Skip to main content

View Diary: On marriage equality, the Republican Party is out of step with its own young voters (24 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  60s liberals were "hippies" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    librarisingnsf

    I think a lot of the reason for the shift right in the 1980s was that much of the liberal/progressive movement was characterized by the far left. It was easy for those who wanted to stop or turn back the progressive movement to color all liberals with the hippies, freaks, weirdos and main-hating lesbians, and the Democrats really didn't respond correctly. Quite frankly, the hold the Democrats had on the House and Senate probably made them complacent in the strength of their political coalition.

    The situation is almost completely reversed now, with progressive social issues being pushed with a far more mainstream argument (and that's because the conservative economic system has hurt nearly everyone who can't build an elevator in their garage), and the move to marriage equality is probably the least "hippie" argument you can make (for the record, the first gay couple to fight for their marriage rights - 40 years ago - is still together, still married and now retired). Today's conservatives seem to be as concerned about holding their own political coalition together - and not expanding it - as the Dems were 30 years ago.

    The question is, will the children of today's conservatives be as embarrassed as the Alex P. Keatons of the 80s were about their liberal parents? And will that change the political tone of the country?

    Cruelty might be very human, and it might be very cultural, but it's not acceptable.- Jodie Foster

    by CPT Doom on Mon Mar 10, 2014 at 12:13:08 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  As someone who was somewhere in the range (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CPT Doom

      of hippie to fellow traveler, the hippies were mostly young kids trying new things, which is what young kids have done probably forever.

      I remember being around when fellow students at my school took over the road in front of the university during the protests following the Kent State killings.  The next day some kids about my age arrived in a bus and announced they were part of the "People's Park" movement (sort of a precursor to environmental groups today).  They were going to turn the road into a park.  A half hour work with a pick showed the difficulty of using that tool to remove a roadway.

      Of course, it was so much easier to get politically involved back then, at least for guys, since the odds were high that your own ass might wind up in Vietnam.  Made things a whole lot less abstract.

      I guess I'm not so much disagreeing with you as reminiscing, a common ailment associated with aging.  

      About the only other point I'd make is that dividing a country between two political parties creates inherently unstable coalitions.  Back then it was the Democrats, trying to unite liberals, blue collar workers, minorities and Dixiecrats.  

      Today it's Republicans trying to unite religious conservatives, economic conservatives and Tea Party folks.  Not that having more than two political parties, common in most democracies, has proved to be clearly better at governance.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site