The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of like-minded America is Tearing Us Apart by Bill Bishop

"You don’t know me, but you don’t like me." The lyrics from Homer Joy’s Streets of Bakersfield resonate far beyond country music. They encapsulate a broader truth explored in Bill Bishop’s The Big Sort: the growing tendency of Americans to divide themselves into like-minded communities, not just politically but culturally, economically, and even spiritually. This self-sorting, as Bishop argues, is eroding the fabric of American democracy by fueling polarization, diminishing trust, and turning what could be productive differences into irreconcilable divides.

The Revolution of Choice

Bishop takes readers on a journey through decades of change that laid the groundwork for the Big Sort. In the mid-20th century, America was a relatively homogeneous society—economically, culturally, and politically. People with college degrees were remarkably evenly distributed, and churchgoers sat side by side, regardless of political leaning. But by the 1960s, the old systems of order—land, family, class, tradition, and religious denomination—began to unravel. The cultural transformation that followed, described by sociologist Ronald Inglehart as the “Silent Revolution,” marked a shift in priorities.

Inglehart’s theory, based on Abraham Maslow’s “hierarchy of needs,” proposed that as people’s basic material needs were met, they sought new forms of fulfillment. “People who knew their basic needs were satisfied would gradually adopt different values,” writes Bishop. These post-materialist values prioritized self-expression, personal spirituality, and individual choice over traditional collective identities. Issues like abortion rights, gay rights, and environmentalism took precedence over economic growth or military security. People no longer found meaning in old hierarchies, and their affiliations became a matter of preference rather than inheritance.

This revolution of choice had profound effects on where and how people chose to live. Americans began sorting themselves into communities that aligned with their personal values and beliefs. As Bishop describes, “Instead of communities built on diversity, Americans gravitated toward places filled with people who looked, thought, and believed as they did.” Republican counties gained 27.4 million residents between 1980 and 2006, driven not just by natural population growth but by domestic migration. Republican landslide counties were poorer, with incomes averaging three-quarters of those in Democratic landslide counties, yet they attracted migrants seeking a particular cultural fit.

The sorting wasn’t purely political—it was economic, cultural, and occupational. Cities producing the most patents attracted “creative class” workers, while economically stagnant areas became hubs for older, less educated populations. Young, educated people increasingly moved to dynamic cities, while rural areas grew older and poorer.

The migration set off new forms of segregation, driven by values and aspirations as much as income. Creative-class workers clustered in cities where they could maximize their economic return and enjoy cultural amenities. Cities became “entertainment machines,” producing “sights, sounds, tastes, and experiences desired by post-materialists engaged in their part of the Big Sort.” Meanwhile, low-tech cities, unable to attract such workers, were left behind.

The consequences of this shift went beyond economics. “The most abundant product of the Big Sort has been inequality,” writes Bishop. Segregation by race, age, and occupation deepened, further entrenching the divide. The changes were gradual but unmistakable: “By the turn of the twenty-first century, it seemed as though the country was separating in every way conceivable.”

Bishop highlights the broader cultural implications of this sorting. Communities no longer resembled microcosms of America as a whole. Instead, they became homogeneous tribes—politically, economically, and socially. This revolution of choice may have promised freedom, but it came at the cost of diversity, dialogue, and shared identity.

Feedback Loops and Extremes

The consequences of sorting are both social and psychological. Homogeneous communities reinforce groupthink, amplifying extreme beliefs and silencing dissent.

"When like-minded people gather, their opinions grow more extreme." This phenomenon, known as the law of group polarization, explains why tightly knit communities often become echo chambers. The psychological research is clear: group discussions do not necessarily balance out different perspectives. Instead, they often radicalize the majority opinion, pushing groups further toward ideological extremes.

Bishop draws on experiments demonstrating this effect. Over hundreds of studies, researchers have found that homogeneous groups grow more extreme in the direction of their dominant views. For instance, individuals who begin with moderate opinions about environmental regulation, when placed in groups of like-minded people, emerge with far stronger beliefs. Conversely, dissenting voices are often suppressed in such settings, leading to a feedback loop that reinforces existing convictions.

