Younger voters not particularly scared of the word "socialism"

[mookiemookie]

But it’s not that the youngest voters don’t know what socialism means. It’s that most aren’t scared of it — and find it bizarre that, decades after the fall of the Berlin Wall, a political movement would center itself around opposition to it. The fact that both the tea party and the Republican Party have made vociferous opposition to “socialist’’ policies a key part of their rhetoric helps explain the tepid response among young adults.

Republican strategists see short-term advantages in the tea party movement’s passion. But if conservatives can’t wean themselves off of Cold-War-era rhetoric, they risk alienating an entire generation of young people. The tea party is well on its way to doing just that. A recent New York Times/CBS News survey found that three-quarters of the movement’s supporters were older than 45.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/04/20/to_young_voters_socialism_isnt_a_bad_word/

I think the Republican/Tea Party needs to have more of an understanding of demographics. If they're not connecting with younger voters, they're mortgaging their future for short term gains. The anti-immigrant rhetoric isn't going to play well with the Hispanic contingent either - every day they're becoming a larger and larger minority. Interesting times ahead.

[AVGWarhawk]

But if conservatives can’t wean themselves off of Cold-War-era rhetoric, they risk alienating an entire generation of young people.


What is this supposed to mean? Cold war era rhetoric? What rhetoric is that may I ask?

[razark]

What is this supposed to mean? Cold war era rhetoric? What rhetoric is that may I ask?

"OMG! COMMIES! THEY'RE EVERYWHERE! THEY'RE GOING TO EAT OUR CHILDREN! etc. etc. ad nauseum."

That schtick. It gets old after a while.

[AVGWarhawk]

"OMG! COMMIES! THEY'RE EVERYWHERE! THEY'RE GOING TO EAT OUR CHILDREN! etc. etc. ad nauseum."

That schtick. It gets old after a while.

Can you point out this Commie rhetoric in recent months?

[razark]

Can you point out this Commie rhetoric in recent months?

If you haven't noticed it, you haven't been opening your eyes.

Plenty of signs at demonstrations, various commentators, windbags on talk radio and Fox News, etc.

[Catfish]

"Can you point out this Commie rhetoric in recent months? "

I thought you meant "ant-commie rhethoric" ?
If you meant that i would have liked to point it out, but i cannot enter the whole subsim forum, into less than some hundred links :rotfl2:
Let's add one more:
Anyone who wants to tax Exxon-Mobil, is a Commie. :O:

Greetings,
Catfish

[AVGWarhawk]

If you haven't noticed it, you haven't been opening your eyes.

Plenty of signs at demonstrations, various commentators, windbags on talk radio and Fox News, etc.

I do not watch Fox. To much craziness there.

[AVGWarhawk]

"Can you point out this Commie rhetoric in recent months? "

I thought you meant "ant-commie rhethoric" ?
If you meant that i would have liked to point it out, but i cannot enter the whole subsim forum, into less than some hundred links :rotfl2:
Let's add one more:
Anyone who wants to tax Exxon-Mobil, is a Commie. :O:

Greetings,
Catfish

Well, some of the forum could be entered. Yes, we need to tax Exxon-Mobile. Problem is, big oil is very involved in government.

Ok, I just wanted to clear up the Commie rhetoric deal. :up:

[August]

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/04/20/to_young_voters_socialism_isnt_a_bad_word/

I think the Republican/Tea Party needs to have more of an understanding of demographics.

I think the Democratic/Communist party needs to recognize that the Republican party and the Tea Party are two totally separate entities.

[mookiemookie]

I think the Democratic/Communist party needs to recognize that the Republican party and the Tea Party are two totally separate entities.

The "socialist" rhetoric is the same from both of them, so I lumped them together. It doesn't change the point at all.

[AVGWarhawk]

I think the Democratic/Communist party needs to recognize that the Republican party and the Tea Party are two totally separate entities.

That would probably be a good idea. I remember the cold war in a different light. You know, nukes parked off the Florida coast. Things of that nature. Rhetoric that meant something for a REAL problem. So these young folks are not afraid of Socialism or some such thing. I guess they are ok with nukes parked 80 miles off the Florida coast?

