Idea of the Week: Post-Material America
One of the most frequent frustrations expressed by Democrats is that Republicans have somehow succeeded in convincing millions of middle-class Americans to vote against their material self-interest. How is it that a party so completely committed to promoting the selfish interests of the very wealthiest Americans, and so completely uninterested in tackling challenges like economic insecurity and skyrocketing health care costs, can nonetheless win the votes of so many people who don't benefit at all from their policies, including, by some definitions, a majority of white working class voters? Some Democrats, often styling themselves "populists," think the problem is that the party focuses too little and too quietly on economic issues and class divisions, blunting the "natural" appeal of progressive politics.
At a Washington event sponsored by the DLC yesterday, Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger of the research firm American Environics provided a massive refutation of the economics-first hypothesis, based on more than a decade of extraordinarily detailed analysis of trends in what makes Americans tick as people, not just as voters. Their presentation, borrowing from research on more than 100 "social values" indicators that have long been used by businesses tracking consumer trends, helps explain why Republican cultural themes and symbolism often resonate with middle-class voters, and how Democrats can forge new coalitions by conveying what they believe, not just what they will do on the ledger sheet of voters' material self-interest.
Nordhaus and Shellenberger's most basic argument is that America has become largely a post-material society. This doesn't mean that people have stopped worrying about making ends meet, but does mean they also place great value on "post-material needs: desires for status recognition, belonging, community, a purposeful life, fulfillment, happiness, etc." And they often make voting decisions based on partisan and candidate appeals to their basic world-view, which do not typically match up with simplistic notions of progressive or conservative "frames," to use the fashionable buzzword.
In a written report based on American Environics' research, Nordhaus and Shellenberger explain some of the political implications of the "social values" trends they see in the American population:
- Americans neither rationally assess nor vote their material self-interest. "Americans support candidates and policy proposals based on whether they resonate with their core and (often unconsciously held) values and outlook on life. Appealing to the 'rational' and material self-interests of American voters will only lead to further disappointments at the ballot box.
- Demography is no longer destiny. "Americans today form their identities in far more complex ways than they did in the past. Social and geographic mobility has loosened the connection between demographic and biological identities and political identity. For example, our research shows that African Americans under the age of 20 have more values in common with whites and Hispanics under the age of 20 than they do with blacks over the age of 60. Continuing to understand and speak to Americans in demographic and biological terms -- e.g., 'Hispanic women' or 'suburban soccer moms' -- risks misunderstanding political behavior and missing important political opportunities.
- Americans are demanding a more flexible and less hierarchical relationship to religion, work and government. "Americans today hold increasingly more flexible orientations towards work, family, spirituality, government and consumption. [They are] increasingly rejecting the idea that command and control government programs are the best way to solve social problems and are looking for a relationship to government that reflects changed economic and social realities. What Americans most want is a new social contract -- a different relationship to government than the kind Democrats established during the New Deal and war on poverty."
- Moving either to the right or to the left will not solve the Democrats' problems. "The problem for Democrats is not, for the most part, that they are either too liberal or not liberal enough. Rather the problem is that Republicans but not Democrats have created an agenda and a politics that is more consistent with the seemingly nonrational ways postmaterialist Americans hold values, form identities and engage in politics."
Nordhaus and Shellenberger, who also co-direct a policy group called the Breakthrough Institute, are working on policy initiatives that can help progressives connect with the distinct world views of subsets of Americans who currently tilt conservative and progressive, but are targets of opportunity for Democrats, such as "compassionate Christians" (found especially in fast-growing suburban megachurches). But their most basic insight is simple and profound: "values voters" aren't just a small segment of the electorate with especially strong views on cultural hot-button issues like abortion or gay marriage. Most Americans make political decisions based on an assessment of whether candidates or parties share their attitudes towards life and the world and the country they live in, in ways that frequently cross racial, ethnic, and class boundaries. Progressives would be wise to pay attention to this research and its implications, and speak to the American people as they are, instead of stubbornly demanding they put aside their values and views and vote their pocketbooks.