This process isn’t confined to politics. Churches, media, and even neighborhoods contribute to the same self-reinforcing cycles. Donald McGavran’s “homogeneous unit principle”, as Bishop explains, provides a lens to understand this. McGavran wrote in The Bridges of God that successful religious movements thrive when they do not ask individuals to abandon their social groups or “tribes.” Rather, they work within cohesive communities where beliefs are confirmed rather than challenged. Bishop argues this dynamic has been co-opted by megachurches, gated communities, and political campaigns. "Ministers, much like politicians, cater to their audiences’ preconceptions—not to transform beliefs but to confirm them."

The feedback loop extends to the media. Americans increasingly consume news tailored to their beliefs, creating information silos. Rather than seeking out diverse perspectives, people turn to like-minded media sources—TV shows, newspapers, books, and social media—that reflect their worldview. This phenomenon is exacerbated by algorithms that serve us content we already agree with, further entrenching polarization.

Bishop highlights the danger in this:

"Mixed company moderates, like-minded company polarizes. Heterogeneous communities restrain group excesses, while homogeneous communities march toward the extremes."

The consequences are profound. Isolated groups become seedbeds for extremism, both political and cultural. Individuals within such groups gain confidence in their opinions, often dismissing conflicting evidence or voices. As Bishop notes, the echo chamber effect doesn’t just shape what people believe; it shapes how they perceive the world and those who disagree with them.

Bishop underlines how this polarization manifests in everyday life. In overwhelmingly partisan areas, individuals in the political minority often feel pressured to remain silent or hide their views. For example, Democrats in heavily Republican regions risk social stigma if they openly express support for their party. Over time, this conformity reinforces the dominant group’s beliefs and suppresses dissent. As Bishop writes, “The feedback loop becomes self-sustaining, pulling communities deeper into ideological conformity.”

The danger, then, is not just political division but a loss of shared reality. When people can no longer agree on basic facts, compromise becomes impossible. Bishop’s warning is stark: America’s fragmented communities are not simply polarized; they are radicalizing, pushed to ideological extremes by the very forces that promise comfort, identity, and belonging.

A Broken Political System

This self-sorting extends into the political arena, where gerrymandering compounds the effects of geographic clustering. Bishop debunks the idea that redistricting alone created polarization. Instead, he shows how Americans’ choices about where to live have led to ideologically uniform districts, where moderate voices are drowned out by partisan extremes. Politicians in these districts face no incentive to compromise, driving Congress into gridlock.

"The 2004 election exemplified this shift. It wasn’t an election of persuasion but one of turnout." Campaigns relied on loyal voters rather than appealing to swing constituencies. Patrick Donaldson, a Republican campaign leader, summed up the strategy: “You aren’t trying to convince anybody of anything. You’re trying to talk to friends, neighbours, and family.” It’s a far cry from the deliberative democracy envisioned by the nation’s founders, who believed in the power of diverse groups to moderate extremes.

Bishop delves into how political institutions themselves have adapted to this polarized landscape. Gerrymandered districts—while not the root cause—have exacerbated the problem. Legislators, aware of the ideological homogeneity of their constituencies, have grown more extreme in their views and voting patterns. The incentive to appeal to the center has vanished. Instead, politicians cater to the most vocal and ideological members of their base, knowing this is the path to reelection.

The consequences are clear in Congress, where partisanship has reached historic highs. Charles Babington, writing for The Washington Post, noted how polarization has paralyzed the legislative process: "Congress seems to be struggling lately to carry out its most basic mission: passing legislation." Issues like immigration reform, energy policy, and climate change slip under the surface of endless partisan squabbles. The 2006 House of Representatives, for example, met nine fewer days than it had in 1948, earning the nickname "do-nothing Congress."