[Egan]

Part of the reason, I suspect, is that it is bandied around so often by segments of the right who haven't even the vaguest notion of what socialism is and use it to attack anything they don't believe in that it has become incredibly devalued, Exactly like sections of the left and their childish and -virtually always utterly wrong use of the word 'Fascist.' Is it any wonder that when you cry wolf enough everybody stops listening? Words are too important to be used wrongly - especially when, like 'Socialist' and 'Fascist' they have such profound meanings and connotations.

[VonHesse]

So these young folks are not afraid of Socialism or some such thing. I guess they are ok with nukes parked 80 miles off the Florida coast?

Sure, pack them all into a time machine and ship them back to 1962, and I bet they'd be just as concerned about nukes off the Floride coast as everyone else was back then.

But there aren't nukes parked off the off the coast anymore. Haven't been any for over 45 years.

I'm just sayin...

[GoldenRivet]

Part of the reason, I suspect, is that it is bandied around so often by segments of the right who haven't even the vaguest notion of what socialism is

Socialism: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

yeah, we know what it is.

and i dont think that I should be a 1/300,000,000th owner of General Motors

nor do i think I should be a 1/300,000,000th owner of any other industry

Business are started by private men who create business models that either work or dont.

when they work, the man makes more money which is exactly what he set out on doing in the first place.

what incentive would anyone have to work hard to become successful if the government just went "Ok everyone... come and get your government subsidized success!"?

answer - zero incentive

The problem with Socialism is that it breeds what is referred to as a welfare state.in a welfare state, the people are powerless to better their financial position unless the Federal Government does it for them.

Sorry, but not even the United States Government wields that sort of power over me.

[AVGWarhawk]

Sure, pack them all into a time machine and ship them back to 1962, and I bet they'd be just as concerned about nukes off the Floride coast as everyone else was back then.

But there aren't nukes parked off the off the coast anymore. Haven't been any for over 45 years.

I'm just sayin...

And Iran just wants to make a reactor for well...energy :up: There are still talks of nuclear arms reduction even today. ICBM sir. No need to park'em off the coast.....just saying :03:

[mookiemookie]

Part of the reason, I suspect, is that it is bandied around so often by segments of the right who haven't even the vaguest notion of what socialism is and use it to attack anything they don't believe in that it has become incredibly devalued, Exactly like sections of the left and their childish and -virtually always utterly wrong use of the word 'Fascist.' Is it any wonder that when you cry wolf enough everybody stops listening? Words are too important to be used wrongly - especially when, like 'Socialist' and 'Fascist' they have such profound meanings and connotations.

Absolutely correct. Any idea that's anything left of hardcore Ayn Rand is labelled "SOSHULIZM!" by folks who have no understanding of the concept, save for the fact that it's an "-ism" and therefore must be bad.

[AVGWarhawk]

Absolutely correct. Any idea that's anything left of hardcore Ayn Rand is labelled "SOSHULIZM!" by folks who have no understanding of the concept, save for the fact that it's an "-ism" and therefore must be bad.

Over generalizing.

[Freiwillige]

The American model was based on the exact opposite ideals of Socialism.

In fact if you follow American history the more free and independent we are as a nation the better we do. Socialism isn't worth the garbage bag I would use to haul it away with!

And as far as the youth. Of course they don't fear Socialism. They also lack a decent education here and what education they do get is filled with leftest idealism. The dumbing down of America has been going on for years and the news and media back when they weren't bought and sold used to report on it.

So you have all this left leaning propaganda bombarding our youth from Radio to MTV to Hollywood and you wonder why kids see Castro and Lenin as Cult hero's. you can follow that paper trail all the way back to McCarthy
no even Roosevelt.

Its no longer a war for social and economic beliefs, Its a war for the youth's mind.

This is as true and relevant today as it was yesterday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6H63CD7uQA

[AVGWarhawk]

The American model was based on the exact opposite ideals of Socialism.

In fact if you follow American history the more free and independent we are as a nation the better we do. Socialism isn't worth the garbage bag I would use to haul it away with!

And as far as the youth. Of course they don't fear Socialism. They also lack a decent education here and what education they do get is filled with leftest idealism. The dumbing down of America has been going on for years and the news and media back when they weren't bought and sold used to report on it.

So you have all this left leaning propaganda bombarding our youth from Radio to MTV to Hollywood and you wonder why kids see Castro and Lenin as Cult hero's. you can follow that paper trail all the way back to McCarthy
no even Roosevelt.

Its no longer a war for social and economic beliefs, Its a war for the youth's mind.

