Is youth the new political divide?

Written By: - Date published: 9:21 am, March 11th, 2018 - 44 comments
Categories: class, community democracy, Deep stuff, democratic participation, discrimination, election 2017, greens, jacinda ardern, journalism, labour, national, polls, same old national - Tags:

There was this fascinating recent panel discussion on Guardian Weekly where the panelists discussed where the political divide in the United Kingdom currently is.  The panelists claimed that notions of class politics they though were breaking down.  Brexit showed many working class areas, apart from Scotland, voting leave while more urban areas with younger populations such as London voted heavily to stay.  And the surge in Corbynmania was clearly because of young people getting out and voting.

From the introduction:

For most of the 20th century, British politics was a battle of left v right. There was a clear divide between those who favoured more state intervention and those who preferred freer markets. The parties tended to split neatly on the issue: Labour on the left, Conservatives on the right.

But things are no longer that simple, at least according to research from a new thinktank, Global Future. To understand the seismic convulsions of Brexit and last year’s general election, it says, you need to look at politics through a different lens: open v closed. That is, those who are open to immigration, new technologies and new ways of doing things versus those who are worried by those things.

But the one factor that clearly distinguished the group likely to vote Labour and the group likely to vote conservative was age.

This graph from YouGov says it all.

The tipping point was about the age of 47.  Below that and the younger voters were the more likely they were to vote progressive.  The older they were the more likely they were to vote conservative.

I am not sure if the discovery is so revolutionary.  The change itself is somewhat evolutionary.  It used to be that the demarcation lines for political support were based on class.  But continued attacks on the trade union movement in all western democracies have seen their power ebb and notions of class diminish.

But it is not as if the support has then been coopted by the right.  Rather support has been spread around many different movements, most of which are at least nominally progressive.  Just think of the LGBT movement and the environmental movement.  Think also about the surge in cultural pride and the acceptance even celebration of cultural diversity that occurs.  These are ideas and concepts that are traditionally associated with the left.  The right will embrace them as well, but only when it realises that political power depends on it.

What about in New Zealand.  Are we also seeing evidence of a Youthquake?

The evidence is mixed.  This is from an article from Newshub where the topic was discussed after the results for the 2017 election were published:

Fears of a ‘youthquake’ at this year’s election were unfounded, with young people no more likely to vote in 2017 than in 2014.

While turnout for 18 to 24-year-olds on the electoral roll jumped from 62.7 percent to 69.3 percent, there were actually fewer in that age group enrolled to vote in 2017 than in 2014.

“You have to remember the commission’s figures are a percentage of the enrolled voters,” Grant Duncan of Massey University’s School of People, Environment and Planning told The AM Show on Thursday.

“Of the 18 to 24-year old group, only 72 percent are actually enrolled – therefore only half of them voted.”

Combining the Electoral Commission’s data with population figures from Statistics NZshows only 47.6 percent of 18 to 24-year-olds voted in the 2017 election. In 2014, it was 47.4 percent – almost exactly the same.

Statistics NZ data shows in 2017 there were 483,940 people aged 18-24, with 333,164 enrolled; while in 2014 there were 447,880 people, but 338,269 enrolled.

The article does however miss the point that more young people voted and it also does not comment on how they voted.  And the rate of increase in the numbers of young people outstripped the overall population increase.  So an increasingly progressive vote can at least in part be put on the young.

And do young New Zealanders match their overseas equivalents?  It appears they do.  From a post by Bryce Edwards in the Herald just before the 2017 election:

The strongest evidence of a powerful age dynamic coming into the election campaign came out of the most recent 1News Colmar Brunton opinion poll for, which showed that “67 per cent of 18-34 are voting or intending to vote Labour” – see: ‘Something’s clearly going on here in terms of this idea of a youth quake’ – Corin Dann on huge new Colmar Brunton poll.

