How Does Polarization Erode Compromise?—A Multilevel Empirical Analysis of Party System Polarization, Intra-party Competition Intensity and Voters' Attitudes Toward Political Compromise in Europe
Abstract
Political compromise is essential to representative democracy amid diverse interests. Yet in contemporary Western societies, party-system polarization has intensified and compromise is scarce. Existing studies focus on elite consequences but rarely ask whether polarization penetrates voters' attitudes and erodes the public psychological basis of compromise. Using European Social Survey and Chapel Hill Expert Survey data, this paper argues that party-system polarization strengthens voters' partisan identification, making them view compromise as "betrayal" rather than "necessary concession." Intra-party competition intensity amplifies this chain, creating a vicious cycle of polarization, internal struggle, and hardened voter attitudes. The higher party-system polarization, the lower voters' willingness to compromise, especially among strongly partisan voters. Intra-party competition positively moderates this mechanism, particularly in multi-party systems. This paper offers cross-national voter-level evidence for understanding Western democracy's "compromise dilemma," revealing that when party competition degenerates from ideological contest to identity confrontation, the erosion of compromise culture has deep socio-psychological roots. This has important implications for democratic resilience today.
References
- Dahl, R. A. (1999).Preface to democratic theory. SDX Joint Publishing Company. Beijing
- Lijphart, A. (2012).Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. Yale University Press. New Haven
- Qi, L. (2022). The compromise dilemma in American political polarization.Jiangsu Social Sciences, (5), 61–69+242.
- Mason, L. (2018).Uncivil agreement: How politics became our identity. University of Chicago Press. Chicago
- Wu, Y. (2021). Phased pain or systemic crisis? Development trends and practical dilemmas of social democratic parties in Europe.Scientific Socialism, (1), 73–78.
- Levendusky, M. S. (2009).The partisan sort: How liberals became Democrats and conservatives became Republicans. University of Chicago Press. Chicago
- Qi, L. (2022). Political polarization and the dilemma of Western democracy.Open Times, (3), 159–171+9.
- Dalton, R. J. (2008). The quantity and the quality of party systems: Party system polarization, its measurement, and its consequences.Comparative Political Studies, 41(7), 899–920.
- Coppedge, M., et al. (2024).V-Dem codebook v14. V-Dem Institute. Gothenburg
- Somer-Topcu, Z. (2015). Everything to everyone: The electoral consequences of the broad-appeal strategy in Europe.American Journal of Political Science, 59(4), 841–854.
- Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2012).The spirit of compromise: Why governing demands it and campaigning undermines it. Princeton University Press. Princeton
- Mutz, D. C. (2006).Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge
- Harbridge, L., Malhotra, N., & Harrison, B. F. (2014). Public preferences for bipartisanship in the policymaking process.Legislative Studies Quarterly, 39(3), 327–355.