This seems to be a common trend - what do you guys attribute this to?

Here are some ideas:

It is paternal instincts, wanting to increase stability and a move from more radical ideas - for the safety of the children?

Is it a disaffecttion and a realisation of the difficulties in implementing marxism etc, after years of a lack of progress.

Or do the foundations of these beliefs begin to crack because of your changing cirumstance, eg you may resent authoirty less, since you arent subject to it as much as when you were young?

The question is therefore - what are the cause/s of the ineviatble swing toward conservatism that many face as they age?

The general trend I've seen here is this:

In your youth, you're idealistic and wanting to solve all the world's problems. Usually with someone else's money, because you have none. This lasts until you get a really GOOD PAYING job. Perfect match for the liberals, but you don't vote anyway, because you think that your vote isn't all that important in the scheme of things.

In your middle years, you're making bucks, giving a bunch of it back to the government(s) and resenting how it's getting wasted, wanting to keep your family and your job safe. You vote for conservatives, because they want to give you tax breaks (and it's real similar to how you're floating all those posessions you have on credit cards!) and talk a lot about law and order.

In later years, you actually swing back, because the social safety net is now important, and you will vote for liberals who will protect that.

Of course, this is a gross generalization, since there are so many middle-aged liberals out here, but that's how the general trend works when related to age.

On the other hand, there's also a relationship here in the states between location and the spectrum. The coasts are liberal, the south and middle are conservative. I'll let others address why that is.

Sure people are often products of their environment, but some of the experiences will stick with you for life. Do you not think you are over-simplifying the issue? Are their not other issues working alongside the environment as you mentioned.

Your analysis is based on a very rational economic model, where people only act in the monetary interests, what about stronger moral beliefs and personal convictions that never go away? In other words, are there not longer, wide ranging issues than span across your life that change other than the short term circumstance?

What about the role of education, do you think when people come out of it, they like to forget about deeper issues and become more self orientated? Young people are keen to learn and absorb ideas. Older people seem not to be - why is this?

Do people really tend to get more conservative as they get older, or is it a generational thing? It seems to me that, as the baby boomers age, the older set is becoming more liberal. They certainly seem rather keen on their entitlements, that's for sure. At the same time, I see a lot of college kids and fresh-outs whose world view is very distinctly anti-liberal. I'd love to see a study that examined the same cohort as they aged, to see if there was a significant change within that cohort, but I don't know of any such.

I guess the problem is that each age and each generation is not a monolith. Consequently, the generation at present does not necessaryily just react against the one that came before it. Each generation varies greatly, internally, as well as in comparison to the one preceding it. Thus the pendulmum swings back and forth internally, between those who are very liberal and those who reject the 'niave optimism' as it does in every generation, however, society is more liberal today than it was years ago - so are people staying liberal for longer, if so, why?

[quote=Paul Doran,Jan 16 2004, 11:46 PM] [QUOTE=amf,Jan 16 2004, 01:11 AM]
Young people are keen to learn and absorb ideas. Older people seem not to be - why is this?

[/quote]
Lots of old ideas are new to the younger generation.
I see young people as not commonly being able to intelligently digest the information when young, so are less able to think and act wisely.
As we gain maturity and experience, we are more able to discard "new" ideas that we have seen before and can remember that they didn't work when we last saw them.

[quote=Bill55AZ,Jan 16 2004, 08:30 PM] [QUOTE=Paul Doran,Jan 16 2004, 11:46 PM] [QUOTE=amf,Jan 16 2004, 01:11 AM]
Young people are keen to learn and absorb ideas. Older people seem not to be - why is this?

[/QUOTE]
Lots of old ideas are new to the younger generation.
I see young people as not commonly being able to intelligently digest the information when young, so are less able to think and act wisely.
As we gain maturity and experience, we are more able to discard "new" ideas that we have seen before and can remember that they didn't work when we last saw them. [/quote]
This is questionable logic. Educators find that young children are better able to learn new languages because their minds are more flexible and able to absorb and store unfamiliar information. By that logic once a child "matures" around the onset of puberty they lose the ability to think and act independently of the information they are presented with.

While some of us older folks develop insight, some of us just experience hardening of the arteries. We don't all age evenly.

I think all of the reasons posed here have some validity because older generations are not freeze-dried into some homogeneous block of identical thinking (you're right, Paul Doran). We remain individuals, even though as a generation we are subjected to similar situations.

