I have exactly the same observations. I am a European who sometimes tries to follow American politics. I try to get a more objective picture by reading different sites: I read a conservative site (National Review), one on the left (Salon.com) and one that has articles on both sides (New York Times, although it seems rather left). I`ve read in salon.com articles full of hatred for whites, men, Trump voters, etc. I have never read such a noise of hate in the National Review. Yes, the left is increasingly positive about socialism and is trying to embellish the crimes of the communists, whereas I have not noticed anything similar with regard to the right and the Nazis. Antifa is violent and I don`t see a group of violence comparable to the right. Language restrictions, campus protests, bans on intervening, firing people for false thoughts, all these undemocratic and non-wild things are mostly left-wing. “Political polarization in America is at a record high and the conflict has propelled itself beyond differences of opinion on political issues. A certain degree of antipathy – at least if not personal – may, in principle, reflect disagreements, no prejudice.

But there is a big difference between an awareness of antipathy and the festive forms we are now observing” (10- Cass Sunstein (2015) Let me hold a mirror to science itself. Does this “incivile segmentation” affect faculty, not only in politics, but also in schools of thought? As far as politics is concerned, I have observed a somewhat exaggerated reaction from academics to the Trump election, so much so that there are regular “Tourette`s Syndrome” oaths on the current political landscape that seems stronger than the past. It is almost as if there were “two-minute hate sessions” to deduce from meetings that have nothing to do with the current political landscape. And those who don`t walk the line jump right away. This “furious” phenomenon encompasses many of those who are supposed to analyze the political landscape in a professional (passionate) way. But do we do it? The social science profession seems to be approaching the Trump administration as a great outlier (several above-average standard deviations), but has anyone asked if the government is really so “far away”? In short, does Professor Mason, who is studying in the political world, also have an impact on the profession in which the analysis is conducted? I will again nominate Arthur Brooks as a potential future guest on this topic (or related) based on his new podcast focused on the art of disagreement. As a Liberal, Brooks is one of those conservatives that I have in mind because I am interested in some of his work.