The Millennial Pendulum: Cohort Effects and Political Realignment

Winston Churchill famously said "If you’re not a liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 35, you have no brain.” It's a line that is often quoted back to me on political blogs when I try to make the case for a political realignment brought on by today's increasingly progressive youth. Commenters often like to refute my thesis by stating that political views change, and most people become more conservative as they grow older. But is that really the case?

A new study by the New American Foundation, The Millennial Pendulum, attempted to answer that question by examining data comparing the political views of Baby Boomers, Gen Xers, and Millennials at similar points in their life cycle. What the found bodes well for those of us expecting Millennials to usher in a political realignment in favor of progressive government.

In a nutshell, the report identifies three causes behind political and ideological identity, and weights them in an attempt to determine which, if any, play a dominant and predictive role

1. Age effects: Winston Churchill is supposed to have said, “If you’re not a liberal when you’re 25, you have no heart. If you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 35, you have no brain.” Leaving aside Churchill’s value-judgment, this could be an accurate developmental theory. Perhaps people grow more conservative as they move through life. Indeed, cross-sectional snapshots comparing younger vs. older adults within an era support Churchill’s view. Compared to contemporary elders, younger adults tend to be more open to the ideas that are swirling at a particular time and typically are more critical in their commitments and tactics.

2. Period/Historical Effects: It could be common for everyone in a population (regardless of when they were born) to change their opinions at the same time, in response to major events such as economic crises, social movements, pivotal elections, or political leaders. For example, many individuals—regardless of how old they were at the time—may have moved to the left in the 1960s and to the right in the 1980s. And, in the wake of 9/11, Americans of all ages were supportive of national security measures.

3. Cohort effects: It could be that people born around the same time are permanently influenced by events, movements, or leaders that arise when they are young and impressionable, so that their generation acquires a durable ideological character that is still evident decades later. For instance, people who came of age in time to fight in World War One were always more alienated and prone to radicalism than those who came before or after.

The authors of the study note that political realignment is most likely if #3, cohort effects, are found to be the dominant factor in the formation of political and ideological identity:

The potential for a realignment will be greatest today if cohort effects dominate, because then we might be seeing an “Obama Generation” that will vote for progressive candidates for 50 years to come. Of course, it will matter how they define “progressive” politics—what particular issues and positions motivate them. If age effects or historical effects are more important, then a progressive realignment is less likely.

The authors than mapped the opinions of Baby Boomers, Gen Xers, Millennials, and occasionally older generations (when data were available) across four major categories: self-declared political identity, issue preferences, confidence in major institutions, and social/moral issues.

The results of these comparisons will come as no surprise to those who regularly read this blog. On almost all issues, Millennials show a stronger progressive bent than do previous generations, even when they were the same age.

The political attitudes and policy preferences of Millennials reinforce their liberal self-concept. They are far less likely than their elders and than the other generations when they were young to feel that the government wastes a lot of money. They had more progressive attitudes than the general population on federal aid to schools and were just as likely as the eldest respondents to say that the government should provide universal health insurance. Not only do these positions reflect progressive sentiments, they also are relevant for discussions of a new social contract.

The one area in which this proved to be untrue was providing equal opportunity to all individuals, something quite difficult to square with their very progressive opinions on everything from affirmative action to gay marriage:

Contrary to the generally liberal pattern, a lower proportion of the Millennial generation endorsed the belief that society should do anything necessary to guarantee equality of opportunity. This item refers to “society” and not the government or state. Nonetheless, it is difficult to square with the Millennials’ otherwise progressive dispositions.

On virtually every other issue or measure of political identity/engagement, however, they are more progressive than their elders, and these trends are likely to hold over time as Millennials age into the electorate:

So does the Millennials’ enthusiasm for Obama and their more liberal attitudes outlined in this report portend a sea change in the future political landscape? Although people tend to become more conservative as they age and settle into roles (steady job, marriage, family), where they stand in young adulthood is a good barometer of their political views later on. The trends discussed in this paper suggest that, as the Millennials replace their elders, we should expect a greater openness to the role of government in providing services and addressing public problems, more confidence in the branches of government, increasing support for the civil liberties of diverse groups, and an increasing identification with service to the community as an integral aspect of personal identity.

In other words, Churchill was wrong. Cohort effects are dominant, while age effects and period/historical effects are relegated to a smaller role when it comes to political and ideological identity. Sorry Winston.