How The Left Lost Teen Spirit

Tom Paine.com ^ | August 2003 | Micah Sifry

[theoverseer]

If politics abhors a vacuum, why hasn't some opportunistic, talented politician burst forth with an agenda aimed squarely at igniting the passions of young people?

In 2000, less than one out of three eligible voters between the ages of 18 to 24 bothered to vote. People aged 25 to 34 were scarcely more involved. All told, approximately 39 million out of the 63 million Americans in those two age brackets failed to exercise their franchise. Had they turned out, the total youth vote would have outnumbered the 61 million votes cast by people over the age of 45.

Given this huge untapped reservoir, why doesn't American politics better reflect the interests of younger people? It's a vicious cycle. Incumbents and strategists from both major parties are most comfortable targeting their campaigns at the people who they know vote regularly, and those are predominantly older, more suburban and better off than the average. So they focus on issues like Social Security and prescription drugs, crime and national security, education and health care, and taxes, taxes, taxes.

Younger people, not hearing politicians talking much to them, or even looking like them, tune out. It doesn't help that the white starched suits who dominate politics have little understanding of the multicultural world of Generations X, Y and Z (and there's much more racial diversity among younger cohorts than older ones). Only when they get older, settle down and start worrying about property values and their kids' education, do they begin participating in greater numbers.

It's not hard to imagine what a youth-oriented agenda might include: an end to the War on Drugs, or at least the repeal of mandatory sentences for nonviolent drug offenders and greater emphasis on treatment over punishment; free college education for everyone maintaining a B average or better, plus greater investment in literacy, arts education and alternative ways of earning a high school diploma; a ban on racial profiling; real sex education in the schools and an end to the hypocritical prudery that counsels "just say no" and condemns many uninformed young people to AIDS and other STDs; a one-year universal national service obligation for 18 to 24-year-olds; funding individual trust accounts of between $1,000 and $10,000 (depending on family means) created at birth and drawable after the completion of national service; political reforms that open up the system to more diverse voices, like public financing of races and instant-runoff voting; and lowering the voting age to 16, the same age where most states will treat a minor as an adult for the purposes of criminal prosecutions.

Add some visionary goals to the mix -- reverse global warming within 10 years, stop the AIDS epidemic in its tracks -- and there's no doubt that younger Americans would stand up and pay attention.

But American politicians seem afraid of anything that might seriously inspire young people. And one big reason is that for more than 20 years, they've been running away from the '60s, the not-entirely mythical decade of youthful idealism and protest.

If you doubt that proposition, check out Danny Goldberg's new book, Dispatches from the Culture Wars: How the Left Lost Teen Spirit. Goldberg, a 52-year-old music industry exec. and progressive activist, calls himself an "aging hippie" and he's got the chops to prove it. After dropping out of U.C. Berkeley in the fall of 1967, he was arrested on "assorted possession charges" six weeks before his 18th birthday. Back home in New York and in his parents' custody, he decided to stay away from drugs but dove headlong into the music scene with a job at Billboard magazine. Soon he was writing record reviews and traveling to the Woodstock festival in a limo commandeered by a press-agent friend. Rock writing led to talent management and a stellar career working with Led Zeppelin, Neil Young, KISS, REM, Nirvana, Diana Ross, Madonna, Joan Baez, Bonnie Raitt, Jackson Browne, Bruce Springsteen, Steve Earle, Allen Ginsberg and assorted gangsta rappers, boy bands, classical divas and jazz masters.

Through this whole strange trip, Goldberg honed a sure sense of popular culture and a growing outrage at how baby boomers have come to join cultural conservatives in bashing the tastes and enthusiasms of the young. He defends the '60s not only for the advances of the civil rights, feminist and gay rights movements, but also for including "a spiritual dimension, a search for unconventional and nonmaterialistic kinds of freedom that inspired millions of people."

