Foucauldian Micropolitics and the Evolution of Party Polarization: Diverging Discourses in America's Two-Party System

Much attention has been paid to the growing level of polarization at both the party level and within the American public, particularly since the late 1970's. Many scholars will either argue that elite polarization is representative of pre-existing, strongly felt political beliefs in the electorate, or that voters act on the basis of the elite cues they observe in politicians. Scholarship has been lacking, however, a microlevel analysis of the polarization of elite discourse, its motivations, and its effects on the American voter. This study quantifies the divergence in party discourse on particular issues through an analysis of published platforms and presidential candidate convention speeches. By employing Foucauldian theories of micropolitics and biopower, a qualitative case study, critical discourse analyses, and ANES polling data, this study finds that not only have the parties been deploying drastically diverging discourses on issues of biopolitical administration, but this also tends to engender political saliency on issues in which voters were not significantly concerned. There are certainly insidious implications for a representative system of government when parties utilize discourse to manufacture political opinions for their own self-interest. The data herein show that both parties have been guilty of such mobilization tactics within the last forty years.