David Brooks' Realignment Won't Happen by David Atkins - Washington Monthly
Summary:
David Brooks correctly asserts that there is a comfortable "upper crust" benefiting from globalization and increases in asset prices, while a large set of middle and working castes experience a decline in wealth. Atkins explains that Brooks expects the "great faction of millennials and workers of all races" to join Republicans while Democrats secure the support of Silicon Valley and Wall Street. However, Atkins points to the social and neurological factors that lead to the general liberal or conservative tendencies and how these feelings are stronger than any immediate response to economic anxiety. As such, there will be no major party realignment. In fact, Atkins expects the Republicans to create a happier version of the race conscious economic protectionism that clings to a reactionary belief in the good old days. The Democrats will have to deal with an intra-party struggle between the progressives and the "establishmentarians." If Atkins is correct, the Republicans will become a "regional minority party" because the demographic shifts do not favor their base, while it remains to be seen whether Wall Street or Main Street will prevail amongst the Democrats.
Questions:
Do you think that how our brains respond to certain stimuli can predict our political identity?
How much of a factor is race in this situation?
What is the most or least compelling part of Atkins' argument?
What will happen in the future to the parties?
In this particular situation I don't think race plays a role. This is a conflict within a party, and the party as a whole already tends to attract certain racial identities. For instance, many African-Americans vote Democrat, but whether they vote for Bernie or Hillary is not really influenced by their race, that is just an opinion within the main ideology.
ReplyDeleteThe future of the Democratic party will likely see a strong split due to the younger generation's increasing liberal (some may say radical) ideas. I agree with Atkins' assertion that Democrats will have to deal with interparty struggle between the new progressive generation and the older, "establishmentarians". In this election year, we've already seen this through the major differences between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, that have caused a number of Bernie supporters to either refuse to vote for Hillary, their democratic nominee, or even jumping to the Green Party. These instances are creating more opportunity for third parties to rise, while increasing the strength of the Republican party.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThrough Atkins political cartoon, he asserts the improbableness of party realignment due to the increase in discrepancy within political parties. As depicted in Atkin's political cartoon, the conflict between Bernie and Hillary supporters will give the third party and the Republican Party an advantage in the election. I believe the disparities within the party will lead to more political parties in the future.
ReplyDeleteWhile the brains of conservatives and liberals may be respond to certain stimuli, I believe it cannot fully predict our political identity. Conservatives, in comparison to liberals, react more negatively to the change or new information. If people only identified with their political party only by brain stimulus and wiring, then we wouldn't have any dealignment or realignment. Therefore, you cannot predict the political identity of people sole based on brain wiring or stimulation based on the idea that people change and their beliefs, morals, and views change as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Tesia. The brain can certainly have an impact on how a person identifies politically, but I believe that their experiences and upbringing are a more powerful factor in shaping their political ideals.
DeleteThe most compelling part of Atkins' argument and the political cartoon is that the split in the Democratic government will cause the Republicans, or even a third party candidate, to win over the Democrats. The cartoon depicts how two people are too busy arguing over which of the Democratic candidates, Bernie or Clinton, is better suited without realizing that this arguing is causing them to both lose the election in the long run. In the end, I feel that this split will cause more Democrats to go off on their own and vote for either a third party or even a Republican, and the Democrats losing to the more united Republican party.
ReplyDeleteI think it's very interesting that there are actually such differences hard-wired into our brains. However if they do exist, it would be stupid for political parties not to use them to their advantage. It is very clear that the Republican party uses more fear based rhetoric to appeal to their voters. In pretty much any interview you can find that asks a Trump supporter why they're voting for him, they will parrot back that he's strong, he's 'straightforward' and he's seen a lot of success in the past. All of these characteristics have been strongly reinforced by Trump himself to create an image of a strong fearless leader that will 'trump' all of the real or imagined bad guys that they have been using to scare Republicans into voting. If the Democrats were able to adjust their rhetoric just slightly, especially when visiting swing or Republican states, they could possibly pull a lot of voters who technically share in Democratic ideals, but just don't know it yet.
ReplyDeleteAtkins' commentary on the role of the brain's response to different stimuli was particularly compelling because it offered an explanation as to why people hold certain political views, not just that they have opinions. I like that Atkins uses science to explain why people fall into certain ideological groups, and the way he structured that part of his argument was sound and convincing. We can see these divisions between the Rep and Dem parties, but also inside each party. The cartoon above depicts slight differences in thought between democrats, and there also exist differences in republican thought, all of which come from how our brains are wired.
