Long Division: Historical note on how we got here.

Please find this and other writing on Substack.

Post World War II Priorities: After World War II, people prioritized materialism and security, leading to a focus on economic growth, better housing, and welfare states.

• Shift in Values: The younger generation (Boomers), exposed to economic prosperity and technological advancements, prioritized different values, leading to the rise of social movements in the 1960s and 1970s.
• Global Protests: Protests against the Vietnam War in the 1960s and 1970s, particularly in Washington, Tokyo, and London, highlighted the emergence of a younger generation with different priorities, and, I would argue, better music.
• Social Movements: The rise of various social movements, including the environmental movement, protests against climate change, anti-nuclear weapons protests, the women’s movement, and the LGBTQ+ movement.
• Post-Material Values: A shift in values from material affluence to post-material concerns like freedom, autonomy, and diverse lifestyles. Meaning, once your basic needs can be met (post-material), there is a tendency for cultural shifts to lean into things you can’t buy. On a side note, this happened notably during the Axial Age, when, after a high degree of affluence, the world saw wisdom traditions (in Persia, India, Greece, the Middle-East), rise in popularity and influence.
• Silent Revolution: A gradual process of social change driven by the replacement of older generations with younger generations holding different values. One. Funeral. At a time.
• Political Cleavage Shift: The traditional left-right economic cleavage in politics has been replaced by a new cultural cleavage.
• Cultural Cleavage Issues: New issues like women’s rights, childcare, welfare policies, and reproductive rights have become more important in political debates.
• Impact on Political Parties: The cultural split leads to a reshuffling of political parties, with new issues and new leaders emerging.
• Women’s Equality Movement: Post-World War II, women transitioned from traditional roles to industrial work, then back to domestic roles. The 1960s and 1970s saw a rise in feminism, demanding equal pay and challenging gender norms.
• Secularization Trend: As societies became more secure, the importance of religion declined, as documented in the book Sacred and Secular co-authored with Ron Inglehart.
• Secularization Trend: Dramatic change with declining religious affiliation, particularly in Europe, affecting both Protestants and Catholics.
• Data Sources for Secularization: Eurobarometer, Pew surveys, and World Values Survey show a decreasing proportion of people identifying as religious.
• Environmental Concerns: Growing concern for environmental issues, exemplified by the rise of Green parties, though initially supported by a small group.
• Climate Change Impact: Climate change is a major issue impacting politics, society, and values.
• Generational Shift in Values: A significant change in values is driven by successive generations with distinct political and cultural views.
• Generational Change vs. Life Cycle Effect: The shift is not due to individuals becoming more conservative with age (life cycle effect) but a generational change in values.
• Socialization Process: Formative years (childhood, adolescence, early work life) shape values, attitudes, and norms.
• Value Influences: Role models like teachers, family, community, and society contribute to shaping values.
• Value Stability: Values tend to remain stable after the formative years, influenced by early life experiences.
• Generational Value Shift: Values in society changed as younger generations with different values replaced older generations.
• Impact of Social and Political Changes: Social and political changes, such as the legalization of gay marriage and marijuana, reflect shifts in societal values.
• Influence of Historical Context: The values of individuals are shaped by the historical context in which they grew up.
• Generational Change Speed: The speed of generational change is unprecedented compared to historical norms.
• Deterministic Theory of Modernization: The idea that every generation is more liberal and tolerant is outdated and doesn’t reflect the diverse paces of change globally.
• Impact of Events on Generational Change: Short-term events like economic crises and terrorist attacks can temporarily reverse or slow down the progress of generational change.
• Generational Differences in Values: Older generations tend to be more socially conservative, while younger generations are more liberal.
• Impact of Period Effects: Short-term societal shifts, like recessions or security threats, can influence public opinion, but they don’t erase generational differences.
• Values of Older Generations: Older generations often perceive traditional values like patriotism, religion, and family as under threat and push back, especially at the ballot box.
• Social Liberalism’s Impact: Social liberalism’s expansion led to a minority status for traditional values, impacting those who felt their values were being lost.
