This FEELed Note was written by FEELed Lab research affiliates and climate solution scholars Jamie Stevens and Estraven Lupino-Smith whose project explores the potential of using arts‐led social infrastructures to address polarization for Anticolonial Climate Justice.
We are both settler-scholars and to begin, we offer gratitude to Indigenous scholars who have deeply informed this research. It is the research of IndigenEYEZ, Dr. Jeannette Armstrong, Dr. Shawn Wilson, Dr. Linda Tuhiwai Smith, Dr. Gwen Bridges, and Dr. Jennifer Grenz that grounds our work in an understanding of our polarizing tendencies within the colonial project – notably the binary categorizations of Us vs. the Other and Culture vs. Nature – and also possible anti-colonial pathways forward. This will be further expanded on in our next FEELed Note.
In the fall of 2025, we began by scoping our project and schematizing polarization. In order to address polarization, we sought a working definition of what polarization is and a place where polarization is perceived to be significant in order to keep our research as specific as possible. The definition was elusive, but the places were plentiful. We selected rural BC because of our positionality as researchers and the location of the FEELed Lab.
Our research identified five critical issues with polarization as it related to our project:
- Research on Canadian rural communities is sparse – it is often focused on American (eg: Ezra Klein’s book, Why Are We Polarized – where a two party political system channelizes the conversation) or European rural contexts (where the definition of rural would include both Kelowna and Haida Gwaii)
- Anti-colonial climate justice in rural BC necessitates grounding the research in land. Land looms large in rural identities, it is a site of ongoing climate injustices, and the control of land is the central tenant of colonialism (Tuck & Yang, 2012)
- Normative polarization research holds social cohesion as the main goal in order to maintain stable democracies, however this can come with an expectation that marginalized populations do not rock the boat in service to the national interest
- polarization has an instrumental “political use” and political elites actively mobilize and amplify polarization for political gain (McCoy, Rahman & Somer, 2018, p.34; Ling, 2018)
- There is agreement that polarization is a problem – but not on its metrics or whether it helps or hinders society
We drew from public policy, political studies and environmental science for a working definition of polarization.
Our initial findings highlighted that one unifying element of the common understanding of polarization suggests that it is a problem, but many sources still hesitate to say what kind of problem it is. In a 2023 report by the Public Policy Forum, a Canadian Public Interest Think Tank, Ling suggests that the problem of polarization is something that Canadians know exists, and can identify as a problem, but cannot name specific metrics for labeling it. The report goes on to say that polarization, when understood as competing views, is not always negative, instead diverse voices analyzing an issue is an important element in resisting majority rule or the consolidation of power. So perhaps it is a good problem to have?
A definition that speaks to polarization in the context of invasive species management states, “polarization occurs when disagreements become framed in oppositional, often binary, terms. Reducing complex debates to simple “for or against” positions implies that parties are on opposing sides in a win-or-lose game” (Crowley et al., 2017, p.134). This straight-forward definition holds two oppositional sides in a game where rules, capacities, and power are equal but are the legacy and context before the game ignored?
McCoy, Rahman & Somer’s (2018) widely-cited political science paper investigated polarization’s role in movements towards authoritarianism in four countries, Hungary, Turkey, the United States, and Venezuela. Their polarization definition emphasizes that the binary is inherently “relational and political” in nature and becomes focused on “one single difference that becomes negatively charged and used to define the “Other” (p.18). Thereby, they define polarization “as a process whereby the normal multiplicity of differences in a society increasingly align along a single dimension, cross-cutting differences become instead reinforcing, and people increasingly perceive and describe politics and society in terms of “Us” versus “Them” (p.18). They hold the main drivers of polarization as existing cleavages in society that are exploited by political elites for political gain. If increased polarization is a step towards authoritarianism, actually perhaps it is not a good problem to have?
At the same time as we were conducting this research, the contemporary political narrative in rural BC was intensifying existing cleavages around land. In BC, this is against UNDRIP and Indigenous Land Title – a site of ongoing interwoven injustices that harkens back to the establishment of BC (BC Assembly of First Nations, 2022; Olsen, 2026) and at the national level, Canadian projects of national interest within the province. These narratives exemplified the intentional, strategic actions of political parties to use polarization, where “elites play a critical role in constructing and/or intensifying existing cleavages or resentments with a divisive rhetoric of “Us” versus “Them” intended to mobilize a (perceived) marginalized or disunited sector of the population” (McCoy, 2018, p.35).
This tactic is used broadly on the political scene – from Dallas Brodie’s Backbone of BC Tour coming to Kelowna this weekend, which is focused on “the state of UNDRIP and Defending Private and Crown Property” to PM Mark Carney’s thinly veiled warning that the province of BC and Indigenous Nations need to get in line with the Canadian team on projects of national interest, or “If things get stalled here, we’re going to be spending more time elsewhere in the country.” As pointed out by the Yellowhead Institute, “When Indigenous rights and title stand in the way of the “national interest,” Canada turns to legislation, the courts (when convenient), and political discourse” (Wale & McGuire – Jaad Gudgihljiwah, 2026, para. 5, emphasis added).