Labour’s incredibly success with youth is also shown in two other surveys that have just come out. Survey firm SSI was commissioned to run a poll for Newsroom, which also showed that 65 per cent of 18 to 24 year-olds intended to vote Labour, with only 14 percent of this group favouring National – see Tim Murphy’s Labour opens gap with women, young.

Inversely, National dominates amongst older age groups: “Labour’s lead reduces progressively as the age of respondents rises, but is still 57 percent to 22 among 25-34 year-olds, 45 to 26 for those 35-44 and 49 to 24 for those aged 45-54. Only from 55 to 64 does National pull ahead, by 39 to 34 over Labour, with a commanding lead of 53 to 27 for those aged 65 and above.”

The Horizon polling company also identifies a similar trend: “By age, Labour’s strongest support is coming from those aged 18-34. 52% of definite voters aged 18-24 support, Labour, 25% National. 47% of those aged 25-34 support Labour, 32% National. The parties each have 32% of those aged 35-44 years. National has more support among those aged 45+. Among those 65+ National has 52%, Labour 29%” – see: Main parties in dead heat.

Why young people tend to vote progressive is easy.  Progressive parties tend to think more carefully about the future.  They are more determined to address climate change and environmental disaster and these are issues that young people have a particularly keen interest in.  Progressive parties are not afraid of change of new ideas.  Nor are young people.  Conversely older people tend to resent change.

And progressive parties have always been at the forefront of the recognitions of diverse rights associated with race, creed, gender and sexual preference.  And young people also tend to relish these values.  On the other side conservatives resent change and have to be persuaded, over time, that respect for these rights is actually a virtue and not a threat.

The job for Labour and the Greens will be to continue to attract the support of young people, get them enrolled, and get them active and passionate about politics.  And the job of National will be to reach out to them while at the same time keeping its older support.

44 comments on “Is youth the new political divide? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. The Fairy Godmother 1
    11 March 2018 at 9:43 am

    I find this data fascinating. One factor which could contribute to the high proportion of conservatives in the older age groups could be that wealthier more prosperous people live longer lives. That is working class people on lower wages who are more likely to vote Labour struggle more and die younger so skewing results in the older age groups.

  2. AB 2
    11 March 2018 at 9:55 am

    The downside of this is that young people get old.
    It would be preferable if the divide was based on awareness of who has power and who doesn’t . ‘Class’ in other words.

    • Tuppence Shrewsbury 2.1
      11 March 2018 at 10:20 am

      Stupidest suggestion ever. Moving away from empirical evidence of who is able to vote to a subjective “values“ approach will lead to greater disenfranchisement

      • AB 2.1.1
        11 March 2018 at 10:39 am

        Eh?
        My point was that if progressive parties are dependent for their support solely on the youth of voters, rather than their awareness of class, it is not really a very secure position to be in.
        Carolyn makes some interesting points below about how the importance of youth might, at least partially, be a constructed narrative with the whole purpose of de-emphasising class.

  3. Carolyn_Nth 3
    11 March 2018 at 10:05 am

    I do think that more young people are motivated to vote for change and that tends to diminish for some people as they get older.

    However, I also think this idea of a youth rather than a class divide is something the mainstream media political pundits want to talk up.

    When I looked at the stats for the 2014 election, it showed that Labour voters were far more likely to identify as working class than any other party voters. And the age differences were fairly negligible.

    As I recall, stats by electorate showed something a little different – ie by clumping together the total party results in low income vs high income electorates.

    I suspect that part of the difference between young and older voters has to do with low income people dying younger than high income people. So it’s not so much to do with people becoming more conservative as they get older, but of more conservative/right wing people living longer.

    UK newspapers have published some articles going back a decade or more, reporting stats that show there is an increasing divide between the life expediencies of low income vs high income people.

    The Guardian 2009: Life expectancy gap between rich and poor is widening

    The Independent 2014: A 25 year gap between the life expectancy of rich and poor Londoners is a further indictment of our unequal society

    The Guardian 2015: Life expectancy increases but gap widens between rich and poor

    The UK’s independent fact checking charity 2016:

    Claim
    People born poor will die nine years earlier than others.