With that broad understanding of what individual freedom should mean to progressives, he flays an array of center-left leaders who rail against the excesses of pop culture -- ranging from Al Gore to Ralph Nader -- for coming across as "uptight, preachy elitists." A recurring theme is his fight against censorship of music and intimidation of artists by the likes of Tipper Gore and Joe Lieberman, and the stories alone of his personal encounters with them in the salons of Los Angeles and the hearing rooms of Capitol Hill are enough to make the book worth reading. For someone who has had lots of access to the top tier of the Democratic Party, Goldberg is refreshingly unafraid to tell tales out of school.

Not only that, he makes a dramatic political point about the last election: "A major reason Gore lost in 2000 was a very severe case of liberal snobbery. With his unwillingness or inability to communicate in ordinary language ("Dingell-Norwood"?), his shrill attacks on popular culture, his selection of a running mate even more sanctimonious than he, and his obsessive need to distance himself from President Clinton, Gore turned off millions of voters he could have attracted." Indeed, in 1996, Clinton had a 19 point margin over Bob Dole among 18 to 24-year-olds. In 2000, Goldberg points out, Gore and Bush split that vote evenly.

It's far too soon to say if things will be any different in 2004. With both Democrats and Naderites running away from popular culture in recent years, Republicans have done all sorts of things to step into the gap -- funding college groups, hanging with icons like U2's Bono and MTV star Ozzy Osbourne, hyping their supposed support for the military (while shortchanging soldiers on pay) and building a stable of youthful TV personalities to sell their party.

But, like Goldberg, I find it hard to believe that a majority of young people will identify for long with the party of intolerance, inequality and greed. "No progressive change has ever occurred anywhere in the world without the energy and inspiration of young people," he writes.

If the Democratic Left can't get hip to that, they will stay in the political wilderness, and deservedly so.

[dirtboy]

But, like Goldberg, I find it hard to believe that a majority of young people will identify for long with the party of intolerance, inequality and greed.

Kiss my pasty rump, Sifry. Intolerance? The Dems are intolerant of any creed or value that does not fit their crusade of eternal victimhood. Inequality? The remaining pockets of hard-core poverty are mostly a creation of liberal politics. Greed? The Dems always want to take someone else's money. That's about as greedy as it gets.

[DPB101]

The days of the left grabbing neophytes is over. In the 1960s, FICA wasn't even noticable on a paycheck. Today it is more of a cost for low wage earners than the Income Tax. Kids look at their paycheck then see retirees driving around in Mercedes asking for free drugs and don't flock to the liberal cause.

[jae471]

Follow the money. Most people don't have a stable financial base established at 30, and even fewer are there at 25. These people aren't any help to the fundraising machines of the politicians, so they don't exist in their eyes.

Likewise, championing Free College isn't going to make an 60 year old vote for you -- the older people will be asking "Will my SS check be there in five years if these brats get free college?"

[archy]

But, like Goldberg, I find it hard to believe that a majority of young people will identify for long with the party of intolerance, inequality and greed.

With either party of intolerance, inequality and greed, for that matter, run by old pols and their pals. But you'll find plenty of youthful- as well as older- faces here.

-archy-/-

[Rummyfan]

Haven't the Libs already done this in Vermont?

[thoughtomator]

Well, let's face it, the Republicans are no angels either, they're simply not outright evil like the Democrats are. Neither party advocates the interests of young people.

[Abe Froman]

"It's not hard to imagine what a youth-oriented agenda might include: an end to the War on Drugs, or at least the repeal of mandatory sentences for nonviolent drug offenders and greater emphasis on treatment over punishment; free college education for everyone maintaining a B average or better, plus greater investment in literacy, arts education and alternative ways of earning a high school diploma; a ban on racial profiling; real sex education in the schools and an end to the hypocritical prudery that counsels "just say no" and condemns many uninformed young people to AIDS and other STDs; a one-year universal national service obligation for 18 to 24-year-olds; funding individual trust accounts of between $1,000 and $10,000 (depending on family means) created at birth and drawable after the completion of national service; political reforms that open up the system to more diverse voices, like public financing of races and instant-runoff voting; and lowering the voting age to 16, the same age where most states will treat a minor as an adult for the purposes of criminal prosecutions.

