Lessons of History: The Politics of Division

In my previous columns, I have discussed the 250th anniversaries of important events in the American Revolution. As we enter 2026, you’ll see more of that in this space and elsewhere. But there’s no denying that we are, right now, in the middle of hugely historic, possibly cataclysmic, events that will shape the future of this country, for good or ill. At such times, the historian’s job is to remind us how current events have historic parallels and to point out the lessons that history provides.

There is also no question that Americans are divided now, perhaps more sharply and more passionately than at any point in our lifetimes. So let’s look at a few of the other historic times when Americans were most divided, and see what lessons we might draw from them.

In the early 19th century, despite the glorious ideals of the revolution and the Constitution, voting was restricted to just one class of people: white males who owned land. Yes, that was it — no one else could vote. Popular movements in the 1820s and ’30s resulted in the expansion of voting rights for almost all white males, but it wasn’t easy. In some states, privileged landowners resisted sharing power with the unwashed masses — they called it “mob influence” — and the debates were quite heated. There was violence, too (see the Dorr Rebellion), but eventually real reforms were enacted.

Ironically, the massive influx of new voters resulted in the selection of a president who would turn out to be the most autocratic of the 19th century: Andrew Jackson. He had campaigned as the first “man of the people,” someone from outside the circle of wealthy elites who had dominated since the revolution. 

New voters were enthralled by his military heroics over the British at New Orleans in 1814 and his aggressive military campaigns against Native American tribes. Once in office, his campaigns against the Bank of the United States and against the tribes (see the Indian Removal Act and Trail of Tears) were marked by the willful expansion of executive power and the employment of unabashed racism as a political strategy. 

Jackson’s support of slavery fed the increasing power of Southern slaveholder interests over national politics, which would lead to the worst political division in our history and all-out Civil War.

Although there was lots of blame to go around for the rise of pro-slavery power, the uncompromising attitude of the Jacksonians, together with their expansion of the power-grabbing spoils system (look that one up, too), certainly helped set the country on a path to violent division. And much of it was enabled by purposefully spreading racist fears of native people and freed slaves.

Discomfort with that racism and with slavery also led to the collapse of the two-party system then in place. As the Democratic Party became dominated by Southern slaveholders, their counterparts, the Whigs, now had to wrestle with the issue of slavery, and it tore them apart. Anti-Jacksonian Democrats and anti-slavery Whigs left their respective parties and formed the Republican Party.

But there was another alternative party that briefly captured public interest and a fair amount of political power.

The American Party was virulently anti-immigrant, with openly racist and anti-Catholic rhetoric loudly proclaiming that this country belonged to “Native Americans,” meaning white men born in the United States.

Even back then, this kind of hatred was just too extreme for most, and their own members took to claiming ignorance when questioned, leading to the moniker by which the party was much better known: The Know-Nothings.

After a brief heyday in which they took over several New England states and had members in Congress and several other state legislatures, the party quickly collapsed by the mid-1850s, as the Republican Party unified Northerners around limiting slavery.

The collapse of the Whig party, then, created enough chaos for the Southern Democrats to force a confrontation over slavery, and this fundamental division in the country led to the Civil War. Fast-forward to Reconstruction, and we find another lesson: The triumph of power over principles.

Republicans ran everything after the Civil War, having smashed the Southern Democrats once and for all, albeit at the cost of close to 1 million American lives. Their support for civil rights and opportunity for former slaves ushered in some of the most positive changes in our history, but they didn’t last. After ruling virtually unopposed for over a decade, the Republican Party had begun to descend into some of the worst corruption in our history. As the public caught on, the party desperately clung to power; so desperately, in fact, that it ended up abandoning the entire cause of civil rights (see the Compromise of 1877). And when one of their own, James Garfield, promised to reform that corruption, he was killed. The collateral damage? Another 80 years of Jim Crow and segregation.

So, what are the lessons here? There are many, but let’s concentrate on the most relevant.

Divisive tactics like fearmongering, prejudice, and racism are handy political tools, but tend to backfire. And when they do, the resulting chaos can be tragic. In times of chaos, a unifying, positive message can bring progress. But chaos also creates opportunity for those who value power over principles. They stoke fear, then promise order and progress, but never deliver. As Lord Acton said in 1887, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Jonathan Bill taught history in Peninsula schools for 32 years. He lives in Wauna.