    Conclusion
    This is partially correct. Boys born in some of the poorest areas in the UK are expected to live nine years fewer than those in the very richest areas. For girls the figure is seven years.

    this article quotes some research that shows,

    It found that the majority of areas with persistently low life expectancy during this time also had a high proportion of people earning low or no wages. It also found that the reverse was largely true.
    …
    a number of other factors affected life expectancy, including deprivation in old age, housing deprivation, binge drinking, fruit and vegetable consumption and gender.

    UK Medical Express Feb 2018: Life expectancy diverges between England’s wealthiest and poorest neighbourhoods:

    Death rates for people aged 60-89 improved for all groups between 2001 and 2015. However, the improvement was greatest for the best-off.
    …

    Differing improvement rates meant that by 2015, men aged 60-89 from the least advantaged fifth of the country were 80 percent more likely to die in any given year than those from the most advantaged fifth. This figure has climbed from 52 percent in 2001. The equivalent figures for women are 44 percent in 2001 and 81 percent in 2015.

    So, I think while there is some tendency for some people to become more conservative as they get older, I don’t think it’s any different than for previous generations. There are proportionally more high income older people as they age, with more low income people dying.

    I’d be wary of some MSM reports being influenced by a desire to undermine class differences.

    • Bill 3.1
      11 March 2018 at 11:22 am

      I’d be wary of some MSM reports being influenced by a desire to undermine class differences.

      Yes. Very.

      A “it’s just the yoof” narrative might lend itself to dampening political demands from across the rest of society by deliberately or otherwise obfuscating the actual state of affairs and subtly suggesting that older people ought not to follow their instinct if it accords with some “claimed to be” youthful extravagance or “passing phase”.

    • Siobhan 3.2
      11 March 2018 at 3:55 pm

      Well put Carolyn_Nth.

      Incidentally it would be interesting to see a breakdown of the youth vote.
      In NZ and the UK, are these working class youths or the children of the upper middle classes that are becoming politically engaged. As they age these two groups/classes are going to have very different concerns. To be honest I don’t hear many working class voices on the Left any more.

  4. Bill 4
    11 March 2018 at 11:12 am

    Youth has got nothing to do with it per se.

    The radical centre (ie – the liberal status quo) that has encompassed both Tory and Labour Parties is basically done and dusted.

    UK Labour broke out of that dying space with Corbyn. The SNP broke out of that space. Trudeau pretended he was breaking out of that space. Trump claimed he would be a break. Sanders claimed he would represent a break.

    All of the above attracted far more of the vote than status quo loving liberal media predicted. That same media has tended to disparage any electoral challenge to the liberal or radical centre coming from either the left or the right.

    Curiously (sarc/) the ploy for countering a presence on the right is to simultaneously build them up in the public mind, but portray them as a threat – ie, the fear card designed to send people back to the safe hands/arms of the centre.

    A presence on the left is dealt with more by way of ridicule, dismissal and character assassination.

    So why this “youth” analysis? Because it ‘s a convenient red herring that avoids the obvious conclusion – the schism isn’t generational. The schism is between the radical centre (liberalism) and everything else, where “everything else” sits along authoritarian and non-authoritarian lines (so not strictly speaking “left and right”)

    Even when there is no political expression of an alternative, we can see how deep voter discontent runs.

    The establishment prefers “steady as she goes” European alignment? Give us Brexit. The establishment prefers “steady as she goes” Clinton? Give us Trump.

    But not Le Pen. After Mélenchon’s surge had been smothered, (in part by building up Le Pen as the bogey man) that was a step too far and an occasion to rush back to the centre.

