ideological bases as their districts have become more partisan and homogeneous. Districts have become more like echo chambers, reinforcing members’ ideological predispositions with fewer dissenting voices back home or fewer disparate groups of constituents to consider in representation. The impact shows in their behavior.17
Elizabeth Kolbert, in a review of David Daley’s book on redistricting, titled RATF**CKED: The True Story Behind the Secret Plan to Steal America’s Democracy, noted:
The science of gerrymandering is now so precise that most incumbents’ main fear is a primary challenge, and here the best defense is to play to the lunatic fringe. The net result, as many analysts have noted, is increasing polarization. Daley takes this analysis a half step further, arguing that the control Republicans exercised over the latest round of redistricting is the very reason the party lost control over its members. The representatives who make up the House Freedom Caucus – the group that last year forced John Boehner from office – hail from districts so red that the biggest danger they face is being branded insufficiently immoderate. Daley quotes James Huntwork, a Republican election-law expert, who describes a primary campaign in a typically lopsided district as a contest between one candidate who says, “I am completely crazy!” and the one who says, ‘I am even crazier than you!18
Collectively these findings not only explain how elected officials become more insular and polarized in their outlook and actions, but they set the stage for explaining how and why money comes to play such a dominant role in today’s political environments.
What Then to Do?
Recognizing that Trump won the election according to the Constitution and laws of and within the United States is one thing: agreeing that he received a mandate to do as he wishes is an entirely different matter. Moreover, understanding the context within Trump arose and the psychology through which he operates, it is not enough to simply throw up your hands and say Trump won the election so he can do what he wants or to take a break from politics so to recover from the defeat: our understanding of human dignity and what it means to live a dignified human existence demands we confront inequality and inequities, promote individual rights and social justice, and build toward more respectful and integrated communities.
Moreover, it is not enough to simply address the rise of populism, as if one did all problems would go away. Consider, for example, recommendations of the study on personalities and populism previously discussed. The study recommended a four-step strategy for mitigating the rise of populism:
•
•
•
•
This is all well and good. It might even result in some positive change. But it will take time, a lot
67