Polarization is a good thing!

The initial signs of the polarization in 2008 occurred between Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise. When Tom Cruise was making the movie Walkryie, it recounted an assassination theme that was plotted against Hitler during WW2 and shed light on that time. Pitt, a year younger than his senior Tom, parodied Hitler"s time in a panoramic vision in the film "Inglorious Bastards" directed by Quentin Tarantino in 2009..

Brad said at the movie premiere that "Inglorious Bastards" one of the best movies that has ever been made in relation to WW2 and, when referring to the movie Cruise made a year ago, he said it was funny and by no means comparable to his own.

Since both actors starred in ''interview with the vampire'' (1994) they have never settled with each other and not even looked at each other''s face. Fitting the popular term in Turkey, they were ''polarized'' and despite that, they made equally good movies and pleased their audience.

A similar case occurred between Robert de Niro and Al Pacino. They broke the ice with the movie Heat (1995). At any rate, the US was not as it used to be. Everything was changing and the generation difference was revealing itself almost in every field. This situation also reflected on the media. The media that lost its past credibility went through financially difficult times. The research company Pew published a research in July 2012. According to the research, on the resolution of the issues in the US while the polarization rate between Republicans and Democrats was 10% in 1987, it had increased to 18% by 2012.

The election of Barack Obama as the president and the severe opposition of the ''tea partiers'', which represented some groups in the Republican Party and the Fox News'' extreme right wing broadcasting policy, led the society to a serious fracture. Known as liberal and possessed by General Electric, MSNBC also started to broadcast aggressive programs. Even so, once MSNBC was left in the wake of the TV rating of Fox News, three weeks prior to the Iraqi occupation in 2003, Phil Donahue''s popular prime time show was removed.

In 2012, Fox News channel was way beyond CNN. The number of MSNBC''s audience was twice of CNN''s. The people did not know whom to believe, but everyone chose to watch the channels they felt intimately close. According to the National Journal, since 1982 the year of 2013 is when the Congress had the top level in polarization. In the previous years, Republicans and Democrats were getting along with each other ideologically to an extent. For example, a democrat party member could be more conservative than a republican member could, or vice versa, a republican could be more liberal than a democrat. The basic dynamic in the polarization is that parties are using a sharper style of language with the election concerns.

And this leads to the result in which both parties a considerable amount of members are leaving politics to more falcons. More surprisingly, it was intriguing that among the most severe critics against Obama''s commencement of the negotiation process with Iran was the most liberal Democrat Congress members. The reason why these liberals turned into falcons on the issue of Iran was because of the large population of Jewish voters in their election regions.

Last June, Pew''s last report proved that the level of polarization in the US so much increased that it became its highest level in the last 20 years between Democrats and Republicans. Accordingly, the number of moderate Americans is on a decline. Thirty-nine percent of the participants in the survey are in the center of the ideological range, however 12 percent are in the ''stable liberal'' camp while 9 percent are in the ''stable conservative'' camp.

According to the Pew report, again the polarization also manifests itself in daily life continuously. The ¾ of the ''stable conservatives'' are willing to live in larger houses that are more remote to others and at least a few miles away from schools, stores, restaurants. While 77% of the stable liberals are willing to have smaller houses that are adjacent to each other but still a walk distance to schools, stores, restaurants.

There are some people in Turkey who are fussing around saying ''oh we have been polarized for the last 5 years''. As you see, even in the most democratic country there has been an ongoing polarization for the last 5 years. By the way, why would it be a bad thing at all? Everybody has his or her own choices. What is the problem with that? Who knows what kind of tensions are present elsewhere in the world. People are all different. We all interpret the events from different perspectives. In a communication age like this, it''s good to have a myriad of opinions. Is it better when everybody has the same opinion? Even in the same house, kids cannot look into the events the way their parents see. This is against the nature of things.

I have never seen someone in the U.S complaining, ''Oh no, we have been polarized. We are dead, finished''. Everything co-exists with its opposite. That is the beauty of it. For me, it is quite ludicrous and ridiculous that some arguably intellectual, miserable people explain the Turkish sociology with ''imported'' terms. Reading Slavoj Zizek and using Marxist terminology or the logic of the novelist Kemalettin Tugcu, you are not able to understand this country. We had polarization here 30 years ago and it still exists. It will also exist after 40 years.

With a unique difference, though. It''s only that you guys are no longer in power. Your term is over. So, there is no point to make such nonsense ''we have been polarized'' just because you are no longer in power. You have also proposed many untrue theses. And no matter how many times you have said ''amen'' after your impossible prayer – as we say in Turkey –, the result is the same: you have failed.