Showing solidarity with another one’s cause can build ties between different groups in society. But solidarity is also very demanding, it requires not only to view the cause as legitimate but also as worthy. A less demanding solution is provided through political compromise. Compromise also requires to regard the other side as a legitimate representative, but one does not need to make a common cause out of it. The different sides can still disagree about the best solution to the given issue, but they respect each other views and act in the strong believe that striking a compromise between the different views, even though this means loss on both sides, is better than no compromise. But how can societies in such heated environments as we find them today create an atmosphere of mutual respect and legitimacy of the other side’s cause?

On October 26 at the Goethe-Institut Chicago, Pola Lehmann and Johannes Gerschewski explored the value of compromise in democratic societies. Is there empirical evidence that political debates are becoming increasingly heated and polarized? What can we do to counteract this, and what are the limits of compromise?