Politics

Миллениалдардың Трампты қолдамау себебі

Feb 2, 2017 Jeffrey D. Sachs

НЬЮ-ЙОРК – Америка Құрама Штаттарындағы негізгі саяси суайырық партиялар немесе штаттар арасында емес, ол ұрпақтар арасында болып табылады. Миллениалдар буыны (18-35 жастағылар) Дональд Трампқа белсенді түрде қарсы дауыс берді және оның саясатына қарсы негізгі топты құрайды. Егде американдықтар арасында біраз келіспеушілік болса да, Трамптың базасы 45 жастан асқан адамдардан тұрады. Жас сайлаушылар барлық мәселелер бойынша Трампты қолдамай, оны болашақтың емес, бұрынғының саясаткеры деп қабылдайды.

Әрине, бұл абсолют деректер емес, орташаландырылған сандар болып табылады. Дегенмен, сандар буын арасындағы айырмашылықты растайды. Экзитполдар нәтижесі көрсеткендей, Трампқа сол 45 және одан жоғары жастағылардың 53%-ы дауыс берді; 30-44 жастағы сайлаушылардың 42%-ы және 18-29 жастағылардың тек 37%-ы дауыс берді. 2014 жылы жасалған сауалнама бойынша, миллениал өкілдерінің 31%-ы өздерін либералдар деп көрсетті, салыстырмалы түрде қарасақ, “бэйби-бумерлердің” (сауалнамаға қатысқан 50-68 жас аралығындағы азаматтар) 21% -ы және үнсіз ұрпақтың (69 және одан жоғары жастағылар) тек 18% -ы өздерін либералдар ретінде анықтады.

Бұл жердегі маңызды ой - ол бүгінгі жас либералдар ертең егде консерваторлар болады деген емес. Миллениалдар олардың жасындағы “бэйби-бумерлер” және үнсіз ұрпақпен салыстырғанда әлдеқайда либералды. Олар сондай-ақ аса партиялық емес, және басты екі партиядан бөлек үшінші тараптан да шыққан, олардың құндылықтарына сәйкес және қажеттіліктерін шешетін саясаткерлерді қолдайтын болады.

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to PS Digital

Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.

Subscribe Now

Jeffrey D. Sachs

Writing for PS since 1995
354 Commentaries

Jeffrey D. Sachs, University Professor at Columbia University, is Director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University and President of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network. He has served as adviser to three UN Secretaries-General, and currently serves as an SDG Advocate under Secretary-General António Guterres. His books include The End of Poverty, Common Wealth, The Age of Sustainable Development, Building the New American Economy, A New Foreign Policy: Beyond American Exceptionalism, and, most recently, The Ages of Globalization.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 23 Comments on this article

TRIQUI AHMED Feb 22, 2017

Une analyse pleine d'espoir contenu dans la jeunesse américaine. Je rajouterai celle d'Emmanuel Todd affirmant qu'un coup d'Etat militaro-industriel est impossible parce que toute la population américaine est armée. ( 320 millions d'armes circuleraient aux USA) Bon, on se rassure comme on peut.
Je crois plus à l'émergence d'une tyrannie au sens classique, celle qu'étudia Léo Strauss à partir du Hiéron de Xénophon ( à suivre)
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Mirek Fatyga Feb 12, 2017

This article, whether true or not in terms of a political prediction, shows us quite clearly the horns of our dilemma. Mr Sachs just cannot help himself but to trot out the God of Global Warming.
In the interest of actually preserving western civilization from rising fascist menace, may I please suggest to cut it out and drop the subject, immediately? This is now a failed scientific theory which is contradicted by the last 20 years of evidence. Drop it. let the sleeping dogs lie.
Here is the actual solution to our political dilemmas. The world is suffering from want, not excessive abundance. Populations are still rising, be it more slowly. US, with ~5% of world population is using ~20% of world oil production and is importing 50% of this use. How much could we cut this use by, in any foreseeable future, without having a revolution of the hungry, never mind dispossessed? Energy generation is the absolute, non-negotiable backbone of the western civilization. Every new, commercially viable method of energy generation is welcome to the marketplace as a supplement to fossil fuels. If some of these methods prove in the future to be superior, they will replace fossil fuels. For now, replacing them is a pipe dream ,and a dangerous one if someone was to try to force such substitution through the power of the state. Central planning did not work in the USSR, and it will not work anywhere else.
Focus your energies on the economic development for all, not quixotic battles with windmills, and we may yet resurrect the liberal democracy before wars overtake us all.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Ellis Feb 6, 2017

I just wish that redneck America would hoist in that climate change is man-made (the greenhouse effect - so simple a piece of science) and that Trump's refusal to recognize it is by far the most dangerous of his obsessions (and an indication of his lack of intellect) and will have the greatest impact on the young.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Petey Bee Feb 6, 2017

1. While I am super hopeful of what Pref. Sachs is saying, I recall that in US presidential elections, a person's % chance of voting is roughly their age. Is this really changing?

