R.I.P. social conservatism: Why it’s dying — and the coming realignment

[DonViejo]

Don't cheer yet, liberals. A direct consequence could be the crack-up of today’s Democratic coalition. Here's why

MICHAEL LIND

In our age of political trench warfare, it is easy to assume that today’s political coalitions will last forever. Democrats put their hopes in the incremental demographic growth of their present coalition of blacks, Latinos and white progressives, chiefly as a result of Latino immigration. Forward-thinking Republican strategists hope to thwart a permanent Democratic majority by enticing a sufficient number of Latinos, if not blacks, to vote for the GOP. These are reasonable strategies for both sides, for the next few electoral cycles.

But the fixed political trenches have been dug into a glacier which itself is both changing and moving. In a new article at Breakthrough Journal, “The Coming Realignment: Cities, Class, and Ideology After Social Conservatism,” I speculate about how one long-term social trend in particular — the decline of social conservatism — is likely to transform the definition of categories that today we take for granted, like “progressive,” “conservative” and “centrist.”

You wouldn’t know it from watching MSNBC or Fox, but the era in which controversies over social issues like “God, gays and guns” defines political alignments is probably drawing to a close, thanks to the social liberalism of younger Americans such as Millennials, who were born in 1981 or later. Millennials are the least religious generation, with fewer than one in 10 saying that religion is important in their lives. They are the only generation in which a majority (70 percent) supports gay marriage. And Millennials are not only less likely than their elders to own guns but also provide majority support to gun control.

Does the rise of social liberalism mean that today’s Democratic coalition will permanently dominate American politics in a decade or a generation? Will John Judis and Ruy Teixeira be vindicated by the final emergence of “the emerging Democratic majority”?

more
http://www.salon.com/2014/05/17/r_i_p_social_conservatism_why_its_dying_%E2%80%94_and_the_coming_realignment/

[Jackpine Radical]

1. The comments following that piece are better than the piece itself, but

everyone seems to be overlooking the real context of the issue.

"Social liberalism" is a natural outgrowth of improved contact between diverse groups of people, even if too much of that contact is through electronic means. The millenials and those who come after will naturally be pressed into accepting the trivial differences among their fellows--differences of race, sexual orientation, religion, etc. That will naturally result in a withering away of social conservatism.

The elimination (or at least de-fanging) of these social distractors will allow attention to focus on the important aspects of sociopolitical life--i.e., issues of human welfare, particularly as climate change and environmental degradation bring new and ever more dire threats to human existence. Racism, homophobia, religious intolerance, and the like are luxuries the millenials and their children won't be able to afford when they're faced with inadequate supplies of food, water, and even air. Parasitic capitalism is a self-limiting problem; the only real question is whether it will persist long enough to kill off its host, that host being a humanly habitable biosphere.

[vi5]

2. The Democratic party has conceded plenty of their own issues at this point.

They gave up on gun control and the death penalty years ago. Obama is driving us so far to the right on education and has been so lackluster on unions that I fear those are the next to fall into the "well both sides agree" abyss he's plunged the party into.

And hell, the issues we've "won" on like gay rights were not thanks to our cowardly leaders who hid behind a desk while activists and citizens did all the difficult work, and then the party and it's leaders came out to do a victory lap once the war had essentially been won.

[The_Commonist]

3. I'm a Boomer/GenXer on the cusp.

I know, work with, hang out with, am neighbors with and talk to a hell of a lot of Millennials.
They are all quite aware, liberal and active.

And from what I can tell, they all see the Democratic Party as almost as much of a joke as the Republican Party. It does NOT have their interests at heart, only Corporate interests. And for the most part, they don't vote because of that.

So no, the Democratic party does not have a lock on Millennials, because they see it as a kinder, gentler Corporate Overlord. The few who I know to be politically active are members of the Working Families Party here in New York. Now, in New York candidates can be on 2 party tickets at once, so while I have voted for Obama twice, I have not voted for him on the Democratic ticket.

Because the Democratic Party is (rightly) seen as a joke amongst younger people. It's an anachronism. And it's just as interested in making sure that these kids carry 10s if not 100s of thousands of dollars of student loans as "the other guys." So don't for a second, count on an "emerging Democratic majority."

[vi5]

4. Amen

And the problem is that articles like this keep allowing the Democratic party leadership to think they can do nothing but sit back and let the Republicans trip all over themselves. And yes, they'll probably squeak by in that case, but there will never be a solid, emergent Democratic majority as long as they are content to be no more than "not as crazy as the Republicans."