• Rise of Authoritarian Populism: This shift fueled support for authoritarian populist parties, advocating for a pushback against social liberalism and the “woke agenda.”
• Authoritarian Populist Parties’ Agenda: These parties, while not always economically right-wing, aim to restore traditional values, often opposing immigration-driven diversity and advocating for positions like anti-abortion laws.
• Political Ideology of Right-Wing Parties: These parties oppose LGBTQ+ rights, globalization, and the European Union, advocating for national borders and nativism.
• Rise of Right-Wing Parties: These parties have gained significant support, votes, seats, and even entered governments in European countries, significantly impacting European politics.
• Understanding the Psychology: Beyond specific policy stances, there’s a deeper psychological aspect involving a sense of losing power, feeling silenced, and perceiving the world as changing against one’s interests.
• Free Speech and Cultural Shift: People feel their beliefs are becoming unacceptable, leading to a backlash and a sense of disorientation.
• Disorientation and Political Response: Disorientation, particularly among older generations, is a key factor in the rise of political movements that promise to restore a familiar past.
• Nostalgia and Political Appeal: These movements offer a nostalgic promise of returning to a past that feels familiar and less disorienting, appealing to those who feel left behind by societal changes.
• Cultural Issues’ Significance: Cultural issues, unlike economic ones, deeply impact social identity and one’s tribe, making the issues themselves more contentious and more personal, and more threatening to entire groups.
• Nostalgia and Social Change: People’s resistance to cultural changes stems from a nostalgia for past social structures and a desire to preserve their sense of identity. “Back-in-my-day-ism,” is more than just annoying. It’s a resonant misrepresentation of historical realities, that ignorance can inspire.
• Kinda’ like Brexit: Brexit, and its impulses, exemplifies the appeal of returning to a perceived (albeit fantastic) past glory, despite the practical implications of, in the UKs case, leaving the European Union.
• Brexit’s Impact: Boris Johnson viewed Brexit as a way to re-establish Britain as a major global player, similar to its role during World War II.
• Populist Party Appeal: Populist parties, like Trump’s Republican Party, capitalize on societal changes and promise to represent the “silent majority” who feel marginalized by the establishment.
• Materialist vs. Post-Materialist Appeal: Ezra Klein seeks to understand the material and post-materialist appeal of politicians and parties, drawing on global examples and knowledge.
• Transgressive Aesthetic in Politics: A transgressive aesthetic, characterized by challenging norms and institutions, is a recurring element in the politics of cultural backlash.
• Trumpism and Popular Policy Views: There is an argument that the appeal of politicians like Donald Trump lies in their adoption of popular policy views, such as opposing cuts to social security.
• Role of Transgressive Rhetoric: Transgressive rhetoric, including informal language and challenges to authority, is a key aspect of populist appeal.
• Populist Leaders’ Appeal: Populist leaders appeal to the “ordinary people,” often coded as white and native-born, by rejecting experts and authorities.
• Economic and Social Stances: Populist leaders often adopt left-center economic positions, supporting welfare and public services, while holding socially conservative views.
• Examples of Populist Parties: Examples include the Sweden Democrats, the Norway Progress Party, and the British Conservative Party under Boris Johnson.
• Rejection of Institutions: People feel that institutions and experts no longer respect their views, leading to a desire for leaders who reject these institutions.
• Appreciation for Transgressiveness: Even those who don’t agree with a leader’s excesses may appreciate their willingness to defy societal norms and institutions.
• Transgressiveness as a Political Strategy: Transgressiveness reflects a commitment to not be intimidated by societal pressures, resonating with voters who feel marginalized.
• Leader’s Appeal: Transgressive leaders appeal to outgroups by defending their values, using controversial language, and criticizing the establishment.
• Transgressive Leaders’ Actions: Transgressive leaders often transgress democratic norms once in power, engaging in patronage appointments, breaking the law, and facing corruption scandals.
• Outgroup Support: Outgroups, feeling excluded by the establishment, find resonance with transgressive leaders who challenge the status quo and advocate for their interests.
• Populist Transgression in Governance: Populist leaders often challenge democratic norms, with varying degrees of success depending on the political system.