Add some visionary goals to the mix -- reverse global warming within 10 years, stop the AIDS epidemic in its tracks -- and there's no doubt that younger Americans would stand up and pay attention."


So basically "give all your money and power to the government and we'll solve all your problems." That is the way to appeal to youth? Unfortunately, perhaps it is for some, but that is why we don't allow such manifest immaturity participate in elections (at least when they're below 18.) People who are dependent on their parents for support and problem solving are easily duped into perceiving the government in the same way. A dangerous mistake.

[Joe Bonforte]

"It's not hard to imagine what a youth-oriented agenda might include: ... a one-year universal national service obligation for 18 to 24-year-olds..."

Oh, yeah. Those young voters are going to race to the polls to vote for a year of indentured servitude for themselves.

This captures in a nutshell why liberals are fading so fast politically. They think you can appeal to self-interest by bribing people on one hand (free college, for example), and yet sell them on being wildly altruistic on the other hand in support of liberal social engineering projects. In the real world, people don't think and act that way.

[Elliott Jackalope]

Here's my summation of the presidential "debates" last election:

"Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors". "Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors". "Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors". "Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors". "Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors". "Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors"."Lockbox". "Prescriptions drugs for seniors".

Then the politicians wonder why people are tuning them out.

[thoughtomator]

I find it ironic that the younger set can be incarcerated for drugs they want, but the seniors will be getting them free of charge (paid for by the not-yet-incarcerated younger set). Drugs are evil, unless they are desired by voting blocs of retirees, in which case it is perfectly fine to enslave the younger generation to their elders.

[goodnesswins]

I'm going to get a Bumper Sticker made up - "VOTE DEMOCRAT - PAY FOR OUR RETIREMENT/DRUGS!"

[ztiworoh]

As someone who is just about to head of to college (yea! only 15 days till I leave!) I can say that I actually see a pretty conservative streak in my generation, many of us are fed up with being shoved political correctness, affirmative action, guilt about our effects on the environment etc...

Even my friends who are socially liberal are pretty conservative fiscally and very much pro-America an pro-military.

I don't believe that politicians should "reach out" to young people because whenever most of them do it comes off as insincere an they seem even more out of touch. Instead they should be politicians, they're not MTV VJ's or the latest teen actor, they're supposed to be leaders and hanging out with pop-culture icons instead of their advisors makes them appear oftentimes more goofy than hip.

Young people don't expect a 50+ year old politician to be at base culturally with them, but they do understand the policy side of things. Whether a Senator listens to Bach, the Beatles, or Metallica doesn't matter to me aslong as they're not overtaxing me or leaving America open for attack.

[dfwgator]

"I'm old, gimme gimme gimme!"

[Myrnick]

It doesn't help that the white starched suits who dominate politics have little understanding of the multicultural world of Generations X, Y and Z.

Obviously written by someone without real world experience. You don't starch suits, you starch shirts.

[Mr. Bird]

How old is this author? Twelve? I couldn't get past the laundry list of absurdities. "Free" college education to anyone who has a B average? I'm surprised she didn't throw in "7-Up in the water fountains and ice cream for breakfast every day!" What an imbecile.

[Mr. Bird]

Sorry, the author's a "he". And a "Senior Analyst" at Public Campaign.

[Stultis]

"No progressive change has ever occurred anywhere in the world without the energy and inspiration of young people,"

Gotta admit, he has a point there:

[George W. Bush]

The MTV vote has never really materialized.

I suspect that people in that age group are always going to obsess over sex more than politics.

The only way they'll get interested in politics in any real numbers is if they realize the economy is so sour they won't be able to get jobs to pay off college loans and become big consumers.

[AnnaZ]

The only non-pukey line:

 "A major reason Gore lost in 2000 was a very severe case of liberal snobbery."

Finally. Step One. Admitting it.