Through our research and the social and political context in which we were conducting the research, we can say that disagreement is only one part of polarization, and that the problem is not simply strong disagreement, but rather it is the way that people and groups are divided along strict binary lines, seeing other points of view as oppositional, threatening, and deeply personal.The Public Policy Forum report calls this “a loss of viewpoint diversity and a default to simplification, binaries, in-group romanticization and out-group demonization” (Ling, 2023, p.17). However, while this report was helpful in providing some current context for public perception of polarization, it followed the normative framing of polarization that finds social cohesion paramount to maintaining a stable democracy, an argument that asserts that “polarized societies make democracies vulnerable” (McCoy, 2018, p.17). This did not fully speak to justice and equality in the social and political context unfurling in BC around Indigenous Land Rights and Title.
When this normative framing is interrogated by the lens of ecofeminist environmental humanities and Indigenous studies that centers justice, equality, and challenging status quo ideas about binaries, gender, power, and marginalization, a few key questions kept circling – is it the polarized societies that make democracies vulnerable? Or might it be the fissures of inequality and marginalization, that provide the opportunity for polarization to happen, that lead to instability and fragmentation?
A 2024 paper we found helpful in parsing this distinction was Kreiss & McGregor’s A Review and Provocation: on polarization and platforms that maps the connection of social structures & groups with online polarization and argues that ‘“polarization can only be seen as a central threat to democracy if inequality is ignored” (p.556). They state plainly, “the analysis and normative conclusions of much polarization research… are wrong…. we cannot sacrifice equality and justice on the altar of social cohesion” (p.558). Might the status quo, with existing, ongoing, entrenched power imbalances and injustices, be a threat to democratic erosion, meaningful work across difference, and equity for marginalized people?
In the end, normative definitions of polarization helped us map the current research framework that polarization is understood in, but to address climate justice, we needed to direct our research towards the undercurrents flowing beneath the assumptions of polarizing tendencies. With this focus, two outputs for the project emerged:
- Otherwise Polarized – a FEELed Lab Podcast
We focused on storytelling as a creative arts-led method that has broad appeal and can be adapted to many settings, including the rural communities we are focused on for this project. This is because storytelling is a research practice that generates, interprets, and shares knowledge through a narrative where there is no need to erase nuanced and complex realities. For this project, we:
a. created the pilot Otherwise Polarized episodes (release: Summer 2026)
b. hosted a skill-share workshop at ICER on podcasting to expand the capacity of the FEELed Lab community for podcasting, and
c. developed a framework for the continuation of the project to an ongoing FEELed Lab podcast.
- Continuing the Work – A PICS Grant
In May, we submitted an application to the PICS Foresight Grant in hopes to bring together academics and community partners to continue the work of this project this fall. Collaborations for Anti-Colonial and Intersectional Feminist Climate Justice would bring Black, trans- and ecofeminist researchers and practitioners together with Indigenous Land-based changemakers to: create a community of practice for climate justice, as directed by Indigenous-led and place-based authorities; share strategies for values-led community-building; and deepen an understanding of how different justice struggles are entangled in climate justice work in regional and rural BC.
In writing this FEELed Note, we tried to map the lay of the land around polarization in order to put the questions that were exposed through the research out into the community. The conversation around polarization needs to, and will, continue. Look for our next two FEELed Notes and reach out to discuss your insights on what is emerging here.
References:
BC Assembly of First Nations (2022). “BC First Nations climate strategy and action plan”. https://fnlcclimatestrategy.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/FNCSAP_2022.pdf
Crowley, S. L., Hinchliffe, S., & McDonald, R. A. (2017). Conflict in invasive species management. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 15(3), 133–141. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44214098
Kreiss, D., & McGregor, S. C. (2024). A review and provocation: On polarization and platforms. New Media & Society, 26(1), 556–579. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231161880
Ling, J. (2023). “Far and widening: The rise of polarization in Canada.” In The Public Policy Forum. Ottawa, ON, Canada. https://ppforum.ca/publications/polarization-democracy-canada/
McCoy, J., Rahman, T., & Somer, M. (2018). Polarization and the Global Crisis of Democracy: Common Patterns, Dynamics, and Pernicious Consequences for Democratic Polities. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(1), 16–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218759576
Olsen, A. (2026, April 15). “How Joseph Trutch Set the Stage for BC’s Indigenous Policies.” The Tyee. https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2026/04/15/Joseph-Trutch-BC-Indigenous-Policies/.
Tuck, E. and Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1 (1). pp. 1-40.
Wale, J. and Gudgihljiwah, M. M. J., (2026, February 3). Reflections on “Rupture”: Mark Carney’s New World Order & an Indigenous Response. Yellowhead Institute. https://yellowheadinstitute.org/2026/reflections-on-rupture-mark-carneys-new-world-order-an-indigenous-response/
The FEELed lab 