POLITICS - With a big presidential election coming up, there has been a lot of talk about the mood of the American electorate lately. But it’s all a blip on the radar screen if you take a wider view of American politics and society at the dawning decades of the 21st Century. The underlying social and political dynamics that affect elections today really have their roots in the social revolution of the 1960’s, when the Baby Boomer generation broke free from the shackles of conformity imposed by their Traditionalist Generation parents and grandparents.
What we are really seeing is a generational shift toward libertarianism that did not suddenly appear with the Vice-Presidential candidacy of “Ayn Randian” Congressman Paul Ryan, but with the ascendance of the Boomers in the late 60's, and continues with their offspring. The election of Ronald Reagan was not a cause of the conservative ascendance, but a result of the emergence of stronger libertarian sensibilities in the 1970’s. Subsequent elections only continued this trend in varying forms. And it will be the overriding social and political philosophy for the foreseeable future.
The Berkeley free speech movement and the anti-Vietnam War protests of forty-five years ago were the fundamental building blocks of the anti-government, anti-tax, anti-big business, anti-big labor sentiments so prevalent across much of American society today. The youthful rejection of conformity and conventionality lay the groundwork for the fundamental mistrust that many Americans feel today about large public institutions and their perceived “cookie-cutter” solutions. This mistrust of public institutions comes with a growing belief that the individual is the cornerstone of a society’s success.
With changing attitudes about individual behavior and social boundaries, we are moving inexorably toward a country where the consensus on social issues, such as the role of women in society, gay rights and marriage, or race relations and interracial marriage, is decidedly more tolerant and inclusive (in varying degrees, sometimes in fits and starts, but definitely moving forward). All of the polling regarding attitudes toward gay rights and interracial relationships shows clearly that younger generations are much more open minded than their elders. The Tea Party fiscal hawks today are fighting off the influence of social conservatives, and it appears that the protestations of the Christian Right are the last gasp of a dying intolerant philosophy.
With this social liberalism comes a mistrust of large institutions and collectivistic approaches to problem solving, and a rejection of conforming to a communal responsibility in order to fix society's problems in favor of voluntary actions. Exacerbated by the collapse of big banks and the limitations of government, most Americans now view large institutions as part of the problem, and they look on them as squelching individual and small group initiative. This rejection of “Big (Insert Whatever Here)” was germinated during the social revolution of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s.
The public policy manifestation of this takes many forms: people reject the idea of expanding the social safety net, have no confidence in Social Security, bristle at the idea of the redistribution of income, are ambivalent about the Affordable Healthcare Act, and are skeptical about the ability of government to regulate private excess. Voters and politicians oppose or fear new taxes, further starving public agencies and contributing to their continued decline and inability to handle societal challenges.
In big cities, one of the most obvious examples of this is in public education. Schools decline and middle-class parents opt out of public education by seeking alternatives like private schools and charters, which are often held up as the solution to urban education woes. This reinforces the libertarian notion that individuals acting in unofficial voluntary associations are much better than big government institutions at addressing social problems. Instead of fixing public education systems, the stakeholders just walk away from the problem.
This all goes back to the Boomers' rejection of the conformist, even stifling, society their parents and grandparents led. These elders may have been sexist, racist, anti-Semitic and homophobic, and overly concerned with being socially acceptable. But, like many societies where the “needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one,” they also had a basic commitment to collective responsibility for social welfare and the importance of doing right by their neighbors---they fought WW II and heavily taxed themselves in the 50's and 60's (top income tax brackets under Pres. Eisenhower were 91 %!) to build schools, highways, dams, etc.
The Boomers responded by rejecting conformity and social pressure, and by declaring that individuals were entitled to the freedom to realize their fullest potential, to express themselves, to cast off the shackles of social repression and give everyone the maximum opportunity to excel, regardless of sex, race, creed and later, sexual orientation. This led to an extraordinary explosion of creativity and innovation, particularly in the arts and in cutting edge businesses such as technology and entertainment. Some of these revolutionaries took a broader view to include economic rights and equality as an intrinsic aspect of individual freedoms.
But the vast majority of Boomers eventually lost sight of that as they defaulted to their predisposed preoccupation with their own challenges, and later turned inward as they took on the responsibilities of adulthood and parenthood. “I don’t care what you do as long as it doesn’t cramp my style” also means “I don’t care about you . . . period.”
These were laudable concepts that many of us today take for granted---we could never imagine living comfortably in a repressed society like the one depicted in “Mad Men.” Inherent in this philosophy is an antipathy toward large institutions and conventional approaches to problem solving, and an emphasis on the self. But also rooted in this philosophy is a level of self-centeredness and self-absorption that has morphed into narcissism and selfishness as the Boomers aged. This is manifested in the anti-government and anti-taxation sentiment that is so prevalent today---“why should I pay for them?”
What began with a focus on the individual and a disdain for social expectations had turned into a disinterest in collective public responsibility, and resistance to subjugate one’s own dreams and
aspirations to the often intangible and vague “good of the community.” The “Me Generation” was in full flower by the 1990’s; the Boomers threw out the baby with the bathwater, and have passed this ethic on to their children and grandchildren.
It is a classic example of the yin and yang of character, in this case the character of a society. We have evolved an underlying value system that promotes and treasures individual expression, and casts off the shackles of conformity and repression. But this same system subjugates the pressures of social obligation, and rejects the necessity of placing the good of the community ahead of personal considerations. It mocks sacrifice for others as foolishness and waste.
Of course, none of this is completely new---Alexis de Tocqueville famously observed and wrote about American’s rejection of state-run solutions in favor of a “free voluntary association” approach to social and economic problems nearly 200 years ago. And the emphasis on this trend comes and goes throughout our history, but we are definitely seeing it on the ascent today.
It’s hard to ignore the fact that a major contributor to this sensibility has been the internet, mobile platforms and specialized cable channels. These technologies are interactive and robust, but basically solitary, isolating and highly fragmented narrow-casting forms of communication. They allow people to be more self-centered, disconnected from any feeling of being part of a larger community, and more focused on their own specific issues and concerns rather than on the whole. It also facilitates people having deeper interaction with those like themselves, and less interaction with those who may see things differently.
Perhaps what lies ahead is an America in a generation or so, where there is a wonderful level of social tolerance, flexibility and fluidity, with many of the sexual, social and racial barriers wasted away: women as Fortune 500 CEO’s and people of color in high public office being commonplace, and same-sex marriage announcements in the Birmingham (AL) News as well as in the NY Times. But also an America with greater income disparities, a permanent underclass, failed public institutions, a tiny safety net, and a minimal commitment to collective responsibility for those less fortunate.
If you are smart, ambitious and lucky, or come from a family with resources, you will do very well, regardless of your sex, race, ethnicity or sexual orientation. But, if you are in need of a helping hand, you will be on your own, up the creek without a paddle. Perhaps circumstances---such as a dramatic economic collapse or a consuming threat to the American social contract---will alter this trajectory, because just as there are no atheists in foxholes, there are no libertarians on unemployment lines.
(Larry Kaplan is a Los Angeles resident with a long career in politics, civic affairs and non-profits.)
-cw
CityWatch
Vol 10 Issue 76
Pub: Sept 21, 2012