ReplyDeleteIf Hillary clinton is elected, Atkins' prediction could be very possible. Because Hillary is seen as so untrustworthy and bought by Wall Street, minorities could easily swing to the Republican base. If the party focuses on economic freedom instead of social issues, they can gain mass support especially from struggling Americans who feel over taxed.
ReplyDeleteIf Hillary clinton is elected, Atkins' prediction could be very possible. Because Hillary is seen as so untrustworthy and bought by Wall Street, minorities could easily swing to the Republican base. If the party focuses on economic freedom instead of social issues, they can gain mass support especially from struggling Americans who feel over taxed.
ReplyDeleteThe way that our brains react to certain stimuli defines our political identity, as it shows how we respond to issues and problems. The political aspects that separate democrats and republicans is how deal with different issues. It would only make sense for the way our brain responds to problems influence which party we side with, as we would look for whichever takes a stance closest to our own. That being said, a large part of our opinions and stances are based on our piers and environments, making it so that one's political identity may be based more on the people they spend time with than their personal opinions.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIf Atkins is correct and the Republican party becomes a "regional minority party'", then the Democrat party will be effected as well. It is not very likely that the people who leave the Republican party, will align themselves with the Democrat party. The more probable outcome would the creation of a third party that reflects and is compromised of "middle America". This new party will draw equally from the Democrat party due to their own infighting and as a result of the new party will truly reflect the middle, not the right or the left.
ReplyDeleteI think the way our brains respond to stimuli can predict our political identity, but only to a certain extent. Yes, the brains of liberals and conservatives may be wired differently genetically but socially, we tend to follow the people we look up to. So even if someone feels strongly one way, they may be orienting themselves the other way for the sake of pleasing/following others. People also consistently change their minds, so I don't believe an ideology can definitively be "hard-wired" into your brain.
ReplyDeleteThe least compelling aspect of Atkins argument is the fact that she paints the scene out to be that there were three presidential candidates for the election, when in fact there is only one candidate from each party in the final election. This means that even if there was a dispute between candidates in a party, whom ever had the majority of support would become the candidate for the presidential election. Therefore the voters of the other candidate would most likely remain within the party and give very few votes to the other party, in this case the republicans.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that the way our brains respond to certain stimuli can predict our political identity. I think this because our separate thoughts on a certain issue is what groups people into different parties and our brains are what influence these decisions. We are constantly being influenced by parents and friends and what our brain absorbs is what we base our entire lifestyles on, including our political choices.
ReplyDeleteThe current political parties no longer represent two distinct groups in America. Each party shows more disagreement throughout the group, making it harder to find a single candidate that pleases and represents a majority in the party. This is shown through the cartoon, when both democrats fight over who's candidate should win and refuse to vote for the other. This is also seen in the Republican Party when prominent party members refuse to endorse the republican candidate. The future will hold more political parties representing more specific groups.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do think that response to certain stimuli can be an indicator of political identification, I personally think that our political identity comes down to how we are taught (this is really a topic of nature vs nurture). If people were really hard wired like the Atkin's article suggests, that would imply that people would not dealign from political parties as frequently as they do. If there is a correlation between political identity and reaction to stimuli, it's not becuase of our genes. This is really how we've been taught by our parents or other impacting forces to think, i.e. our political identity.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do think that response to certain stimuli can be an indicator of political identification, I personally think that our political identity comes down to how we are taught (this is really a topic of nature vs nurture). If people were really hard wired like the Atkin's article suggests, that would imply that people would not dealign from political parties as frequently as they do. If there is a correlation between political identity and reaction to stimuli, it's not becuase of our genes. This is really how we've been taught by our parents or other impacting forces to think, i.e. our political identity.
ReplyDeleteThe most compelling and practical part of Atkins' argument is the notion that the Republican and Democratic parties will both experience realignment, but in different ways. His prediction asserts that the interparty Democratic schism will pin Wall Street democrats against liberal democrats, as we have seen with the 2016 democratic primary. The Democrats will, however, be able to gain dominance because of their majority over the entire Republican party nationwide. The Republicans at this point, have only the option of siding with Trump's racist conservatism, and although they may gain popularity and attractiveness in the future, they are currently only pushing the rest of the more economically-influenced Republicans to become Democrats. If the Republican can manage to shake the extreme, serial racist conservatism reputation it has become such a posterchild for, they may be able to save the party's history and ideology, but for now the 1% constituency of Democratic party will serve as a haven to the rational Republicans. In short, the near term sees a decline in the Republican party's constituency and a stark, but only temporary realignment between the political parties (if Reps can/want to shake their current image). The original concept of this timeline was the most compelling part of Atkins' argument, but the play-out is what I believe will happen in the future.