If we gain perspective from what we have gone through and from our observations of others who chose a different path, it just makes sense for us to use that knowledge as best we can.

One thing to remember is that for many of us, our most productive years in the workforce are gone. We therefore consider what we do in our time remaining to have to count; it's now or never.

Let's see...

My parents survived the depression, and my mother accounted for every penny they ever earned and spent.

I can remember telling young engineers that they should listen to the fellows that have spent thirty years on the job. After all, they'd seen it all tried before...

Then I began to hear such stories as the invention of the frosted light bulb. It was a routine assignment given to new engineers, to see how long it took them to learn that it was impossible. Part of working as a team, they wanted them to learn, was communications with other members of the team. Then one morning, a new hire spent fifteen minutes in the lab and got a patent...

A mind, like an umbrella, I was told, functions better when it is open.

I began to express my opinions, and people listened to some of them. My world began to change a little. It's called positive feedback.

We have a "compassionate conservative" administration running the country currently. That is called negative feedback. It encourages those of us with a memory to fight for change.

Personally, I grow more liberal every year. (Although I've always joked that if I were to win enough in the State Lottery, say $100 million, I might consider becoming a Republican.

Your last point got me thinking..

About the societal pressures and nature of young people and older people respectively.. Young people are always subject to authority, being told what to do and so on. Information and ideas are pumped into them through education and also through the highly dynamic nature of youth. Consequently their minds are overloaded with data and information, which could shed some light on why teenagers become confused about a multitude of issues: sexuality;political oreintation and so on. With such an open mind it is harder to make decisions, and arrive at some finality with anything. Age therefore represents an escape from this; a return to a smaller group of people ( the family) and so their ideas are challenged less frequently as is their exposure to new ideas. After years of mental rollercoasting, age represents a safe plateau. One which is fertile to conservatism because it inhernetly demands stability and agreement, emancipated from the hot debates of youth. Most far left wing ideas seem therefore unecesarrily doctrinaire.

What I am proposing is that the fundamental lifestyles (the nature of) are possibly what lead people to be more conservative? Similar to amf, but a more personal, philosophical edge - not just economic.

This is an interesting question, by your thinking I should be a Conservative, I am retired. I do know what you mean though because many people I knew were once Democrats are now Conservative.

But is it people who change or is it what the term means. A person considered liberal in 1937, may not agree with what is termed Liberal today. The same holds true of Conservative. Is spendthrift G W Bush the same a Barry Goldwater.

I think though the answer to you question is Responsibility. As you get older you have more things you are Responsible for, family,community, schools things you assume some reponsibility for and sometimes its not always because you want to.

It also has to to with coming to realise you are not infallible, you cannot take the same risk at 55 ,that you did at 25, you don't have time to recover from your mistakes, so you become more and more conservative in what you do. In my case that does not mean I going out to vote for G W Bush or become a Republican because they do not represent my best interest or the interest of this country. Republicans represent the interest of Big Business, which is often in conflict with the best interest of the common citizen.

[quote=Ultimatejoe,Jan 17 2004, 04:11 AM] [QUOTE=Bill55AZ,Jan 16 2004, 08:30 PM] [QUOTE=Paul Doran,Jan 16 2004, 11:46 PM] [QUOTE=amf,Jan 16 2004, 01:11 AM]
Young people are keen to learn and absorb ideas. Older people seem not to be - why is this?

[/QUOTE]
Lots of old ideas are new to the younger generation.
I see young people as not commonly being able to intelligently digest the information when young, so are less able to think and act wisely.
As we gain maturity and experience, we are more able to discard "new" ideas that we have seen before and can remember that they didn't work when we last saw them. [/QUOTE]
This is questionable logic. Educators find that young children are better able to learn new languages because their minds are more flexible and able to absorb and store unfamiliar information. By that logic once a child "matures" around the onset of puberty they lose the ability to think and act independently of the information they are presented with. [/quote]
What? Someone's logic is certainly questionable here. My reply was an observation, not meant to be taken as "my logic".

