{"id":4935,"date":"2026-01-15T15:08:45","date_gmt":"2026-01-15T15:08:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/?p=4935"},"modified":"2026-05-06T10:06:44","modified_gmt":"2026-05-06T10:06:44","slug":"what-kind-of-depolarization-do-we-actually-want","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/theoretical-concepts\/discursive-polarization\/what-kind-of-depolarization-do-we-actually-want\/","title":{"rendered":"What Kind of Depolarization Do We Actually Want?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

What Kind of Depolarization Do We Actually Want?<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Polarization has become a key concern in public debate. It is often treated as something that should simply be reduced or avoided. But this raises a crucial question: what kind of depolarization is actually desirable\u2014and for whom?<\/p>

In our new paper, \u201cWhat Kind of Depolarization Should We Aim For? Making Communication Transformative\u201d (Political Communication), we argue that calls for depolarization often remain normatively vague. Reducing conflict per se is not necessarily democratic, nor does it automatically help societies respond to pressing social and ecological crises.<\/p>

The paper grew out of the Transformative Communication research initiative and was developed through collaborative work in Hamburg. Drawing on debates in deliberative and agonistic democratic theory, we propose Democratic Transformative Communication as a normative framework for evaluating polarization and depolarization in public discourse. From this perspective, the goal is not lukewarm compromise or enforced civility. Instead, we argue for constructive controversies that expand society\u2019s capacity for collective problem-solving. Ideological polarization can be legitimate\u2014and even necessary\u2014when it addresses real injustices or structural problems. At the same time, affective polarization becomes problematic when it undermines democratic listening, fuels backlash, or blocks transformation.<\/p>

The framework also calls for a rethinking of what counts as \u201cmoderate.\u201d Moderation is not about centrist positioning, but about openness to different viewpoints, willingness to engage opponents respectfully, and commitment to democratic and sustainable futures.<\/p>

Rather than asking how to depolarize public debate in general, we suggest asking a more demanding question: Does communication help societies move toward democracy, justice, and sustainability\u2014or does it hinder that process?<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Br\u00fcggemann, M., van Eck, C. W., Gelovani, S., Meyer, H., Muddiman, A., Pr\u00f6schel, L., & Wessler, H. (2026). What Kind of Depolarization Should We Aim For? Making Communication Transformative. Political Communication, 1\u20138. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/10584609.2026.2617224<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Welche Art von Depolarisierung brauchen, oder wollen wir eigentlich? Polarisierung gilt derzeit als eines der gr\u00f6\u00dften Probleme \u00f6ffentlicher Debatten. H\u00e4ufig wird dabei implizit angenommen, dass weniger Polarisierung automatisch besser f\u00fcr Demokratie und gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalt sei. Doch diese Annahme greift zu kurz. Die entscheidende Frage lautet vielmehr: Welche Art von Depolarisierung ist \u00fcberhaupt w\u00fcnschenswert \u2013 und […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":4199,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[24,20,40,27,62],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4935","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-depolarizing-public-debates","category-discursive-polarization","category-research-projects","category-fuel2-the-fire","category-transformative-kommunikation"],"blocksy_meta":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4935","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4935"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4935\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4939,"href":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4935\/revisions\/4939"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4199"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4935"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4935"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/transformativecommunication.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4935"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}