Editor’s Note: This is the latest in a thought leadership series from the Poole College of Management and the Enterprise Risk Management Initiative that taps experts from across NC State to explore societal issues through the lens of risk management.

Discord between America’s two primary political parties is nothing new. They exist, after all, to oppose one another. But there is ample evidence that the United States is as divided politically as it’s ever been, and that polarization has powerful impacts from the halls of Congress to the streets of American cities and towns.

Unlike the divides of the 1960s and 1970s, members of both parties today evince a great deal of “affective polarization,” according to Steven Greene, a professor of political science in the NC State School of Public and International Affairs. That’s a tendency to see members of the opposing party as immoral or dishonest, rather than just as proponents of different policies.

According to the Pew Research Center (2022):

• 72 percent of Republications say Democrats are immoral, and
• 83% of Democrats say Republications are “close-minded.”

“That’s an important feature of what we have now. It’s harder when you see the other side, not as the opposition, but as the enemy.”

If there is good news in the state of modern polarization, it’s that we may not be as harshly split as opinion polls suggest. Those amplifying stories of conflict also benefit from the idea that the population is irrevocably divided, according to Andrew Taylor, also a professor of political science at NC State.

“The people who are producing the media and influencing on social media have the megaphones,” he said. “That may be exaggerating our perception of the true level of polarization in American politics.”

Cynicism and Citizenship

A companion problem to polarization is cynicism. Increasingly, Taylor and Greene said, Americans doubt their own agency and suspect that the government is ineffective or inefficient.

That latter concern could stem from one of the fundamental aspects of our constitutional system. The founders built a system of checks and balances to limit any single branch of the federal government from becoming too powerful. There may be too much friction in the system, though. The U.S. House of Representatives took only 362 votes and passed just 64 bills in 2025, the second-lowest annual totals of the 21st century.

“I think there’s real concern that this particular presidential system of government is more open to democratic backsliding,” Greene said. “Because it can be so hard sometimes to get things done. You can have a leader say, ‘Only I can fix it.’”

“Modern polarization has intersected with some of the weaknesses of our constitutional design and put us in what I consider a fairly precarious position right now.” —Steven Greene

Withstanding Wild Policy Swings

In today’s polarized political landscape, business leaders can no longer count on stable, predictable regulatory environments.

As Taylor points out, the modern era of evenly matched political parties means that when control of Washington flips, “the change in policy is going to be very drastic.” This policy whiplash presents a severe, systemic threat to long-term corporate planning, according to Enterprise Risk Management Initiative Director Mark Beasley.

To mitigate this risk, enterprise risk managers and business owners must transition from reactive compliance to proactive scenario planning. Instead of betting on a single political outcome, leadership teams should design operational strategies flexible enough to flourish under both heavily regulated and free-market administrations.

“You have to be aware of shifting party control of government and the policy whiplash that comes with that.”

4 Key Steps for Boards and Executives

When policies and regulations swing wildly with each election cycle, businesses need to build the flexibility to keep pace. Leaders who take these steps have an advantage, Beasley says.

Get to Know our Experts

If you found this article useful, you may also like: