Peter Thjissen, Antwerp University

More Solidarity, More Polarization? The Narcissism of Small Differences in American Politics

American politics presents a puzzle. Democrats and Republicans appear increasingly polarized, but do they justify solidarity in fundamentally different ways? In times of crisis and growing normative contestation, politics becomes ever more visibly a struggle over which reasons can legitimately justify obligations toward others. We put the Political Solidarity Framework (PSF)—developed and tested primarily in European multiparty systems—to a demanding test in the US two-party context. PSF conceptualizes solidarity as a contested process of political justification, distinguishing four justificatory logics for supporting or respecting others: shared identity, compassion, reciprocity, and empathy.

Analyzing Democratic and Republican presidential platforms from 1996 to 2024, we find that solidarity framing has increased rather than declined, while both parties predominantly rely on compassionate and empathic justifications. Compared with earlier European findings, US partisan differences appear surprisingly limited: Democrats and Republicans differ mainly in the weight they give to different justifications within a largely shared repertoire. The 2024 Republican platform, however, may signal a shift toward identity-based solidarity. We complement this party-level analysis with evidence from Reddit to explore whether similar justificatory patterns extend to partisan political discourse beyond party elites.