Hostile Political Environment

For a nation founded on the consent of the governed, our current hostile political environment is of great concern. The United States presents globally low voter turnout, as more people criticize a government they believed to be deeply flawed. Plummeting governmental trust and sharply polarizing ideologies are a cause of this, as are skewed political socialization and reduced efficacy and feelings of civic duty. As my peers and I come of age in this harsh political environment it is of massive importance for us to analyze these factors when forming our own beliefs, as we prepare to steer the political conversation into a new era; ready to face global and domestic problems alike.
Political socialization, the process in which individuals acquire political attitudes, is much the same for members of a society. Personally, I gained most of my political attitude from my friends and the media.

Awareness of my peers’ beliefs, and repeated exposure to them, created and environment of politically likeminded people. This group polarization served to strengthen my group’s beliefs, as we continued to gravitate to those of similar political attitude. While several of my closest friends are exceptions to this, the vast majority are incredibly similar in political mindset. Studies mirror this, with many concluding that younger voters are increasingly more liberal, and more eager to be involved in the political process 1. The media too plays a huge role in the socialization of the American youth, with the increasing development of social media factoring largely in my peer group’s development of political ideas. Greatly contrasting the static and universal information found in the newspapers or radio programs of older generations, we have, for the first time, the ability to hand pick the media we consume. Dan Pfeiffer, the Communications director of the White House, compares this to the nonchalant way one might approach entertainment, stating that; “People approach their news consumption the way they approach their iPod: You download the songs you like and listen to them when you want to listen to them" 2. This selective exposure to certain political ideologies aids in the polarization of political groups.
The family unit is another major factor in the development of political ideals, and is discussed heavily in the text. The “time and emotional commitment” parents can invest in their children is a crucial influence in their later political beliefs. Study after study confirms this, including those conducted by Jennings and Niemi in the mid-1960’s. Tracking the political beliefs of high school seniors they found them to be quite in line with their parents, despite what they might have initially guessed 3. Personally, family played a significantly smaller role in the development of my political attitudes. While the majority of my extended and intermediate family is conservative, my beliefs fall more left wing liberal. I cite most of this discrepancy as a generational gap, and the highly different political environment I am experiencing now. Many of today’s most polarizing issues- LBGTQ rights, abortion, and police brutality, were far less discussed in the eras my family grew up. They make up the core of my political beliefs, as well as the major reasons for my party alignment.
When defining one’s own political beliefs, many fall middle range of the right wing/left wing, conservative/liberal spectrum. Personally, l lean more left wing liberal, due to my beliefs across a variety of social issues. I am pro-choice, pro LGBTQ+ rights, pro women’s and ethnic minorities rights, and in support of a strong central government with wide-reaching social safeguards for its citizens. I agree with much of the Democratic platform, with only minor discrepancies. Much of this can be narrowed down to minor economic policies, which in my opinion factor down into marginally small issues on the grand platform of political parties. While these liberal beliefs are in line with other of my age, the contrast greatly against older generations, and the general Indiana population. My support of same sex marriage is mirrored by most Americans 4, and I am within the 59% that views Planned Parenthood favorably 5. However my desire for stricter gun control laws 6 and support of bathroom choice for transgender Americans puts me in a minority 7. Overall, however, my views are echoed in those of my peers, who have likewise grown up in an ever-changing social landscape.
Political trust is another controversial issue today.

Our technology-driven society serves as a breeding ground for complaints and conspiracies alike, creating a hostile landscape for the average political participant. Personally, I trust my government and believe that I have an ability to influence change, to a limited extent. For example, I can choose from a selection of candidates to fill the presidential office, creating the illusion of a fair democracy. However, those running in the two major parties get the added benefit of multi-million dollar endorsements and increased media coverage, effectively suffocating third party and independent candidates. This frustration is cyclical in nature and spills into other facets of political life as well, creating an environment of hostility. This in turn negatively impacts the overall views of democracy, as no two candidates receive equal coverage and fair opportunities. This sentiment is echoed in the American masses, as the average trust on the government efficiency at addressing domestic matters is at a record breaking low of 38%

8.
All of this translates into political efficacy, a cornerstone of American democracy. Political efficacy refers to the belief that one’s vote matters, and that active political participation can bring about change. Having turned 18 in June of this year, I was eligible to vote in the primaries last spring. Being a Democrat in a mostly Republican state I realize that my vote this fall might make little impact, but my choice of candidates in the initial primary campaign played a role in determining the Democratic nominee. While the candidate I voted for, Senator Bernie Sanders, lost the nomination at the convention, my sense of civic duty will still encourage me to vote this fall, regardless of the fact that a democratic or third party nominee will most like lose Indiana. Unfortunately this negative mindset is a major justification for people skipping Election Day. In fact the United States has some of the worst voter turnouts of any democratic nation, averaging at about 53% 9. The text also references this, citing our extensive voter registration process as a major factor of our low turnout 10. Most interesting, however, is what the book refers to as our lack of a “major left-wing socialist party”, found in most other democratic nations. In 2008 54 percent of voters under the age of 24 didn’t align themselves with either major political party, despite third parties receiving minimal media attention 11. Bernie Sanders, a popular candidate among youth and minority voters, would have fit into this category. Aligning himself with the Democratic Party for the duration of his campaign was the only way for it to gain any traction, as many third party candidates in America fail. Considering the amount of support he rallied among women, youth, and minority voters, our need for major recognition of this party is crucial for improving the political efficacy and civic duty of these already marginalized groups.