[yurbud]

15. I'm on the boomer/GenX border too and my political drift has usually been on the leading edge

although the Bush years meant that I was either grossly out of step or we lost democracy completely in 2000.

[Xyzse]

17. And unfortunately, that is how they marginalize themselves.

It is why, they don't get taken seriously politically.

It is sad. Unless they get involved with the primaries, they don't get listened to.

Though yes, you are very much right. It is why I still consider myself Independent, even if I vote every single time I can.

[MillennialDem]

5. This one, born in 1980 is sick of being called an Xer. I am definitely a Millennial, and many change

the dates... 1978... 1982... 1983 etc as the start of Millennials.

[Hippo_Tron]

7. You were a teenager while Kurt Cobain was still alive, I think Xers would likely claim you

But I'll admit these cutoffs are probably pretty arbitrary.

[MillennialDem]

10. Yeah I was all of 13 and don't even remember it because I wasn't into music yet. Also had a more

tech savy childhood, thanks to nerdery and living solidly middle class on the west coast. I barely remember any of the other key Xer events (or outright wasn't alive for them). I fit the Millennial profile much, much better.

[tabbycat31]

12. I had just turned 14 when I died

And I remember I was on an 8th grade field trip that day. Everyone on the bus was all saddened and shocked, and I had no idea who they were talking about.

I was sheltered from music that was not Disney or children's music (ie Mary Had a Little Lamb) as a child. I wouldn't get into music until I started having friends who drove and actually played the radio in their cars.

[tabbycat31]

11. Same (also born in 1980)

[Kablooie]

6. But also people's political views change as they grow older.

A lot of free love hippies from the 60s are conservative Republican capitalists today.
The Millennials won't always keep the views they have today.

[Cosmocat]

8. The GOP will always, ALWAYS be able to sell anger and division

My neighbors who are 35 give or take, they absolutely have no time for gay bashing.

But, other than that, they are pretty squarely in the republican fold and generally hate our President and democrats generally. They do the "they are all the same" thing, but when they pull the trigger, it will be for an R.

Safe the couple that moved in from Cali, some union types ...

They have bought the "big spending liberals" thing wholesale.

The only saving grace is, they are extraordinarily apathetic voters, and will only maybe get ginned up enough to vote in a presidential, when the Ds get out, so it is a bit of a wash.

I wanted to be optimistic after 06 and 08, but 2010 taught me a lesson combined with what I have known in my going on 50 years, and what I know of our history.

From Fluoride in water to communism, to whatever the jackasses beat up on FDR over, to the southern strategy and everything I have seen in my life, the republicans will callously find whatever they can find to pit us against each other to get the votes on the margins.

[burrowowl]

13. I have been a Socialist

since I was 10 1/2 years old, I am still a socialist, I am 67.
At 10 I was a humanistic anarchist meaning no archy and if ever one was a responsible human being, it would work).

[Kablooie]

14. See, your views changed as you grew older. Just like I said.

I never defined at what age they change.

[Jamaal510]

9. There's probably something

In their policy views many of the neoliberals, including arguably Barack Obama and the Clintons, are what used to be called “Rockefeller Republicans.” Many neoliberals favor smaller government, free trade, deregulation and lower taxes and side with the Democrats chiefly because of the religiosity and social conservatism of today’s Republicans.

I'm not understanding here, but I don't remember Obama ever coming out in support of lower taxes or smaller government. He has said before that government isn't the answer to all of our problems (which is true), but that's not exactly the same thing as voicing support for those aforementioned policies. So far, he ended the Bush ll tax cuts and has touted tax fairness many times. Also...

Millennials are the least religious generation, with fewer than one in 10 saying that religion is important in their lives.

I think a big reason for this is due to the wingnuts scaring a bunch of people (around my age) away. They have been so hateful that it has turned off many people from religion. I think it is a little sad, since religion arguably does have a lot to offer people, particularly when one properly follows the teachings. Because of the fundamentalists, some people have gotten the impression that they represent the entirety of Christianity and other religions. In reality, they're just a small and vocal minority. They represent neither me nor any other people I know who happen to be religious. There is no comparison between a person like Rick Santorum (a man who hatemongers against gays, "blah" people, etc. for a living) and a Sister Samone.

[yurbud]

16. How will Dems & Republicans do bait & switch without difference on social issues?

They get us all in a huff about abortion, gays, and where we can put our three hundred foot tall plastic jesus statue, then quietly go about giving the country to the already very wealthy whichever party is elected.

What will they do when social issues are off the table, and we see their economic policy in broad daylight without a figleaf to cover it?