• Impact of Political Systems on Populism: Majoritarian systems like the US and UK may see more transgressive populist leaders, while coalition governments in Europe tend to moderate populist parties.
• Turning Point in Populist Authoritarianism: Around 2010, there was a significant increase in the success of populist authoritarian tendencies, potentially due to various factors like economic crises and technological changes.
• Far-Right Parties’ History: Longstanding parties, often neo-Nazi, marginalized and below voting thresholds until recent years.
• Factors Contributing to Rise: Precipitating developments and long-term dissatisfaction, including dealignment in party politics and weakening of class identities.
• Party System Fragmentation: Mainstream parties lost support from the 1960s onwards, leading to fragmentation and a shift in voting patterns.
• Rise of Smaller Parties: The decline of major parties created opportunities for smaller parties, including progressive and populist ones.
• Populist Party’s Image Shift: Populist parties have become more moderate in their image, focusing on immigration and abandoning explicitly anti-European Union stances.
• Factors Contributing to Populist Support: Economic crises, immigration, and the rise of migrants contributed to the support for populist parties.
• Populist Party Growth: Populist parties are gradually gaining support and influence through electoral processes.
• Example of Giorgia Meloni: Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy party, with roots in fascism, gained respectability and increased electoral success by moderating its image.
• Rise of Marine Le Pen: Marine Le Pen’s National Rally party in France has seen a steady increase in support, reaching 41% of the vote in the 2022 presidential election.
• Rise of Populist Parties: A gradual rise of minor parties, often with populist or nationalist agendas, is observed in various European countries, including France, Belgium, Poland, Turkey, and Hungary.
• Shift in Political Parties: Mainstream political parties have become more moderate, leading to a decline in their support and the emergence of new political forces.
• Demand-Side Factors: Profound demographic and cultural changes are creating a demand for politicians who offer a sense of security and identity in the face of societal shifts.
• Political Landscape: Analogous to economic markets, political systems have demand (public opinion), supply (party responses), and regulations (rules of the game).
• Tipping Point in Politics: A tipping point occurs when a minority group’s influence surpasses the majority, leading to a shift in political dynamics and potential resentment.
• Populism and Social Change: Populist movements, like the MAGA movement, capitalize on social changes, such as demographic shifts, to gain support from groups feeling left behind.
• Media Influence on Perception: The rise of algorithmic and engagement-oriented media, particularly post-2010, contributes to a perception of rapid societal change, even if not reflected in reality.
• Impact of Social Media: Social media platforms, with their comment sections and focus on identity-based content, create an environment where people feel increasingly scrutinized and silenced.
• Connection to Political Trends: The author suggests a link between the rise of populist authoritarian figures and the media’s role in amplifying fears and divisions within society.
• Internet as a Tool: The internet, as a tool, can be used both positively and negatively for democratic engagement and political communications.
• Information Access: The internet provides broader access to information, allowing people to break out of their local bubbles and access global events.
• Potential for Misinformation: The internet can also reinforce misinformation and disinformation, creating echo chambers and contributing to the spread of false information.
• Media’s Role in Politics: Debate on whether media, particularly social media, primarily drives support for authoritarian populists or reflects societal shifts.
• Impact of Social Media on Elections: Argument that social media significantly influenced Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign and Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, potentially changing the trajectory of American politics.
• Social Media’s Influence on Political Systems: Suggestion that social media’s ability to bypass traditional gatekeepers and amplify fringe voices can alter the political landscape and the types of candidates who gain traction.
• Algorithmic Influence on Information Consumption: Algorithmic media can create echo chambers by serving users content similar to what they’ve previously interacted with, potentially leading to polarization.
• Impact of Social Media on Politics: Social media has revolutionized campaigning, returning to a more personalized approach and significantly reducing the time and distance between political events and public awareness.
• Viral Spread of Marginalized Content: Social media’s ability to rapidly spread content, including marginalized ideas and figures, can significantly influence the political landscape, as seen in the example of Bolsonaro’s supporters.
