NYT: Books of The Times
Why Are These Democrats Smiling? It’s Cyclical
By MICHIKO KAKUTANI
Published: April 22, 2008
MySpace, YouTube, and the Future of American Politics
By Morley Winograd and Michael D. Hais
....There are two types of major realignments, the authors say. “Idealist” realignments, the last of which occurred in 1968 with the rise of the boomers, are marked by low voter turnout, negative attitudes toward politics and political institutions and “a focus on divisive social issues involving such concerns as substance use, sexual behavior and socially acceptable roles for women and men”; in the public policy arena “idealist realignments tend to lead to gridlock, limited use of and even decline in the national government and greater economic inequality.” Since the 1968 realignment the Republicans, who had become the party of traditional values, would win 7 of 10 presidential elections.
In contrast “civic” realignments — which occurred in 1860 with the election of Abraham Lincoln and 1932 with the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt — are characterized, Mr. Winograd and Mr. Hais write, by rising voter turnout (or stable turnout at high levels), positive attitudes toward politics and political institutions, and “a focus on broader societal and economic concerns rather than social issues involving personal morality.”
Although Republican strategists like Karl Rove, as well as a number of political analysts, saw the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 as triggering a realignment that would confirm Republican hegemony for many decades to come, the authors of “Millennial Makeover” — both of whom are Democrats — argue that 9/11 is more likely to encourage “the Democratically inclined Millennial Generation to vote in large numbers” and thus make the 2008 presidential election “more likely to be a realigning election that favors Democrats.”
Why are Millennials inclined to vote Democratic? Thanks to “their protected, structured and positively reinforced upbringing” (lots of quality time with their parents, lots of exercises in self-esteem) Millennials tend to be far more optimistic and group-oriented than their Gen X predecessors (the alienated generation sandwiched between Boomers and Millennials), and according to Mr. Hais and Mr. Winograd, they’re predisposed to be inclusive, empathetic and tolerant in their social outlook. “A large majority of Millennials endorses affirmative action programs (82 percent) as compared with two-thirds of older Americans,” the authors write, and “more than two-thirds of Millennial women” are opposed to the idea of women returning to traditional roles.
Millennials’ reliance on the Internet (technology that the Democrats have learned to exploit more quickly than their Republican opponents) and their passion for texting and instant messaging have political implications as well. In placing a heavy value on the opinion of friends and peers, the authors of this book suggest, Millennials are inclined to favor conclusions reached by decentralized decision making, and multilateral rather than unilateral policy making. Their proclivity for sharing their lives with thousands of others through MySpace and Facebook also makes them “the generation least perturbed by any potential restrictions on civil rights or invasions of privacy that might have occurred in fighting the war on terrorism.” As a more socially tolerant and less divisive Millennial generation becomes a larger part of the electorate, Mr. Winograd and Mr. Hais predict, “the power of social issues to drive our political debate will wane”: wedge issues will lose their effectiveness, and ideological divisions will give way to an emphasis on “successful governmental activism.” “Majorities,” they argue, “will coalesce around ideas that involve the entire group in the solution and downplay the right of individuals to opt out of the process.”...
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/books/22kaku.html?pagewanted=all 
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
