Dynamics
|
|
Generational Dynamics |
| Forecasting America's Destiny ... and the World's | |
| HOME WEB LOG COUNTRY STUDIES COMMENT FORUM ABOUT | |
As we've frequently written, America entered a "generational crisis" period during the last few years, as the generation of people who lived through World War II all disappeared (retired or died) all at once, leaving behind a new generation of leaders, the "Boomer" generation born after the war.
|
This generational change produces many profound societal changes, including complete social and political restructuring.
As we've previously written, such major structural changes occurred during America's last two generational crisis periods: America gave up slavery after the Civil War, and America became "policemen of the world" after World War II. Political parties changed focus dramatically each time; the Republican party became dominant after the Civil War, and the Democratic party
Today we're seeing a similar structural shift, and this time the Republican party is becoming dominant again. (Don't get too excited about this, because the meanings of "Republican" and "Democrat" will change so dramatically during the next ten years that they'll be almost unrecognizable.)
We've already described some dramatic societal changes that have been going on: Violent crime has dropped, continuing a trend; and "It's going to be the 1950s all over again," as women are overwhelmingly beginning to choose staying home with the kids over a high-powered career; and a New Sexual Revolution, reversing the trends of the last four decades.
The exit polls from the Presidential election show further dramatic societal changes.
 |
One obvious change is the huge jump in number of people voting. This corresponds to a major change in attitude in the public since the recent generational change. During the "generational awakening" period that began in the 1960s, the political emphasis was on individual rights and social causes (women's lib, anti-war, environment, anti-discrimination). By the 1990s, America was in a "generational unraveling" period, where the country had no national purpose, and every citizen was out for him or her self. During this period, the percentage of people who voted generally fell, since people felt that it was less important who was President.
As the country entered the generational crisis period in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the mood changed away from individual rights toward preservation of the nation and the nation's way of life. As national security becomes more important than individual rights, more people feel the need to vote, which is why a record 120 million people voted on Tuesday.
This movement toward national security showed itself in other ways on Tuesday, most dramatically in the reasons that people gave for selecting a candidate.
According to the exit poll, 22% of the electorate said "moral values" was the issue that mattered most in how they voted - compared to 20% who cited the economy, 19% who cited terrorism, and just 15% who said Iraq was the key issue.
Let's take a look at some the exit poll results. The following table lists, in descending order of importance, the most important issued named by voters in exit polls for deciding whom to vote for and, for each issue, what percentage of people choosing that issue voted for Bush and Kerry, respectively.
| Exit Poll Results | ||
| Issue and % Voters for whom that issue is most important |
Voted for Bush | Voted for Kerry |
| Moral values (22%) | 80% | 18% |
| Economy/Jobs (20%) | 18% | 80% |
| Terrorism (19%) | 86% | 14% |
| Iraq (15%) | 26% | 73% |
| Health Care (8%) | 23% | 77% |
| Taxes (5%) | 57% | 43% |
| Education (4%) | 26% | 73% |
As you can see, the "individual rights" issues of health care and education were low on the list, which is what Generational Dynamics would predict.
The "national security" issues of moral values, terrorism and Iraq are high on the list. Intermediate issues, economy/jobs and taxes, are issues that are partially individual rights and partially national security issues.
"Moral values" is the most fascinating issue. You might wonder if this is an "individual rights" issue, but that's not what people mean when they vote on it; a person who says that "moral values" is the most important issue is talking about moral values of the country as a whole.
The fact that moral values scored so high corresponds to the issues we described above. Women are spending more time with the kids because doing so is a moral value; the same reason helps explain why violent crime has been falling.
The split on this issue is illustrated by the map below, which shows the results of the election for each state:
 |
This map shows quite dramatically that there's a geographical dimension to the support for Bush and Kerry, with Bush's support generally higher in the south and midland states, where church attendance is higher, corresponding to a greater importance for moral values. Exit polls showed that 61% of those attending church weekly voted for Bush, while only 36% of those who never attend church voted for Bush.
Let's not forget to mention that eleven states passed referendum questions outlawing gay marriages. In a world where women are resuming traditional gender roles, it isn't surprising that gay marriage is being overwhelmingly rejected. I can safely predict that gay marriage will not be a viable political issue again for at least 20 years, when we begin to approach a new generational awakening.
There are many pundits who are blaming these changes on Bush - making the claim that Bush is somehow influencing the large masses of American people to adopt these new values. That's wrong, wrong, wrong. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Generational Dynamics shows that it's actually the other way around -- that the large masses of people adopt these values during every generational crisis period, including this one. Bush is actually following the population.
However, it isn't correct, as far as I know, to say that Republicans or Bush supporters are more religious than Democrats. Hillary Clinton, for example, is one of the most devoutly religious Christian politicians around.
The restructuring is already well under way, as a number of pundits have pointed out by way of mentioning that "Republican" and "Democrat" have lost the meanings they've had since World War II.
Andrew Sullivan, a politically conservative gay reporter and columnist, changed his endorsement from George Bush to John Kerry, and explained it as follows:
You want a future President who will be hard nosed about committing U.S. troops abroad, wants to balance every new spending item with a tax hike or a spending cut elsewhere and backs states' rights on social issues? Then go ahead and vote for the, er, Democrat, John Kerry.
You think there's too little federal control over education? Vote Bush. Want to expand health-care coverage primarily through the private sector? Vote Kerry.
Confused yet? You're not the only one. For conservatives there's plenty to worry about in Bush's record.
In fact, the Democratic and Republican parties really don't stand for much any more -- at least not like they used to during the decades immediately following World War II.
Most people who voted for George Bush did so because they liked him personally, as well as his policies; those who voted for John Kerry did so because they dislike George Bush and his policies. Voting for someone because he's a Republican or Democrat seems very foreign today, except for the small minority of people who consider themselves lifelong members of one party or the other.
Both John Kerry and George Bush, in their respective concession and acceptance speeches, emphasized that the American people have to put aside their differences and work together.
That's not going to happen. We'll be hearing phony claims of cooperation from both political parties, but as soon as a difficult issue arises, the vicious partisanship will return in full force.
Generational Dynamics predicts that America is going to go through some major crises in the next few years -- deep financial crises and a "clash of civilizations" world war that will challenge America's continued existence.
It's well to remember Tony Blair's words when he addressed a joint session of Congress on July 17, 2003, explaining the need for the Iraqi war:
And the only answer is: because destiny put you in this place in history, in this moment in time and the task is yours to do.
This task and the resulting crises are real. These crises will force Republicans and Democrats to unite to save their country and their way of life, and will redefine the meanings of the two parties, something that's already well under way.
Times of such drastic change provide great danger but also great opportunities. A new generation of leaders can begin now to think about what America should be like in the 2020s, and start to work in that direction. It's not too early.