• Social Media’s Impact on Society: Social media amplifies and expands existing societal phenomena rather than fundamentally changing them.
• Information Consumption Habits: Despite the rise of social media, television remains the most common source of information for people in various countries.
• Political Polarization and Media Consumption: The internet, like talk radio before it, contributes to political polarization by providing platforms for diverse viewpoints and fostering a sense of community among like-minded individuals.
• Twitter’s Influence: Twitter’s influence on politics is not direct but indirect, as it shapes the information and decisions of media, political, and technological elites.
• Public’s Political Engagement: The public’s engagement with politics is not solely through Twitter, as they also consume other forms of media like entertainment.
• Historical Context of Backlash: The current cultural backlash might not be unique, as history has seen similar populist authoritarian figures in the past.
• Reemergence of Authoritarian Movements: Authoritarian movements, including fascism, are reemerging due to the fading memory of their past discrediting.
• Impact of Historical Context: The interpretation of trends, such as the rise of authoritarianism, depends on the starting point of analysis.
• Global Spread of Authoritarian Leaders: Authoritarian leaders are emerging globally, exemplified by figures like Narendra Modi in India, Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines, and Recep Erdogan in Turkey.
• Populism’s Global Spread: Populism, defined broadly, has become a significant political force globally, particularly in developing countries, with examples like Venezuela, Argentina, Mexico, and Nicaragua.
• Populism’s Threat to Democracy: Populism, often associated with authoritarian tendencies, poses a threat to liberal democracy, contributing to democratic backsliding observed in various regions.
• Economic Factors and Populism: The 2008 financial crisis is cited as a contributing factor to the rise of populism, as traditional political parties failed to address economic concerns like stagnating wages.
• Economic Explanation for Populism: Initially plausible, but less convincing when considering affluent countries with strong welfare states experiencing populist surges.
• Cross-Country Analysis: Populism is not limited to poorer regions or countries, as evidenced by its presence in affluent nations like Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland, and the Netherlands.
• Individual-Level Data: Survey data reveals that economic factors alone do not fully explain populist support, as individuals from various economic backgrounds exhibit such support.
• Voter Support Drivers: Cultural issues, not economic factors, are the primary drivers of voter support for populist parties.
• Economic Policies’ Limitations: Traditional economic solutions like job programs and training have limited impact on winning back lost votes.
• Alternative Approach: Social democratic parties should focus on expanding services, improving infrastructure, and providing educational opportunities, particularly in green industries.
• Left Parties’ Dilemma: Left parties face a dilemma in appealing to both their traditional working-class base and the more liberal segments of the population due to internal divisions on cultural issues.
• Center-Right Parties’ Adaptability: Center-right parties find it easier to adapt by forming coalitions with populist parties, allowing them to adjust immigration policies while maintaining their economic policies.
• Potential for Different Strategies: Ezra Klein suggests that understanding the current political landscape as driven by anxieties rather than just policies opens up possibilities for different political strategies.
• Obama’s Political Stance: Obama advocated for change while addressing cultural anxieties, a balance that is often overlooked.
• Political Figures and Change: Politicians like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez emphasize change, while others like Joe Biden focus on reassurance and electability.
• Synthesis of Change and Reassurance: Effective politicians can simultaneously represent change and address concerns about being left out.
• Political Optimism: It is possible to be optimistic about the future while acknowledging people’s fears, requiring a talented politician.
• Policy Popularity: Joe Biden’s policies are popular, but he and Donald Trump have similar approval ratings, indicating other factors at play.
• Issue Dimensions: Economic and foreign policy offer opportunities for politicians to promise deliverables and achieve them, impacting public perception.
• Cultural Change Challenges: More difficult to promise cultural preservation or reversal of populist policies compared to economic promises.
• Leadership Shift in UK Conservative Party: From radical economic change (Corbyn) to “get Brexit done” (Johnson) to a chaotic government of radical change (Truss) to a call for stability and continuity (Sunak).
