ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

The Microsociology of Political Antagonism and Dialogue: Dynamics of (De)Polarization in Interpersonal Interaction

Civil Society
Conflict
Political Sociology
Qualitative
Communication
Narratives
Theoretical
Matthias Revers
University of Leeds
Matthias Revers
University of Leeds

Abstract

The fundamental premise of this paper is that affective polarization is deeply entrenched in the lived experience of political conflict and division, shaped by struggles for recognition and the perception of misrecognition by others. The paper examines micropolarization, exploring how political divisions permeate interpersonal interactions and the mechanisms that sustain and mitigate these divisions. The analysis draws from two empirical studies, which together offer a thorough examination of how: 1) public narratives and emotions stemming from political divisions give rise to interpersonal conflict, and 2) specific communicative practices can serve as effective mitigators of these divisions. The first study examines the interpersonal implications of disputes surrounding the novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination within family and friendship networks in Germany and the UK. Employing a performance theoretical framework, the analysis shows how political emotions, symbolic language, and forms of misrecognition are enacted in these conflicts. I demonstrate that struggles for recognition—understood as contests over moral worth and status—are central to the dynamics of micropolarization. Misrecognition, particularly when tied to stereotypes or dismissive attributions, drives stigma and entrenches divisions. Conversely, the potential for depolarization emerges through moments of recognition, where individuals engage in nuanced appraisals of opposing perspectives, even amidst disagreement. This is where the second study picks up. Building upon this foundation, it extends the analysis to dyadic conversations about climate politics, a highly politicized issue that intersects with divergent political identities. Participants with opposing views on climate activism and policies in the UK and Germany were matched and engaged in unmoderated discussions through video conferencing software. The findings indicate that these interactions often serve to intensify substantive disagreements while concurrently reducing mutual antipathy, which is associated with affective polarization. This phenomenon is facilitated by conversational engagement, such as active listening, expressions of empathy, and the establishment of common ground (on political topics and beyond). These dynamics underscore the dual role of interpersonal communication as both a site of polarization and a potential avenue for its mitigation. Collectively, these studies demonstrate how micropolarization operates as a dynamic and interactional process, linking macro-level political antagonisms to micro-level social interactions. By emphasizing the interplay of political emotion, symbolic meanings, and performative action, this paper contributes to the theoretical understanding and empirical analysis of affective polarization. Additionally, it suggests a broader research agenda concerning the conditions under which political divisions may be negotiated, reconfigured, or even overcome in everyday interactions.