This dysfunction has further alienated the public. Trust in Congress has plummeted, and fewer Americans believe their representatives act in their best interests. Bishop highlights how polarization impacts citizens as well: "Large partisan majorities have the effect of dampening turnout among citizens in the political minority." People in the minority—whether Republican or Democrat—withdraw not only from voting but from public life altogether. They volunteer less, engage less in civic projects, and retreat into their private spheres, leaving political power to the most fervent partisans.

Bishop’s exploration of the political machine reveals a sobering truth: the system is not broken in isolation. It reflects the broader social and cultural divides created by the Big Sort. The feedback loop of polarization—from communities to Congress—continues to deepen, leaving little room for consensus or compromise.

Can We Fix It?

Is there a way out of the Big Sort? Bishop is skeptical but not hopeless. He draws attention to several ideas that aim to bridge the divides and encourage genuine dialogue. One of the most notable is James Fishkin’s Deliberation Day proposal. This idea envisions a national holiday where citizens come together in structured settings to discuss key political issues. Fishkin and other advocates believe that fostering dialogue among citizens of differing views could counter the polarization fueled by ideological silos.

Bishop also revisits the work of psychologist Gordon Allport, who outlined conditions necessary to reduce intergroup conflict. These include:

• Equality between groups

• Shared, common goals

• Regular, authentic interactions that avoid artificiality

  
  

When these conditions are met, Bishop argues, communities can temper their divisions and promote understanding. For example, studies have shown that when groups work together on shared goals, such as community projects or disaster recovery efforts, their cooperation often softens entrenched biases.

However, Bishop is quick to acknowledge the barriers to implementing these solutions. Americans remain deeply segregated geographically and socially. Even within diverse urban areas, people often self-segregate into ideologically homogeneous networks, whether in their workplaces, places of worship, or social circles. This fragmentation limits opportunities for meaningful, cross-cutting dialogue.

Technology has also complicated the process of finding common ground. Social media platforms, designed to maximize engagement, frequently amplify outrage and reinforce existing beliefs rather than fostering connection. Bishop points to the need for intentional efforts—whether through civic initiatives or community programs—to disrupt these feedback loops and reintroduce the art of compromise into public life.

Yet, the most enduring solution may come from generational change. Younger Americans, shaped by the diversity and interconnectedness of the digital age, may be more open to bridging divides. While this is no guarantee of unity, it offers a glimmer of hope amid the divisions entrenched by the Big Sort.

As Bishop concludes, the Big Sort’s legacy is a nation increasingly unable to find common ground. The self-reinforcing cycle of sorting and polarization leaves little room for national narratives or shared identities. And yet, cracks in the system are emerging. Younger generations, shaped by diversity and digital connectivity, may challenge the divides entrenched by their predecessors.

The question remains: Can America’s fragmented communities rediscover the art of compromise? Or will the Big Sort’s centrifugal force continue to tear the nation apart? Bishop doesn’t pretend to have the answers, but his book offers a sobering reminder of what’s at stake.

"For those seeking to understand the roots of America’s polarization—and perhaps find a way forward—The Big Sort is essential reading."

High-Tech vs. Low-Tech Cities

Bishop draws a clear contrast between high-tech and low-tech cities, illustrating the cultural, economic, and social divides that underpin America’s polarization:

High-Tech Cities:

• More interested in other cultures and places

• More likely to “try anything once”

• More optimistic

• More interested in politics

• Church attendance decreasing

• Volunteering increasing, but community projects and club memberships decreasing

• Engage more in “individualistic activities”

  
  

Low-Tech Cities:

• More likely to attend church

• Community projects and club memberships increasing

• Volunteering increasing

• More supportive of traditional authority

• More family-oriented

• More feelings of isolation and economic vulnerability

• More sedentary with higher levels of stress

• Decreasing interest in politics

• More active participation in clubs, churches, and civic projects

  
  

This divide highlights the growing separation not only in economic outcomes but in cultural values and daily lives across America.