Your Social Science misses a major explanation: the voting system.
There is no nation in the world that has so many layers of winner-take-all on top of winner-take-all. We don’t have free elections; we pick between the two top contenders. When times are not well for many (and they are not good for many despite full bellies), then the finger pointing comes out.
If there are two parties, then the fingers will go to two parties.
I am surprised that you did not look at the system in place. I'd say that is almost unforgivable, Kenneth : - ) But you did do a great job setting up all other arguments.
In the Americas, we have almost always an empowered president. That is one layer of winner-take-all on top of whatever system is underneath.
Major exception: Canada. The Queen holds top position, and in effect establishes an empty top position. It is good for society to not have an Egyptian pyramid with a single power in top. The Mexican pyramid with a flattened top is better; more people can sit at that flat top level, so there is greater attention for the diverse needs in society.
I hope I scored points here right away, not having to explain that Canada is indeed the most European nation in the Americas, better for its own citizens in general than any other nation in the Americas.
Just that one layer of winner-take-all on top of whatever is underneath.
---
Many people are so unaware about district voting. They have no clue how bad it is. Let me moderate that: they have no idea how bad the system is. They don't see it.
It doubles majority rule.
I hope your math skills are around, because a majority times a majority is often a minority.
Sixty percent of the voters picking the Senators is what I found in 2006 when I did the calculations.
Say, with filibuster in place, that 60% voted for a bill, then we have minority voter representation passing that bill.
0.6 x 0.6 = 0.36 percent of the voters that actually supported that decision with their vote.
In Proportional Voting, that is impossible.
With 100 seats, 99.01 percent of the voters are represented in Proportional Voting. So a 60% decision is supported by 59.4% of the voters.
Majority rule over there, unabridged.
Minority rule over here, due to the doubling of majority rule. That is, except on 9/11 when we all sing the same song on the steps of the Capital together. When together, we are really strong.
--
If you get this, then you also get how we often feel:
WE ARE NOT BEING LISTENED TO.
The ones 'representing' us only need to take care of the majority and themselves to get reelected. That means squeezing.
To win, the candidate has to squeeze by the others, and so we are squeezing, squeezing, squeezing as a society because our 'representatives' are squeezing. The decisions are all squeezed decisions.
Then, we are obviously not-fully considered in the decisions and then we look for solutions.
We are then offered two solutions by our two beloved parties, and many pick one, and many pick the other. We have no other options.
The greater the need, the more we want a solution. The more we want a solution, the greater the split in society, politically.
After the Great Depression, a far more stable society was created. But it was done despite out voting system, not because of our voting system. Our voting system has a natural tendency to divide, and when the money flows up in greater quantities than the trickle coming down, then people will get out their fingers to point at the bad guys.
Our system is to blame (plus all the larger realities we are involved in, several you pointed out):
Voters compete with voters here to get representation. And then we lie. We say that we are free, when we actually have a single choice and not a lot of choice besides that.
We are split, because we have a split voting system. We are bipolar, and that is officially an illness but considered the norm.
To say a bit more about our voting system and societal results:
The bottom of society gets very little in the USA.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.DST.FRST.10
Scroll down to see that the US ‘gives’ 1.7% to its bottom ten percent of society.
Canada: 2.7%
Denmark: 3.7%
The better the system, the better society as a whole functions.
So, good article, but I missed the inferior voting system we have.
