly divided political state composed of blue states where liberals dominate and red states where conservatives dominate. Instead, he parses data on a variety of issues to attempt to demonstrate that most Americans still belong in the middle of the political spectrum, and the views of "red" and "blue" America are not truly that divergent.
The books makes some good arguments, but in the end, I have to say that it didn't fully convince me. It may be true that many Americans still view themselves as moderates, but these Americans tend to be the ones who are least politically active, and in some cases their moderation just reflects their desire to adopt socially acceptable positions without having to know anything about politics, e.g., "both sides need to compromise."
Moreover, Fiorina marshals many statistics to boost his argument, but I found myself questioning some of his methodology. His arrangment of seven point scales to reflect positions on controversial issues seemed designed to put such extreme positions at the opposing ends that there was virtually no way that many individuals would adopt them in a survey. Those individuals would be forced more toward the center of the scale, and Fiorina could then argue that they aren't so far apart politically, even though the positions they expouse may still be very opposed to each other. I thought this true especially in the chapters on guns and abortion, exactly the issues where you might expect the most disagreement.
Culture War is not a bad book--and Fiorina certainly has a point that the rhetoric of "war" is overblown, and that many political operators are using the idea of a culture war for their own personal and political ends. Yet, I think we delude ourselves if we persist in the belief that there is a big sensible political middle and it is only our politicians that are driving political polarization. Our politicians are sent to Washington by the rest of us, and the rest of us bear the brunt of responsibility for their actions.
The books makes some good arguments, but in the end, I have to say that it didn't fully convince me. It may be true that many Americans still view themselves as moderates, but these Americans tend to be the ones who are least politically active, and in some cases their moderation just reflects their desire to adopt socially acceptable positions without having to know anything about politics, e.g., "both sides need to compromise."
Moreover, Fiorina marshals many statistics to boost his argument, but I found myself questioning some of his methodology. His arrangment of seven point scales to reflect positions on controversial issues seemed designed to put such extreme positions at the opposing ends that there was virtually no way that many individuals would adopt them in a survey. Those individuals would be forced more toward the center of the scale, and Fiorina could then argue that they aren't so far apart politically, even though the positions they expouse may still be very opposed to each other. I thought this true especially in the chapters on guns and abortion, exactly the issues where you might expect the most disagreement.
Culture War is not a bad book--and Fiorina certainly has a point that the rhetoric of "war" is overblown, and that many political operators are using the idea of a culture war for their own personal and political ends. Yet, I think we delude ourselves if we persist in the belief that there is a big sensible political middle and it is only our politicians that are driving political polarization. Our politicians are sent to Washington by the rest of us, and the rest of us bear the brunt of responsibility for their actions.
December 18, 2010
The “culture war” rhetoric recently popularized by some in the media polarizes and stereotypes Americans. Blue states are snobs. Red states are unsophisticated working class stiffs. But is such polarization real, or is it the figment of “politicos” in the media who have found a catchy sound bite? Media and the politic elite appear to find such divides useful to their purposes, i.e., to be able to play up to their base. Americans are divided in real ways across issues of abortion, gun control, and governmental control over their day to day lives. However, how much this divide actually results in “two Nations” is debatable. Fiorina (2005) provides somewhat of an answer to that question. It is that there is no real culture-divide and Fiorina hammers this point with survey data. Red and Blue states are not divided at all, but are centrists in orientation. However, when the survey data is examined America appears to be more right of center than smack down the middle centrists. For example, both Red and Blue States believe at equal levels that immigration should decrease, favor school vouchers, and view the moral climate as much worse than previously. Both hold socially progressive ideas of equality for women, oppose racial discrimination, and tolerance of others moral views. The divide comes in terms of gun control and opposition to legalization of abortion- and perhaps it is these issues that color our opinion of the "culture divide." It may be that there are deep divides in terms of these two issues in Red and Blue states, but on multiple core issues there is agreement in the conservative direction by the American Electorate.
Dan Smee
Author, "Totally American"
Dan Smee
Author, "Totally American"
December 22, 2009
Red states versus blue states. We have all heard of the great divide in the United States for so long that it has become something close to "received wisdom." This thin little book, authored by the well-respected Morris Fiorina (with the assistance of Samuel Abrams and Jeremy Pope), questions this widely held view of a culture war raging in the United States.
Fiorina, for those readers who are familiar with his academic research, is a skilled researcher, well schooled in statistics. It is to his credit that he presents evidence in a way that is accessible to lay readers (his technical publications would not be so easily understandable to nonacademic readers).
In short, he believes that the idea of a great culture war is dead wrong. As he says in Chapter 1: ". . .the sentiments expressed. . .[by:] scholars, journalists, and politicos range from simple exaggeration to sheer nonsense." Chapter 2 suggests strongly that the differences between citizens in red and blue states is not so great as advocates of the culture war say. While there is greater polarization between leaders of the Republicans and Democrats across the country, this same polarization is not nearly so manifest among the bulk of the American people. Indeed, the United States, in his view, remains a centrist, moderate country politically.
All in all, a good read and a provocative thesis. Worth reading by those interested in how well "culture war" serves as a metaphor for American politics.
