Whataboutism doesn't add any value to a discussion. GP did not exclude what you have commented in their comment. But I don't want to make this comment purely a

Whataboutism doesn't add any value to a discussion. GP did not exclude what you have commented in their comment. But I don't want to make this comment purely about criticizing someone. There is a figure on Wikipedia [1] that shows that Filibusters have been rising starkly since the 70s – since politicians started realising how effective they could be under the new rules. My conclusion of this is twofold: 1. The use of a filibuster is an extreme measure and shows how divisive US politics has gotten – hence the more numerous reach for drastic measures. 2. It is an inevitable devil's spiral with two parties that don't trust each other. Every use of a Filibuster by a Republican will give a Democrat a justification for one and vice versa (this is why Whataboutism should be avoided). So please let's not make this about "But the Democrats started it" or "But the Republicans did more". Instead, judge me on my hypothesis: "The increase in use of the filibuster is an indicator of polarization and shows that polarization has been on the rise since the 70s." [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate#The_two-track_system,_60-vote_rule_and_rise_of_the_routine_filibuster_(1970_onward) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_Sta...