2. Swing states. Millenials in coastal cities don't matter in US national politics (with the significant exception of Florida). We should be examining the midwestern / northern-inland "state-school" segment of the millenials.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Allen Mackenzie Feb 5, 2017

Where you're wrong
1.Conservatives have in the past 20 years accepted diversity.
2. The young will INHERIT the wealth of their parents and live more comfortably than any other generation. They ARE spoiled individuals who don't appreciate what they have however.
3 If the young were economically literate they would realize that tax cuts create JOBS
4. Man Made Climate Change.....give me a break. Read something from any of the increasing number of skeptics
5. Fossil fuels will continue to be the basis of wealth creation for a long while.
The main issue here is success, not pouting ideological nonsense.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
John Ellis Feb 5, 2017

While one can agree with the likely probability of much of this the author harms his credibility by making a couple of absurd claims. Sanders didn't come close to capturing the Democratic nomination and would almost certainly have lost a general election by a larger margin than Clinton who did after all comfortably win the majority vote.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
daniele simoncini Feb 5, 2017

"Their time is coming", "Bernie Sanders would -already- have triumphed in a general election"... I don't know if this is intended as a wish or a menace, but for sure a steer of the U.S. to embrace Socialism would be a big deal for the world economy
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Victor Morris Feb 5, 2017

If you have ever raised children you love there youthful idealistic passion, and when you become a grandfather for them your amazed at there concern for there children's well being, When President Obama was elected you didn't see conservatives burning down buildings and rioting. Liberal Media needs to have their reporters look up the definition of reporting accurately facts and leave the opinion columnists to reflect those facts, then maybe some millennials will have a better way to decide what future might be better for them.
- Peter Ellis Feb 6, 2017
  
  "When President Obama was elected you didn't see conservatives burning down buildings and rioting"
  
  But you saw Republicans filibuster and block nearly everything Obama tried to do. You delude yourself and use 'American pie' family values as a smokescreen.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Tom Berkowitz Feb 5, 2017

This should have already happened, and with all the groups that Trump insulted and alienated, this election should not have been close, but with the Republicans taking voting rights away from groups that vote against them (or making it difficult to register and vote), they will be very difficult to defeat for quite some time even though they are a minority party.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
олег вася Feb 4, 2017

Of course, the red guards with no experience of real life is the support of the liberals.
Those who grew up a bit, cook in real life, married, had children - he begins to see the light slowly. And 45-50 years understands that conservatism is what we need :)
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Velko Simeonov Feb 3, 2017

Keep on dreaming professor! Most of the millennials you are talking about think that being politically active means sitting in you couch producing endless posts in Facebook. People that grew in the comfort of the easy 90’s and early 00’s are unable to sacrifice personal well-being and comfort in order to stand up for their ideas. Occupy wall street is the case in point. The gigantic theft that took place in the years prior to 2008 and the years immediately afterwards, was not able to galvanize them, except of maybe a tiny minority, this won’t be able to do it either. I am sorry to tell you this but comfort makes people soft and feeble, and the folks you pin your hopes on grew in tremendous comfort.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Michael Public Feb 3, 2017

The internet changed things. If you grew up with it you can with in seconds access all points of view . You become more cautious about accepting any old propaganda and become able to think outside the box, critically and independently. Of course, the flip side is television - 1 minute clips, press aligned with parties, football and beers afterwards. The future will be decided by the war for attention raging between television and the internet.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Curtis Carpenter Feb 3, 2017

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/behind-trumps-victory-divisions-by-race-gender-education/
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Feb 3, 2017