Fiorina, for those readers who are familiar with his academic research, is a skilled researcher, well schooled in statistics. It is to his credit that he presents evidence in a way that is accessible to lay readers (his technical publications would not be so easily understandable to nonacademic readers).
In short, he believes that the idea of a great culture war is dead wrong. As he says in Chapter 1: ". . .the sentiments expressed. . .[by:] scholars, journalists, and politicos range from simple exaggeration to sheer nonsense." Chapter 2 suggests strongly that the differences between citizens in red and blue states is not so great as advocates of the culture war say. While there is greater polarization between leaders of the Republicans and Democrats across the country, this same polarization is not nearly so manifest among the bulk of the American people. Indeed, the United States, in his view, remains a centrist, moderate country politically.
All in all, a good read and a provocative thesis. Worth reading by those interested in how well "culture war" serves as a metaphor for American politics.
June 14, 2011
This was a good read. It wasn't overly dry, though it did have its occasional moments. Like the information and proofs that Fiorina brought to the thesis/argument. I would recommend this book to anyone whom has an interest in politics/ government, and media/main stream perspectives. This work helped to illustrate one of the many takes on current American politics. The thesis was logical and didn't seem to overly push the limits. Remaining neutral in the discussion of the proposed 'culture war' helped display both sides of the spectrum (and from what I could tell the leanings remained mostly out of the piece). Good read!!!
June 26, 2012
Fiorina makes some interesting, new-ish points attempting to disprove that there is a culture war in the US. While I agree that perhaps "culture war" is a bit dramatic, he did not convince me that there is not, in fact, great disagreement among a sizable portion of Americans. Maybe it is "only" 20% or so, but that is still a lot of people and quite meaningful, especially if the folks who are interested enough in voting in primaries have quite different views, then the candidates will end up with different views and values. I am sure he will come out with another edition after the 2012 election and I'll be interested to see how he discusses the tea party and the ill-will in Congress.
April 16, 2013
There's substantial empirical evidence in this book to suggest that the political polarization that gets so much attention in the media is an illusion -- so far as everyday people are concerned. True, there is deep polarization among the political elites, but not so much at all among everyone else -- if Fiorina's use of the longitudinal studies (General Social Survey and National Election Studies) is credible. He isn't the only researcher saying this either. It makes me wonder if we aren't still a nation of sheep!
July 12, 2016
I read this in the early 2000s in college and recall that even then I found the arguments less than persuasive. Having reread this book in the age of a stonewalling do-nothing Congress, gun-toting anti-government lunatics, and the rise of Drumpf, I am even less convinced than ever that this country isn't deeply, possibly fatally, polarized.
It would be interesting to read a new edition, with new research, to see if Fiorina still holds to his thesis in light of 2016's grim reality.
It would be interesting to read a new edition, with new research, to see if Fiorina still holds to his thesis in light of 2016's grim reality.
May 1, 2010
Fiorina's thesis is that political parties, not citizens, are increasingly polarized. He discusses how the two major political parties have moved to the left and right and provides arguments on what this all means for democracy. The updated version includes the 2008 election and how it does or does not fit into his thesis.
February 8, 2016
Interesting and very well researched analysis of the polarization (or lack thereof) of the American electorate. I would be interested to see how some of the ideas have changed or how the data might be different if it reflected elections more recent than 2004 as well as the increased importance of social media in determining partisanship.
November 10, 2008
Disappointing -- Fiorina seems content to debunk the crude red-state/blue-state with an endless array of statistics, never actually putting forward a more sophisticated analysis. I bailed after a hundred pages or so.
May 18, 2009
Fiorina postulates and interesting theory regarding the political activity of Americans, and how americans are truly not as polarized as the media makes us out to be.
This is a quick and interesting read.
This is a quick and interesting read.
January 7, 2011
reading the third edition, though... Goodreads doesn't seem to have it!
Hmmm... hard to say whether or not I liked this book. I agree with Fiorina that the "Culture War" is overemphasized, but I dislike his solutions.
Hmmm... hard to say whether or not I liked this book. I agree with Fiorina that the "Culture War" is overemphasized, but I dislike his solutions.
January 30, 2008
There is no left or right America, but, rather, a moderate one. Read this book to find out how media incorrectly portrays America as 'red' or 'blue' and how we are really 'purple,' or, in between.
September 8, 2008
everyone should read this book. the information presented is valid and reliable, the conclusions drawn are linear and realistic... it's so interesting.
September 28, 2008
Important book, but he comes to questionable conclusions. America is split, 45/45. We'll see how the 10% vote in 2008.
February 11, 2009
This was a great read, lots of data from all sorts of sources, and the answer is not what you might think it is!
November 23, 2015
Read for class, a dull take on an over-talked subject.
April 7, 2010
You want to look at some data to see if we're really in a Culture War? This book will help tremendously...
May 9, 2011
A MUST READ!! Seriously. Even if you don't subscribe to mainstream political ideologies, this is a well researched account of what America REALLY believes.
January 15, 2017
Compelling argument, although it does not address recent increases in partisanship among politicians and its possible repercussions.
January 23, 2015
Very informative.
Definitely altered some opinions about American polarization. An updated version would be nice, because a lot has changed in the political climate since 2004/2008.
Definitely altered some opinions about American polarization. An updated version would be nice, because a lot has changed in the political climate since 2004/2008.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 33 reviews