The relative ease of learning of languages when young has little to do with the learning and absorbing of IDEAS.
With 3 educators in the family, and having raised my own children, and now watching the grandchildren grow up, I know a bit about young vs. old. My children are in their 30's and still, on occasion, question my knowledge and experience. Usually, they find out that old Dad was right after all.
And the maturity that I am talking about is not physical, as in puberty, but the kind that comes from long years and many experiences. Call it wisdom of the aged if you like. It ain't perfect, but it is of equal importance as the enthusiasm of the young, and serves as a balance against 'excess enthusiasm combined with inadequate knowledge'.
But among my older friends and co-workers, I can see where a kind of fossilization sets in and they are less accepting to new ideas. The new guy in the shop, whether young or old, isn't likely to be listened to, and that is often a mistake. A fresh set of brains of any age is a good thing in a stale environment.

I do not agree with your sentiment at all, in fact I think it could be termed as arrogant and disrespectful to young people. For some reason, this is a belief that many people hold - that young people have this bright ideas, "but they never work in the real world..." blah blah blah

I bet I could personally challenge your knowledge and prove to have a greater grasp of some issues than you. Sure wisdom is good, but everyone's life is different. Some people have more experiences than others, but say at your age, just because two people - the same age - where one has had less "experiences" than the other; does this make their opinion any less worthy - of course not. That is what your are suggesting. The child's mind can bring a breath of fresh air to the debate, a kind of innocence not tarnished by the democratic despotism of society at large. I think young people retain elements of this. To think that age makes you superior, which is what you suggest in your post, or at least the way you have styled it - is wrong both ethically and in fact.

There are things you know more about than me: maintaning a marrigae; bringing up kids; dealing with certain situations and so on. But why does this necessarily affect my ability to question your knowlegde? Are you really saying you know everything about everything I ask you? I am sure you are not, but you seem to possess a logic whereby experince and time is paramount and more important than orginality and insight.

There is also substantial studies done by psychologists where those who are old enter a "life review" stage, where they look back on the past with romaniticism and remarkable accuracy - their greatest thought goes into the past, not the present - and so new strands of thinking get ignored and discarded as previous failures - just as you mentioned in your first post:


"As we gain maturity and experience, we are more able to discard "new" ideas that we have seen before and can remember that they didn't work when we last saw them."

I don't really think that it's so often true that people tend to get more conservative as they get older. For one thing, I have seen the opinions expressed by a lot of young people that are very conservative indeed. My observation is that people tend to be less dogmatic as they grow older and more experienced. This may make them either more conservative or more liberal, or it may make them a little less idealistic or a little more cynical, without changing their basic opinions. I know that I started off as a classic, Democratic Party American liberal. Some of my opinions have become more conservative, I suppose (I am more cynical about the ability of government to do things properly) but some of my opinions have become more liberal (I am more strongly in favor of animal rights, legalization of recreational drugs and prostitution, and sexual freedom.) People change, but not all people change in the same way.

Amen to that insight!

Then again, I have friends who were quite conservative in their youth and when they hit their mid-thirties, boy did they loosen up and have a ball! Some even went haywire! It depends on your background, experiences, perceptions, responsibilities, mistakes and successes thus far, goals, outlook on life, etc.

This holds true for me, although I have always been socially liberal, what I see as progressive throughout my life. I used to galavant all over the world, without a care. Now I have to consider things I never thought about like retirement, health care and financial stability, but my basic thoughts toward the world are still liberal as in personal freedoms and such, I just cannot afford chaos and instability any longer. I have little time to spare, and it has to be productive. I think some of it is ones mortality catching up, and not wanting to waste what becomes precious time, you then begin to choose your battles and/or battle less and try to enjoy what is here and now.

I dont agree with those that sort of say, youth doesnt know what they are talking about because they are young. I have been extraordinarily impressed by young people on tbis board and proud of them for articulate and thought out positions. Youth can make important changes, they have the energy.

Many of the young here are much more conservative than some of us who are older because of the events they have grown up with. Things have gotten really mixed up, freedom is now perpetual war to maintain it, it means data bases on everyone, credit reports that can alter your life for years, unreasonable search and seizure, and generally living in fear. Aids had an astounding effect on sexuality as well. Violence in the streets has made youth tougher. The pendulum swings. Life itself is different. The young are now more protectionist than I have ever known. Idealism is not the luxury it once was. Materialism and sticking to a status quo equates to acceptance and survival, so I believe we are seeing the young being more conservative than in the past, sometimes MUCH more conservative than some elder people who had it easier, or at least different.

Personally, I believe it is mostly a increase in cynicism. Their idealistic tendencies fade, and they simply give up and admit that they have been defeated by the machine they once sought to destroy/change.