    And where self harming options aren’t the only ones available, then like a succession of inevitable waves from an incoming tide, people are ending towards Sanders, UK Labour, SNP, 5 Star Movement or political autonomy (Scotland, Catalonia…)

    And in NZ we got Jaccinda Ardern. In the mould of Justin Trudeau. And a government now rushing off in the opposite direction from that which the rest of the world is about to go. I mean fuck, Trump just gifted the initiative to the left by pulling out of the TPPA and threatening the end of NAFTA. And in NZ, many people self identifying as “left”, clutch at their beads (pearls have been far too expensive for a few years now!) because an end to “free trade” might mean something not nice happens. 🙄

  5. KJT 5
    11 March 2018 at 11:49 am

    Some would like the “divide” to be over age, gender, race or anything else.

    So long as it distracts from the exponential accumulation of our wealth, by a few. Class!

    • RedLogix 5.1
      11 March 2018 at 12:55 pm

      No question the extremes of wealth accumulation are a problem that demands real thought and the emergence of new ideas around how to best moderate this problem.

      But as you say, all these ‘divides’ that are being thrust upon us; well I’m over them. As a species we have so much potential, so many big real problems to solve if only we’d look to what we all have in common and have the courage to trust one another again.

      • greywarshark 5.1.1
        11 March 2018 at 3:58 pm

        I am very careful who I trust these days after thinking that I understood some younger people to have good standards of respect for people and the environment, and found that it was mainly the environment they were concerned about; in their spiritual? economy people were an externality.

        And then trusting people’s goodness and care about community. It is slow to arise in normal situations, and requires something that achieves an outpouring of sentiment, a hopeless disease that might be cured overseas, a slow but terminal disease that the sufferer discounts arguing for the right to see their grand-children grow up through being given expensive medicine. Little children who can’t get simple health treatment to enable them to be healthy and grow and socialise in a normal fashion are again, externalities.

        Or people might turn out for a special occasion run by some socially accepted body, helping to build a habitat house or such, raising money for the rescue helicopter; if it was to help build a wet house for alcoholic men who were homeless and who didn’t get many jobs or even a basic living – well no.

        The scourge of selfish neo lib economics that teaches charity is a personal choice rewarding the giver with a feel-good satisfaction, leaves us with a situation where we may get little real kindness again. We can’t simply trust one another, and have to remain wary, but also don’t fall into a Me First or Us Separate, type of thinking. Ensuring that you get for yourself what is reasonable but that it is also available to all similar others, is a pinnacle that we must try to climb to, and then stay firm at that level.

        It isn’t possible to relax vigilance; those who are thinking of others and working on their behalf need to nurture their fellows, as it is a wearisome exercise and the really good people can become exhausted.

        • RedLogix 5.1.1.1
          12 March 2018 at 1:33 am

          Thoughtful as always gw; thank you. I’m tempted to turn this into a long, complicated comment, but really it condenses down to this; we’re a complex, incredibly adaptable, social species. Unlike all the other creatures we share this planet with, we alone have the capacity create our destiny.

          Ultimately we achieve what we aim at. This is true as BOTH individuals and collectively. Therefore we should be careful about what we want.

          The question is simple; are we more likely to have a better future on the basis of a society riven by divisions, deep mistrust and polarisations; or one that seeks to bring all of it’s diverse elements under a common dialog and unity of purpose?

  6. Enough is Enough 6
    11 March 2018 at 1:07 pm

    “Why young people tend to vote progressive is easy. Progressive parties tend to think more carefully about the future. They are more determined to address climate change and environmental disaster and these are issues that young people have a particularly keen interest in.”

    That is true for the Green Party indeed.

    I can’t say the same for Labour after their antics in the past week, where they signed us up to the corporate trade deal negotiated by National.

  7. David Mac 7
    11 March 2018 at 3:44 pm

    We grow more conservative as we gather stuff to conserve. Memories, kids, heirlooms. I feel it has little to do with politics and is more to do with our life cycle. We were all bullet-proof and going to change the world when we were 20.

    • Carolyn_Nth 7.1
      11 March 2018 at 3:48 pm

      And many of us never stop wanting the world to change. We just become aware of how we, and the young, are far from bullet proof.

      And depressed at the power of the elites to resist change.

      I don’t see a lot of real change coming from 10 Bridges, or from team Ardern – National and National lite.

      • David Mac 7.1.1
        11 March 2018 at 3:54 pm

        It’s probably the lazy path but I choose to be content. Things seem to go better for me when I get around with a smile on my mug, spring in my step and loving life in NZ.

        • Carolyn_Nth 7.1.1.1
          11 March 2018 at 4:03 pm

          Yes. Well great for you! And also great that you are able to ignore the large numbers of people in the country struggling to get by.

        • David Mac 7.1.1.2
          11 March 2018 at 4:16 pm

          People that make a difference seem to more often than not sport the attitude I’m pointing to.

          I was sitting in the waiting room of the Kaitaia Hospital recently. I had to fight the urge to stare at the guy that sat down beside me, his face rang a bell. We struck up a conversation, this guy had a fabulous charismatic zest for life, he was loving it. I was doing the best I could to engage with this dude on an undercurrent of ‘Who the hell are you?’

          Ricky Houghton picked up a certificate for his 100m Freestyle in the recent NZer of the Year awards. That joker has done more for housing the mighty folk of Northland than all of the commenters at this site put together. This guy loves his life and life in NZ. He’s trying to make it better, Share his joy.

          Mickey savage isn’t going to save any of our Kauri with a “You’re killing our Kauri you arsehole” approach. He needs to share his joy for the Waitakeres and ask people for their help, “Please love the tree without standing on it’s roots, it’s hurting.”

          Being pissed off and angry is a crap way to get new people onboard.

          • Molly 7.1.1.2.1
            11 March 2018 at 8:50 pm

            Sometimes the angry and the pissed off are necessary for change, and oftentimes the angry and pissed off are that way for a moment, while they build up the energy to continue. There are people who have fought long hard battles and they become depleted and despondent.

            I think it is quite understandable for those who have been up against power and systems to become frustrated. The best you can offer to them is assistance, if you agree with what they are trying to do. Share the burden.

            It is often those branded ‘radical’s and ‘activists’ that bring matters to our attention, and garner mainstream attention and energy.

            If you dismiss them, I think you haven’t considered their journeys to get to where they are, and the benefit their stance has often given those who follow.

            When you meet someone like Ricky Houghton, they seem to epitomise the best way of doing things. But I’m sure that even he, will understand the stories of others frustrations, and no doubt would have experienced it himself.

          • Carolyn_Nth 7.1.1.2.2
            11 March 2018 at 9:42 pm

            Some of us have tried nice. We’ve tried reason – more times than we can count. We’ve tried protests. We’ve tried it all over the years.

            And nothing gets any better. And for those already struggling, life just either keeps on keeping on being intolerable, or gets worse.

            People’s lives are being damaged and cut short – that’s ill and dying before their time. It’s been in the media often enough in the last couple of years.

            So when, in the face of all this, someone says, “I’m OK – life just keeps getting better for me – I don’t care about those struggling”… damn right I’m gonna get angry.

            • David Mac 7.1.1.2.2.1
              12 March 2018 at 11:49 am

              Hi Carolyn, yes sometimes getting vocal and angry about something is what it takes to make people take notice, I agree.

              That’s all it does. Attracts attention, like a neon sign. People like Ricky don’t make a difference by raising their voice and banging the table. Nobody does. They make a difference by calmly charming others into engaging with their ideas.

              I don’t adopt this outlook so I can dismiss the struggles of others. Yes it does make me feel good and love the life I lead. This is not a crime, nor my primary point. I’m better positioned to help others if I’m wearing this hat. I feel the bitter and angry are less likely to generate genuine support….I don’t like people getting angry in my face, most people don’t, we make excuses to leave.

          • RedLogix 7.1.1.2.3
            12 March 2018 at 1:44 am

            @ Dave Mac

            Absolutely. And a very pertinent story.

