The dynamics of social division in countries like Bolivia and Spain reveal a common trend in polarization analyses, often seen as harmful to democracy due to fostering confrontation and intolerance. However, we argue that viewing politics through the lens of conflict provides a better understanding. In democratic societies, pluralism can be defended through antagonism, where diverse groups (e.g., farmers, indigenous peoples, feminists) integrate their interests into a shared vision of a desirable society. This vision is always subject to debate and rivalry, supporting plurality and freedom. We term this beneficial form of dispute “agonistic polarization,” essential for politics and democracy, contrasting it with “runaway polarization,” which undermines pluralism by excluding certain groups. Agonistic polarization strengthens democracy by fostering diversity, whereas runaway polarization weakens it by promoting exclusion.