• Sunak’s Leadership and Immigration Policy: Sunak promises stability and economic restoration but maintains the previous administration’s extreme immigration policies.
• Political Strategy and Populism: Discussion on the challenges faced by the conservative party due to the rise of populist parties and the need to balance reassuring voters with addressing concerns about change.
• Cultural and Economic Issues: Exploration of the connection between cultural and economic issues, particularly how concerns about inflation and economic change are often expressed in terms of cultural disorientation.
• Materialistic vs. Post-Materialistic Responses to Economic Issues: Analysis of different responses to economic challenges, comparing the focus on expertise and management (e.g., Mitt Romney) with a desire for fundamental change and a return to traditional values (e.g., Ron Paul).
• Economic Anxiety: Economic issues, such as rising prices and mortgage rates, can create anxiety that is both cultural and materialistic.
• Technocratic Management vs. Cultural Disorientation: Economic debates often involve a choice between technocratic management and addressing a sense of cultural disorientation due to rapid change.
• Addressing Economic Fears: Addressing economic fears solely through economic means might be misguided, as they are often intertwined with broader anxieties, particularly generational anxieties.
• Generational Conflict and Electorate: Younger generations age out of the electorate, potentially leading to a lag period where their political influence lags behind their cultural impact.
• Cultural Backlash and Political Shift: The counterculture becoming the mainstream culture leads to resentment and a yearning for strongman politicians among older generations.
• Projection for the Future: Uncertainty about the accuracy of demographic determinism in politics, but a potential for a new normal to emerge in 15 years as younger generations’ influence grows.
• Secular Changes and Generational Shifts: Long-term changes in values, such as secularization and declining religiosity, are evident across societies and time periods.
• Impact of Minority Status: When a once-majority group becomes a minority, they may feel disenfranchised and resort to self-censorship due to social pressures.
• Timeframe for Social Change: Generational shifts in values take time to manifest, and the effects of becoming a minority group are gradual.
• Demographic Change and Political System: Discusses the potential impact of demographic changes on the political system, particularly in the United States.
• Threats to Democracy: Highlights concerns about the erosion of democratic norms, citing examples like candidates refusing to accept election results and changes to electoral laws.
• Long-Term Trends and Political Challenges: Addresses the tension between long-term generational shifts in values and the immediate political challenges that could hinder democratic progress.
• Authoritarian Support Basis: Exploring the basis of popular support for authoritarian leaders, challenging the assumption that it stems solely from coercion or patronage.
• New Literature on Authoritarianism: Highlighting emerging literature that suggests genuine support for authoritarian leaders who promise security and order, particularly in times of crisis.
• Matovski’s “Popular Dictatorships”: Recommending Aleksandar Matovski’s book, which uses data from Russia and Central and Eastern Europe to argue that leaders like Putin may have public support due to their promise of efficient, strong-armed rule.
• Modern Authoritarianism: Shift from military coups to electoral authoritarian regimes using propaganda and information control to maintain support.
• Propaganda and Information Control: Manipulating democracy and controlling information through censorship and other means to shape public opinion.
• Historical Context of Totalitarianism: Hannah Arendt’s “The Origins of Totalitarianism” offers insights into the rise of authoritarian regimes in the 20th century, relevant to understanding contemporary trends.
• Democratic Backsliding Research: The need for new theories and research on democratic backsliding, focusing on the differences between old and new authoritarian regimes.
• Understanding Authoritarian Appeal: Investigating the popular support for authoritarianism, including the erosion of democratic norms, strongman leadership values, and the appeal of stability, security, and a return to past values.
• Comparative Analysis: Conducting comparative studies to understand the reasons behind democratic backsliding and the challenges faced by liberal democracy.]
• The rise of right-wing populism is a global phenomenon, not unique to the United States. Pippa Norris argues this is due to a “silent revolution” in cultural values, where younger generations prioritize post-material issues like freedom and autonomy over economic prosperity. This shift led to a cultural cleavage, replacing the traditional left-right economic divide in politics.

