The Political Youthquake
In recent years youth voter turnout has increased and there have been a rising number of youth-led social movements. In the UK there have been several large-scale protests against Brexit and Trump’s visit. There have been months of pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong as well as Yellow (and Black) Vest protests in France. These, along with global climate strikes and the #MeToo movement, appear to be emblematic of a youthquake in Politics. Since right-wing commentators cannot reconcile the idea that young people genuinely want to make the world a better place, they have been looking for reasons for this shift. One of the excuses is that young people are only getting involved in left-wing progressive movements because it is trendy to do so. As if you can equate political movements to baby bangs or air-maxes.
While I do not personally believe that progressivism is just en vogue, I can appreciate that there is an argument for this being the case. What is unique about the youthquake protests of the last decade is that they were the first of their kind in a social media era. Activism is being mobilised across Twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram. Social media has multiple uses. These apps propose that everyone shares themselves with the world, or at least a carefully curated version of themselves. In this regard there is no doubt that social media has influenced trends (from Ice-bucket to Kylie lips). And since social media is used for activism as well as popular trends, it is understandable that the two are conflated. When someone posts a picture of themselves at a rally, protest or the polling booth it provokes the question of whether they are posting to promote their cause, or as a form of virtue signalling proving how progressive they are. The youthquake of left-wing progressive movements could be considered a by-product of how social media has made the personal public, and how people feel more judged on their politics than ever before.
The main counterargument to progressive politics being en vogue is the point: if left-wing politics is so trendy, why do we constantly keep losing?
The short answer to this question is that older voters are getting more right-wing, and older voters vote more and are therefore over-represented in political bodies. The long answer is as follows:
Statistics show that the political generational gap has gotten more severe. In the 2019 General election only 16% of voters between the age of 18-24 voted Tory with a gradual increase of Tory voters in age demographics until you reach the over 70s where 58% vote Tory. 38% of 18-24 year olds voted Labour, but an additional 18% voted lib-dem and another 15% voted Green. While there is plenty of dispute around the leanings of these parties, we can agree (mostly) that these three parties lie on the left of the Conservatives and Brexit Party, and are generally more progressive. However, statistics are boring and give me a headache so I will not dwell too much on them. What is important is that the demographic group most likely to vote, have virtually the opposite political views to millennials and gen-z’s.
The political analysis of these fractures is that there has been an authoritarian reaction amongst Western democracies against progressivism. The idea that among older voters, they will soon become the minority voice in politics rather than constantly the majority. There is a general trend in countries that the middle-class would support authoritarianism rather than lose their political majority. Examples of the effectiveness of this trend include Thailand, Argentina and Iran. I believe a part of this authoritarian reaction is due to the idea that current fashionable culture is constantly telling these voters that they are wrong and ignorant. While the older generations have hegemonic political power, they no longer have a monopoly over cultural power meaning the culture no longer reflects their views. Progressive popularity in culture is making voters more resistant to political change. Therefore, progressivism being fashionable has a lot less of an impact on the youthquake and a lot more of an impact on older voters leaning towards the political right.
So, if young people are not getting involved with progressive movements because of Instagram, why are they getting involved?
I believe the answer lies with how easy it is to get angry at governments these days. Voters on either side of the Brexit aisle watch as promises are broken and millions of pounds are drained with stagnated progress. Boris Johnson is a racist bigot and is now Prime Minister with the largest majority since Margaret Thatcher. It is so much easier to get angry about politics these days because we see the results of the populist-right every day. Scott Morrison forcing people to shake his hand while his citizens huddled on beaches to escape apocalyptic fires. We get to watch the most powerful man in the world break the law and get away with it in real time as well as provoke international war as if it was one of his lawsuits. We have to watch the political right tear into a teenage girl for having the audacity of wanting a future. We live in an age of livestreamed mass shootings. No need to watch Netflix, we live in a Black Mirror episode. When you check Facebook, it is no longer about stalking ex-boyfriends but seeing reports about global destruction. So, no wonder young people are getting more involved in politics. People tend to fight back when their future is being taken away.
This is causing somewhat of a chicken-and-egg situation. Older middle-classes are leaning towards authoritarianism out of fear of progressivism and there is an increase of youth led-progressivism to combat rising authoritarianism in Western states.
While I do not believe that people are getting involved in progressive politics because it is fashionable, I will caution that its trending capabilities result in a few false friends of the movement. The most obvious ones are corporations. Rainbow coffee cups do not suddenly make a corporation progressive. Sponsoring pride does not mean that companies treat their staff well. These companies will support these movements only because it benefits their profit line. Trying to support movements through corporations is about as useful as Kendell Jenner saving the world with a Pepsi can. However, don’t get disheartened if you think you are going about going about activism the wrong way. The more you get involved, the easier movements are to navigate. Unless, you are Kendell Jenner. If you are Kendell Jenner, which I highly doubt, and are still planning on ‘solving racism’ please start by informing your family to stop practicing blackface (google Kim K’s 7Hollywood magazine cover for an example).
The final point I will leave you with is the question: Should we even care if people are only getting involved in progressive politics because it is popular, and their friends are doing it? When it comes to collective action the more people involved the better. I don’t care if you get involved because your friends were involved, I don’t care if it’s because you want an edgy Instagram picture, I don’t care if it’s because you have a crush on Obama or Corbyn or Long-Bailey. The political right wants fewer young people involved in politics because it marks their oncoming demise. I believe that the demeaning of the progressive youthquake as just another trending hashtag is emblematic of the political right’s undermining of political activism. If you do not want something to change, you will undermine and trivialise that change in any way possible such as promoting the idea that the generations watching Love Island have a less legitimate political voice than the generations who watched the Black and White Minstrel Show. However, that young progressive voice is legitimate, it’s angry, it's only stronger due to social media mobilisation and it’s not slowing down.
Written by Zoe Williams
Zoe is 22 and originally from Bath but currently residing in Manchester. She just graduated in Politics and therefore loves a good rant about Brexit and Boris Johnson. She is currently working for a Coffee chain that shall remain nameless, but they pay far too little tax and keep their staff’s tips. Unsurprisingly she is on the market for a new job. She is also a textile artist when she finds the time.