Kids now, (like I suspect they always mostly were) for the most part, reflect the political standpoint of their parents until they reach the age where they think for themselves, whatever that may be. I must agree with Doran, that age does not mean that you are superior. Often times it just means that your youth's attitude has been broken.

People don't get more conservative, society gets more liberal. Those who do not change their positions may find their status changing from liberal to conservative over a generation.

Who is it that said (Churchill) people who under thirty who are not liberal have no heart and people over 30 who aren't conservative over 30 have no brain. Badly paraphrased of course.

Oh. alright I'll go find it . . . .



Link Beware that this attribution is disputed by some.

Anyway.

I think there is some truth to this. Under thirties have their life ahead of them and have a better ability to shoot for the moon and think in terms of win-win situations and think about reworking the world.

Over forties have lived more of their life and have largely committed to a course in life and established property. They have less of an interest in radical reform and have probably seen such reforms have unintended and unfortunate results.

Such is the tendency, I doubt that it is a coincidence that the once radical baby boomers who altered the political discourse of the sixties with the radical youth voice, are now pushing the political discourse to the right as they age and retire.

Follow the money and you will often find one's political philosophy.

This may be true, but only on the linear liberal-conservative scale you use.

Many people stop being socialists, social democrats or progressivists as they age - that cannot merely be a relative phenomena as you suggest. They are defined doctrines, and refer to the method of government of society - completely different and radical to what exists. What changes in our society is thus irrevelant to the radical alternatives. Consequently, when a socialist cease to be, it is their individual belief not that has changed not of society.

I can't say much about "getting" conservative, because I don't know if there is a study that examined voting habits of older adults.

However this link shows that the youth of America are much more conservative than the older adults on many issues.

I will post again when I finish researching.

Edited to say: All I can really find are more articles that also express that today's youth are much more conservative than the older generation.

I think it is surprising, but maybe it is just that the political spectrum is changing.

I just dont buy it, to make a definate analysis a much broader survey it required than the one there.

Actually Paul Doran, I went to google to type in the words " more conservative, older" to hopefully come up with something I agree with, and the only thing that really came up on the first 2 pages was that the youth of America are more conservative than their elders.

It consisted reports on major news channels (including Fox News), and at the Berkeley website I just posted

I wasnt making an attack personal to your research, I was just saying that there are limits to what your can draw about wider political beliefs from such concrete questions. In their nature Poltical beliefs are over-ridingly abstract, policy choices cross over between poltical beliefs. Some republicans share the same beliefs as a democract. Therefore the outcome of these kind of questionaires can be easily influenced by the construction of the questions, and these classic issues - asked in the Berkely assesment - form only a small part of a necessary, wider analysis needed to draw some more illuminating conclusions based not on policy, nor philosophu, but politcal belief - as I will illuminate below.

For example, asking the question of school prayer refers more specifically to a policy of the republican party - especially Bush - and not conservatism as a whole. Thus to draw a conclusion that young people are conservative from this single issue - single policy - means very little, since it is a policy not a broad belief spanning a number of issues. There are democrats that are conservative, and their are republicans that are more liberal. Parties are not un-maleable but broad.

Issues that young people feel more stongly about - things like censorship and foreign policy would be over-ridingly more liberal. The former - regarding TV - is shown in the Berkely analysis, the latter is strangley omitted. The latter is one of the greatest indications of a liberal world view.
The philosophical issues (Abortion), where poltical beliefs are supplanted by morality and deeper fundamental conceptions- though I concede the two are partially intertwined - are poor indicators, since they are, as I suggest, principally philosophical not political.

The real, hard, poltical and social issues - Minority and Womens rights are supported more strongly by young people, and are again far greater indicators of liberal values. And highlited even in the Berkely analysis -yet eac of the questions are treated with equal wieght as indicators. In reality this is of course not true. Some indicators are better than others, and the outcome cannot be decided on a numerical basis of "young people were conservative on more issues, making them more conservative generally, since many of the issues they may give little thought or care to. And some issues tell us more about the poltical persuasion of the indivdual than another.

You may disagree with some of my analysis, but one aspect is not contestable. And that is that some indicators are better than others in judging liberal values. I have highlighted my thoughts on what they may be, you may disagree, but it does show the difficulty in quantifying such an abstract political scale of conservatism/liberalism with a basic, inhernetly biased set of questions.