This is as true and relevant today as it was yesterday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6H63CD7uQA


:up:

[DarkFish]

really, what's so bad about socialism? (socialism, not communism, as I can see how communism is bad)

besides, compared to the Netherlands, socialism is almost non-existent in the US. Obama's got any socialist characteristics? Don't make me laugh.
Here even the liberal parties have got a similar policy as Obama wants.

[krashkart]

And as far as the youth. Of course they don't fear Socialism. They also lack a decent education here and what education they do get is filled with leftest idealism. The dumbing down of America has been going on for years and the news and media back when they weren't bought and sold used to report on it.


Why fear it? Wouldn't it be better for them to understand what it is and let them make up their own minds as to whether a step in that direction would be a good thing for their futures?

I do agree with your point about the "dumbing down of America". The networks give us more bias and pundit hapablap and not enough of the real meat of things. Thankfully we still have the freedom to think for ourselves. :shifty:

[AVGWarhawk]

really, what's so bad about socialism? (socialism, not communism, as I can see how communism is bad)

besides, compared to the Netherlands, socialism is almost non-existent in the US. Obama's got any socialist characteristics? Don't make me laugh.
Here even the liberal parties have got a similar policy as Obama wants.

Hence my questions at the very beginning of this thread. One is saying Socialism and another is cold war rhetoric. Last I checked it was Communism that spurred the cold war. Left me itching my head. Socialism with cold war Communism rhetoric? Got me confused..... But I'm being told that youth understands Socialism and is not afraid of it. :hmmm:

[Freiwillige]

Why fear it? Wouldn't it be better for them to understand what it is and let them make up their own minds as to whether a step in that direction would be a good thing for their futures?

I do agree with your point about the "dumbing down of America". The networks give us more bias and pundit hapablap and not enough of the real meat of things. Thankfully we still have the freedom to think for ourselves. :shifty:

Exactly. Teach it absolutely, along with every other political system with out 'sspin and let them decide. For that's whats great about American's is that we at least at one time thought for our self's.

But I also believe that each state is sovereign and its not the fed's job to impose systems. So if one state's voters (California) wants socialism and another (Texas) wants Capitalism so let it be.

[Ducimus]

Younger generation's grew up with no memory of the cold war, so why should they be afraid of the word "socialism"?

Cold war rhetoric is pulling the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic card. Socialism is assoicated with communision for those of us who have a memory of the cold war. For those who didn't grow up in the 80's or earlier, the word is probably meaningless. Just some nutjobs flying off the handle.

[Méo]

Still amazed to see what's going on in your country...

[tater]

Socialism is un-American—in the Founder's sense of the phrase. None of them, regardless of affiliation (even the Federalists) would have liked it. Much of what they wish is expressly unconstitutional. Being in favor of the constitution doesn't make you some sort of crazy radical, or anti-government. In fact, it makes you PRO government, since the Constitution IS our government.

Young people are for the most part pretty dumb, that's part of it.

Socialism might work for some places—particularly tiny countries. The problem that always arises is that it requires, strong, centralized control over most all aspects of everyone's life. This is always dangerous, since that gives those in power almost infinite tools of control. Large scale democide in the 20th century was almost the exclusive purview of socialist regimes—remember that there were only "communist" regimes in name, functionally, all socialists.

Again, it's not BECAUSE of socialism, but because the central control required for socialism is a necessary requirement for totalitarianism. There are (and were) no decentralized, totalitarian states (since decentralized and totalitarian are mutually exclusive).

Also, on the level of the average guy, they realize that it's against human nature. They also tend to envision themselves as being capable of succeeding enough that they'll be the victim of confiscatory taxes. Those content to never be successful are perhaps more likely to want to steal from others—legally.

In addition, people will always try to create free markets when markets are fettered. Always. Anything that is too highly taxed, or banned is available in a black market—everywhere on Earth. Proof that this is the natural state. Other economics exist only at gunpoint—free markets exist in spite of gunpoints.

[Ducimus]

Personally, i think the tendency for the government to become stronger and more centralized started as a response to the merry band of ragheads that decided to park a couple airliners into the twin towers. It then flowered with W's copious use of Signing statements and strengthening of presidential power, continues on with Obama, and will probably keep on continuing so long as the terrorism continues to be, or be thought of, as a threat. The next decade is going to be mighty interesting.

BTW, politics sucks.