ReplyDeleteRace doesn't seem much like a factor in this situation and is more tied to economic status. People will mostly vote for whatever party platform appeals and benefits the most to them. According to Atkins, a financial secure person is simply more likely to vote democractic over republican.
ReplyDeleteI think how our brains react to certain stimuli can predict our political identity, but only to an extent. All people are wired a certain way and will react differently to different things, but ultimately it comes down to a person's thinking. People take in information every single day about many things, including politics. The more information we gain as humans the easier it is to make a conscious decision on what our political identity is. Being able to think and make conscious choices is more of an influence on political identity than how people's brains are wired.
ReplyDeleteI think race is a small factor in this situation. Race has some influence on our culture, how we are raised, what we are taught, and the different environments we are exposed to. This shapes our values, opinions, and way of thinking, which help make up our political identities. However, what we learn from our surroundings does not always correlate with our race, and other factors can influence our political identities as well.
ReplyDeleteSince the republican party is becoming a rural party, it will put them at a severe disadvantage as urbanization continues. Urbanization will continue because it is the only sustainable way to have population growth. Therefore, in the future, the republican party will need to have a plan for urban areas that fit with the republican philosophy.
ReplyDeleteDue to the differing ideas in the Democratic party, there is a divide that is happening and is undermining the power of the party, as shown in the cartoon above. Because of these differing ideas, causing two people in the same party to be opposed to their own candidates, this could allow republicans to dominate, and even leave room for third party candidates to win an election.
ReplyDeleteThe divide of the democratic party is on the horizon, the supporters of wall street and the progressives will divide the party. By dividing the ideals of the democratic party could possibly shift to be a little more conservative with the loss of the progressives. The Republicans will remain a rural majority unless the party can adapt its ideals to better fit that of the urban population.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think education is more of a factor than race. Atkins states that the most important social divide is between a well-educated America and less-educated America. Therefore, with the gap between the upper and lower class widening the classes possess differing views and beliefs. Because of their different social status, they will vote for policies that benefit them.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI believe that in the future, we are going to witness major party realignment, both in each party and in the government. In this election, Democrats were split between Bernie and Hillary, two different but viable candidates for President. Republicans quickly eliminated the moderate Jeb Bush and nominated the radical Donald Trump, which again, are two different candidates. Each party is internally separating, and because of the internal separation, the parties are getting further apart from each other, calling for realignment.
ReplyDeleteDavid Atkins’ predictions about the future of our parties are very accurate. There was a clear divide in the Democratic party between Hillary and Bernie supporters and this divide shows no signs of closing in future elections. Also, the Republican party will find it hard to compete in future elections if they are not able to change the demographics from which they draw support. As the country has become more educated, more diverse, and younger the Republican party has become less educated, whiter, and older meaning they could face serious hardships in the future.
ReplyDeleteLooking at how people process stimuli in order to determine political alignment is a very compelling topic. Parties use numerous types of rhetoric and propaganda to advance their agenda. Different parties use differing amounts of aggressive rhetoric. Therefore by examining how people react to different party tactics a lot of information on a person's political identity can be discovered. In the near future a major party-realignment is very likely. The growing anti-establishment and populist movements of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump respectively are prime examples of dissatisfaction with the status quo.
ReplyDeleteI would say that how are brains respond to certain stimuli does not have an effect on someone's political views. I believe that main reason for someone's political views would be their upbringing and the people around them. Race plays somewhat of a role because deep down all people judge people based on their race and upbringing. Atkins argument is compelling because it brings up an unusual way of explaining why Americans are either conservative or liberal. I believe the democratic party will become more powerful due to the increase of minorities like Latinos entering the United States.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that the way our brains respond to certain stimuli can predict our political identity. I think this because our separate thoughts on a certain issue is what groups people into different parties and our brains are what influence these decisions. We are constantly being influenced by parents and friends and what our brain absorbs is what we base our entire lifestyles on, including our political choices.
ReplyDelete