Doubtless, there have been significant shifts in social values, particularly in liberal democracies, over the past 50 years. The rise of feminism, secularization, and environmental concerns, noting how these issues have become widely accepted and influenced political and societal norms. An emphasis on the generational nature of these changes, explaining how formative experiences shape values and attitudes, making them less fluid in later life. Social psychologists have much to say on this, but for the purposes of my shameless thievery on this post, lets call it out as something obvious.

Older generations, feeling left behind by social liberalism and cultural shifts, are increasingly supporting authoritarian populist parties. These parties, promising to restore traditional values and national identity, tap into a sense of disorientation and nostalgia among older voters. Brexit, for example, was framed as a return to Britain’s former glory, appealing to a desire for a more familiar past. It should be noted, in like manner and form, that Putin is doing the same thing in Ukraine, except that his handiwork is more violent and didn’t involve any of that messy voting that Democracies are used to.

Populist leaders often employ a transgressive aesthetic, rejecting established norms and institutions, to appeal to groups feeling marginalized by cultural shifts. This appeal is strengthened by their economic policies, which often lean left-center, promising support for welfare and social programs. However, once in power, some populist leaders may also transgress democratic norms, undermining liberal institutions and values.

Populist authoritarian parties have been on the rise since the 1950s, but experienced a significant increase in success around 2010. This shift can be attributed to a combination of factors, including the decline of mainstream parties, the rise of populist parties’ savvy marketing strategies, and the increasing desperation of voters for politicians who reflect their values. These changes are further exacerbated by demographic and cultural shifts, such as urbanization, racial and ethnic diversity, and technological advancements.

The rise of algorithmic media and highly engagement-oriented platforms, particularly since 2010, has led to a rapid shift in public perception of societal change. While social media can amplify political discourse and enable the spread of misinformation, its direct impact on authoritarian populism remains debated. Critics argue that social media serves as a reflection of existing societal divisions rather than a primary driver of political polarization. I would add, as an educator, that we’re watching in real-time how the Nature v. Nurture Debate has added another component: Algorithm. So any kid, these days, has an added layer of complexity embedded in his, or her, upbringing. It’s now: Nature v. Nurture v. Algorithm.

While some argue that the current rise of populist authoritarianism is unprecedented, others point to historical examples like fascism and socialism, suggesting a reversion to the historical mean. Economic explanations for this rise, particularly in response to the 2008 financial crisis, are debated, with evidence suggesting cultural issues like race and immigration hold more sway. Left-leaning parties face challenges in addressing these cultural anxieties while maintaining their core values, potentially hindering their ability to counter the appeal of populist movements.

Politicians often struggle to balance promising change with reassuring voters anxious about the future. While some politicians focus on emphasizing change, others prioritize stability and continuity, particularly on cultural issues like immigration. Economic crises can create anxiety that is both cultural and materialistic, leading voters to seek competent government and economic security.

Generational shifts in political values, particularly towards secularization and liberalism, are evident but take time to impact politics. While younger generations may eventually dominate, the current political landscape is turbulent due to the resistance of older generations, who are using their remaining power to undermine democratic institutions. This resistance, manifesting in authoritarian tendencies and erosion of democratic norms, raises questions about the long-term stability of liberal democracy.

Again, nothing new. Maybe too obviously torn from books and articles already writte, but I’ve yearned for the grounding that historical reality can offer the cloudiness of theory. To that end, hope this was an interesting romp. Hats off to those who’ve inspired the missive: Ezra Klein, and Dr. Pippa Norris, especially.