[Platapus]

Perhaps because the word socialism has been bantered about for describing anything against some people's opinion, that the younger generation is simply numb to the over use/misuse of the word?

After a while no one listens to the politician/commentator who cries socialism. :yep:

[Aramike]

That editorial you posted is drawing biased conclusions based upon faulty reasoning. Republican strategists see short-term advantages in the tea party movement’s passion. But if conservatives can’t wean themselves off of Cold-War-era rhetoric, they risk alienating an entire generation of young people.Why? Really, why?

For one, studies have shown repeatedly that young people ultimately get older. Furthermore, and less in jest, studies have shown that, as they get older, people tend to move conservative.

But see, the writer's point is irritatingly self-serving, and has implied that the Cold War rhetoric of Communism is similar to the current rhetoric of Socialism. Communism was indeed more feared, as a result of the Cold War. Socialism doesn't carry the same "nuclear war" urgency.

Finally, I find this quote particularly hilarious:
Naveed Easton, a 19-year-old Emerson student, said he thought the group was out of touch. “You can notice the shift in society over the past 30 years,’’ he said. “It’s just getting more and more open-minded, and some people are just very resistant to a progressive society. Especially when it comes to, like, ‘Oh, that’s a socialist program!’ ’’Wait, so the writer found a young leftist, and then used this quote to justify the position that Tea Partiers are out of touch with youth? That's absurd reasoning.

It seems to me that a more correct interpretation would be that the Tea Party people are out of touch with LEFTISTS.

[Zachstar]

Why on earth would the youth fear socialism when the tea party is filled with racist signs mentioning it. Its making the connection that anti-socialism is the jelly to racism's peanut butter in the realm of politics.

Yet again the republicans and tea party let themselves get defined by hate mongers who dominate news cycles and scare young people away from any thought of conservatism.

I wouldn't worry that young voters are going to vote in the commie party anytime soon. But the racism and dumbness is going to cost republicans political votes in 2010 if they don't get control over these parties.

[Ducimus]

But the racism and dumbness is going to cost republicans political votes in 2010 if they don't get control over these parties.

Oh yeah, and howdy. When i see things like this in the news:
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/POLITICS/04/19/second.amendment.rally/tzleft.gunrally.gi.jpg
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/19/second.amendment.rally/index.html

I cringe. Thats extreme. The Bible, politics, and guns is bad combination. I'm starting to wonder when these tea partiers, montana militianmen, and the like, are going to get themselves frenzied up enough to do something incredibly stupid. Which is one reason why i think this next decade is going to be interesting.

[Tribesman]

Nice article Ducimus.
"We're in a war. The other side knows they are at war, because they started it," said Larry Pratt, president of the Gun Owners of America. "They are coming for our freedom, for our money, for our kids, for our property. They are coming for everything because they are a bunch of socialists."
Is Pratt his name or just a description?

[Ducimus]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Pratt

[Tribesman]

So its both his name and a good description of him
Such a nice crowd he runs with, the Klan, the Cause foundation, Christian Identity.
What a Prat

[tater]

Ducimus, while I agree that terrorism is partly to blame now, it goes in cycles. FDR was far , far worse than anything done to curtail liberty since—combined, I imagine.

The real danger is the erosion of personal responsibility and liberty, IMHO. The more people expect from the State and get, the more beholden they are to it.

Regarding racism, given the press coverage, and the goal of showing all these tea party guys as being racists, we see virtually every single sign on the news. I drove past one last fall (?) and I was stuck in traffic, and was doing a count (people on my side per 0.1 mile, then multiply), as well as looking at signs. I saw one sign I didn't think was in good taste, and it wasn't racist, just crass.

What % of the signs were racist?

Virtually all virulent racists in the 30s and 40s were Democrats. Were FDR and Truman therefor evil, or were those just some % of Democratic membership?

Without the actual stats, no real claims can be made one way or another. Data is useful.

[Ducimus]

I wasn't saying their racist, i was just saying their nuts.

[Freiwillige]

I wasn't saying their racist, i was just saying their nuts.

Why? Belief in the Constitution? Usage of the ideals of our founding fathers? Being patriotic? Hating the excessive government waste and all the taxes that are bound to pay for it?

I don't get all the tea party bashing....What they are doing just appears American to me.

It looks as if those in power are annoyed that their bosses "The people" actually want to have a say.:nope:

Sure their are nuts in the Tea Party...But guess what? There are Nuts everywhere even here on Subsim! Should I go on other message boards and bag Subsim because some nut here went off on a politically incorrect rant?

