This evening, as I finished my work at Cooper, I took a walk over to the Great Hall to listen to Dr. Fred Shapiro introduce Morley Winograd and Michael Hais discuss their new book, “Millennial Makeover: MySpace, YouTube and the Future of American Politics” with a talk asking the question, “Is there a Lincoln or FDR in the 2008 Presidential Race?”
Interestingly, the talk seems to have been a combination of the premise of the book creation, as well as an attempt to answer the question posed at the start of the talk. [Suffice it to say, I think they would say Obama is the next Lincoln/FDR – more on this later] But what was most interesting to me was the discussion of the impact of technology and generational demographics and their impact on American history – which goes to the heart of two of my posts ([1], [2]), “Would social networks impact the 2008 election?”.
At the time, I answered in the negative.
After last night (and this book), I might have a different point of view…
Impact of Technology and Generational Swings
Note: I have only started to read the book as of yet, but I was entranced with the discussion by both speakers and their premises. I must say that I agree with much of what they said and suggest, though I do not completely agree (yet) with some of the mechanisms.
From the start of the talk, Morley drew the obvious parallels with Lincoln and Obama, Steward (Lincoln’s “primary Republican” adversary) and Clinton and the issue of race during the election cycle. [Note: I promise to go into the parallels that exist].
But, what perked my ears and interest was the discussion of generational impact and the advent of technology and the impact it had on campaigns and their hypothesis on how it has, on 40 year cycles (give or take some years) cause a civic realignment in terms of political parties and fundamental populational relationship with government and civic duty.
Winograd and Hais’s basic premise is that civic realignment – where they characterize it by the “enhanced party identification and straight-ticket voting, rising voter turnout or stable turnout at high levels, positive attitudes towards politics and political institutions, and a focus on broader societal and economic concerns rather than social issues involving personal morality”. [p. 27] They argue that this civic realignment is a predictable phenomena that occurs every forty years in America due primarily to:
- political coming-of-age of a large dynamic generation, and
- emergence of a new communication technology
which results in clear changes in:
- electoral results: major parties change power
- voting behavior: South going Democratic, after being Republican and back, and
- public policy: from a laissez faire foreign policy to a force-projection policy in 1932
With this premise, Winograd and Hais posit that this generation – the Millennials – will cause another major civic shift and cause a new outcome in our government that focuses on the societal and economic issues of the day, rather than the divisive issues of our time.
I could short-circuit the discussion with the final statements that:
- likely winner of the Presidential election: Barack Obama
- movement of civic involvement in a more responsible fashion: college for public service (as in AmeriCore and Kerry’s National Service program)
- redistribution of wealth from the top 1% to a more even spread
- acceptance of programs that require group sacrifice, rather than blind ignorance of the hidden cost of inaction
I must say that I am pleased this is being painted, and hope that it does come about – which we will see what happens in the coming months. I believed it as the time with Kerry and Dean (as Winograd and Hais said that the Millennials and the Boomers did vote overwhelmingly for), but the weight of the Millennials were not felt until this year – and this cycle. And for that, I look forward to seeing the outcome.
After the fold, I give a short summary of their premise.
Continue reading