Jeffrey D. Sachs is hopeful that millennials will save Trump's America from relapsing into backwardness. The November election reveals a generational divide that pits millennials against baby boomers (aged 50-68) and the "silent generation (69 and above)." Trump's main voters - 53% - were over 45. He received 42% votes of those between 30-44, and only 37% of the youth vote (18-29). Trump’s base lies among older voters, many of whom are not educated and unskilled. Their despair drove them into Trump's arms. Young voters mostly reject Trump, "viewing him as a politician of the past, not the future."
Millennials (18-35) who voted for Trump are either young Republicans, or they were carried away by his pro-business pledges, even though they couldn't stand him. These cohorts are becoming increasingly critical in US elections. If they all turned out at the polls, they would make up the nation’s largest voting bloc. Trump's unexpected win sent shockwaves across the country, with anger being particularly pronounced on college campuses. But the bleak situation facing young Trump opponents is about to change, and they will "form the backbone of resistance" to his illiberal policies. In a 2014 survey, "31% of millennials identified as liberals, compared with 21% of baby boomers.... and only 18% of the silent generation....."
Often in life we see "young liberals" or rebels becoming "tomorrow's older conservatives." The author outlines "three big differences in the politics of the young and old." Today's millennials are "far more liberal than the baby boomers and silent generation were in their younger years." This is certainly good news and gives hope to a new political culture in Congress, which has been the venue of the ugliest partisan politics for decades. Trump's hasn't come to terms with "America's growing racial, religious, and sexual plurality."
Growing up in the era of globalisation and technology, the youth are "facing the unprecedented economic challenges of the information revolution. They are entering the labor market at a time when market returns are rapidly shifting toward capital (robots, artificial intelligence, and smart machines generally) and away from labor." On the whole they cope better than many older cohorts, and they are "also decidedly less partisan, and will support politicians who address their values and needs, including third-party aspirants."
Many "elderly rich" Trump supporters relish "a stock market boom caused by the same technological revolution," and benefit from "cuts in corporate taxes and estate taxes," while the young have to bear the brunt "of larger budget deficits." Most of them have to live with their parents, since rents, bills, and student loan debt simply make financial independence unaffordable, while looking for jobs. Trump "is indifferent to the $1 trillion overhang of student debt." The author demands "opposite policy" for the young: "higher taxes on the wealth of the older generation in order to finance post-secondary education, job training, renewable-energy infrastructure, and other investments in America’s future."
Last of all is the climate change. Millennials are "much aware of climate change and its threats" than Trump's generation of older Americans, who are ignorant of global warming, because they didn't learn about it in school. Trump and his cohorts "are ready to put their own short-term financial interests ahead of the dire threats to their grandchildren’s generation," while the young "want clean energy and will fight against the destruction of the Earth."
Young people have no future under Trump, who - unlike Bernie Sanders - dwells on the past. Those white working class men who voted for him will soon learn about his lies and hypocrisy, because he wouldn't be able to bring jobs back. Their plight has little to do with free trade agreements that Trump wants to scrap. What they need mmost, is to improve their skills and deepen their knowledge, by participating in vocational training programmes. On the whole the author sees no reason for despair, because "Trump’s political success is a blip, not a turning point." Today’s millennials, "with their future-oriented perspective, will soon dominate American politics." Trump could be removed from office due to incompetence and other causes, or be unseated in the next election.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Mitchell Rossman Feb 2, 2017

My daughter, a millennial, worked for Obama in 2012, but did not even bother to vote in 2016. So now she gets to enjoy Trump.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Gunnar Eriksson Feb 2, 2017

Sure hope you are right, but it will depend on if the institutions can be protected from the attack on the "Open Society" that we see developing around us
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
ron smith Feb 2, 2017

I certainly hope that doctor Sachs is correct that the millennials reject trump in 2020; I hope they also bother to vote in large numbers. I wonder if the good Doctor reads the same stats I do. Even if, his conclusions are not merited by any non-naive Bayesian approach. The Left Coast and selected parts of the East Coast were dynamically anti-Trump (not the same as pro-Clinton) across the age spectrum. And, the numbers I read concur that the Millennials are anti-trump, they also show them as astonishingly apathetic, at least with respect to actually voting.

Statistical analysis, especially of complex systems which the econo-political entity is, are tricky at best. Statistically and numerically, trump was not elected...
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Stephen Jackson Feb 2, 2017

Yes, I agree with your analysis. I believe it to be accurate and apt. For all the talk of a 'new age' in politics, Trump politics appears primarily backward-looking, reactionary, regressive and lacking in any sort of moral vision. May the 'blip' be as short as possible!
A new reply to this comment has been posted.