[Ducimus]

I think they're nuts because parading around with AR 15's outside DC strikes me as something towards the deep end of the wading pool. I'll be surprised if they're not prancing around and thinking of themselves as the "America's True patriots", how everyone else is not, and start talking about overthrowing the government. Thats why i liken them to montana miliamen groups, they like to call upon that "spirit of 76" too, and they do beleive they are the true patriots. Tea partiers are of a similar vein, just not reciting the turner diaries just yet.

Hell, there's already groups out there conducting weekend bivoucs in case they have to defend themselves from big bad uncle sam. These paranoid people are out of their freaking minds, and wrapping themselves in the constitution to justify themselves. To me, thats a travesty, and their one step away from being home grown terrorists. But hey, extremists come in all shapes, colors and sizes. Tea partiers parading around with AR 15's rate right up there.

[August]

Tea partiers parading around with AR 15's rate right up there.

A single person out of a crowd of hundreds of thousands, spread over every state in the Union does not make a parade. By your standard the idiots who wear Che Guevara at Obama rallies represent the Democratic party?

[Zachstar]

The issue is the repubs are letting the extreme into these rallies with open arms. Having Palin address them glen beck at every corner. Its hard not to get into a frenzy of hate at that point.

Bringing a bunch of guns to these rallies REALLY dosent help their cause either. I mean if they believe the gov is out to get them and install socialism wouldn't the perfect excuse be if one of these idiots goes nuts and opens fire?

Young people see this and think the tea party is full of nutjobs.

[August]

The issue is the repubs are letting the extreme into these rallies with open arms. Having Palin address them glen beck at every corner. Its hard not to get into a frenzy of hate at that point.

Bringing a bunch of guns to these rallies REALLY dosent help their cause either. I mean if they believe the gov is out to get them and install socialism wouldn't the perfect excuse be if one of these idiots goes nuts and opens fire?

Young people see this and think the tea party is full of nutjobs.

A bunch = what, two people seen to be carrying so far? That's hardly a movement.

And what exactly do the republicans control at a Tea Party rally? I'll give you a hint. Nothing, and that's a big problem for the GoP which I don't think they fully appreciate yet.

What young people also see is a Democratic party willing to say and do anything to maintain their hold on power in the upcoming elections while they spend trillions of dollars bailing out the very same corporate fat cats they campaigned against in the previous election.

[Zachstar]

Young people don't care about spending. I came to grips that I will never see a dime of my Social Security tax ever again LONG ago,

The bailouts are indeed an issue but they are far more likely to vote against dems for failing to do things such as the Employee Free Choice Act and Repealing DADT. Tho even this is suspect because other than Ron Paul none of the remotely possible pub candidates connect to young voters.

[Aramike]

Yet again the republicans and tea party let themselves get defined by hate mongers who dominate news cycles and scare young people away from any thought of conservatism.This is just silly. Conservatism, or for that matter, liberalism, is not about a group of people one aligns oneself with. It's about an overall ideology.

Seriously, did you consider this point carefully?

Because what you're saying is that, someone opposed to excessive government and government spending, someone for personal accountability and free markets, someone opposed to ...

...OK, you should know the list as well as I. So you're saying that someone of a conservative viewpoint will no longer be a conservative because they don't like that they share CERTAIN opinions with others that are far more radical?

That's propagandist nonsense, and you know it.

[AVGWarhawk]

Young people don't care about spending. I came to grips that I will never see a dime of my Social Security tax ever again LONG ago,


Well they should....government has been dipping into SS funds for decades.

[tater]

I didn't see a single gun driving by the tea party in the fall. And NM allows open carry ;)

I think that the Tea Party people are less nuts than the anti-war crowd I saw at their (smaller) protests here downtown. I saw plenty of commie shirts (do all the time walking through the U, actually). That is as nuts as it gets, IMHO—supporting the murder of millions. That doesn't mean that everyone there was a nut, however. There is no way to control people showing up, so this is a fact of life in such protest, you'll get legit people, and an add-mixture of kooks.

Look at all the nuts who thought Fahrenheit 911 made good points (the basic premise of what is in Saudi best interest being so obviously wrong that the rest didn't matter (the last thing they want is any chance of a democracy in any form nearby, it would create too much of a contrast to their autocracy).