            Yet here is the thing; in his private moments we can be sure Ricky … like all of us … has to face down his own frustrations, resentments and pain. Yet he chooses a ‘zest for life’. And as you say, likely he has gotten way more DONE than all the angry pixels typed here will ever achieve.

            In my experience the only person worth getting angry with is myself; for my own laziness, stupidity and naivety. I try to harness that anger to push myself into doing better.

            • Molly 7.1.1.2.3.1
              12 March 2018 at 9:56 am

              Self-reflection is a useful tool to see whether you are acting in line with your values, instead of reacting to externals.

              But I get concerned about messages for ‘positivity’ if you want change. Mostly because it just seems to limit the ways people are expected to respond despite what they are concerned about. Another way of saying ‘I won’t listen’.

              The compassionate will always understand that frustration can come out as anger, and will accept that as a legitimate response. We have our fellow NZers being turned down for ACC, sanctioned from receiving already substandard benefits, reduced to living in cars. We have just had nine years of being lied to by our representatives, and a change of representation that has signed us up to the TPPA. Anger is not an inappropriate response. I am not condoning violence, which is an act of physical or mental harm, but I do support the right of people to feel and express their anger.

              • Carolyn_Nth …
                12 March 2018 at 10:07 am

                I have little patience when someone comes to a political blog, joins in a discussion about the class divide, in a context where there is dicsussion about how too many are struggling, to crow about how great their comfortable life is.

                David mac’s second comment has more value in highlighting Ricky Houghton’s community work.

                But he then goes on to attack writers here for not being positive enough.

                I’m pretty sure Micky has had many positive things to say about the west and the Waitakeres in the past, and has done so often in his day and community work.

                This makes David mac’s comments as divisive as he is criticising others for being.

                • greywarshark …
                  12 March 2018 at 10:37 am

                  The only thing that David Mac’s comment is good for is to remember to spread some happiness when something good happens, to be pleased at some positive advantage or even preventing something detrimental happening. We should pass on advances for our group, and for the country. Otherwise I query his outlook.

                  A really good piece on Radionz this morning about alert medical people in an Auckland hospital and how their hospital has worked to reduce their carbon footprint by a good percentage. Go down to the black border at bottom of page and on left there is Latest Audio. Look through that.

                  • Carolyn_Nth …
                    12 March 2018 at 10:48 am

                    Thanks, grey.

                    There was also plenty of positive in Micky’s post above – about what can be, and has been achieved by progressive movements, and about how the enthusiasm of young people can contribute to further change.

              • RedLogix …
                12 March 2018 at 11:21 am

                Fair enough Molly. Hell only knows I’ve had my own ‘highly angry motivated moments’ here at TS … only a fool or a liar denies their capacity for it. Nor am I suggesting anger is always a bad thing; certainly it’s roots lie in an evolved aggression that can serve to protect and project.

                But outward aggression is not a good long term tactic, it’s weak politically because it alienates and provokes unnecessary resistance. Plus it’s tough on the body if we sustain it too long.

                It’s a big complex topic to discuss and I’m not even going to try and pretend to have the last word on it. 🙂

                • Molly …
                  12 March 2018 at 12:46 pm

                  The term “outward aggression” to me suggests violence, where anger and ‘pissed off’ do not. Maybe it is just a case of differing views of definitions, in that respect.

                  But I really think the request for positivity is both inane, and dismissive. It’s just another excuse for many to not listen to what is being said. We should have the capacity to listen to people who have been hurt or damaged or outraged without insisting on ‘tone’ beforehand.

                  • greywarshark …
                    12 March 2018 at 3:42 pm

                    Molly positivity does not mean inane and dismissive if there is proper balance in attitudes. Just remembering to enjoy things when they go right, note changes for the better, while still going for a wider improvement! Balance is something to aim for I think, resist the human tendency to obsession and excess.

                    Quote – Life is what happens while you are making other plans. John Lennon said it, and he repeated it from soneone else. Good eh. Look what happened to John, so sad,
                    but he did lots and I think he enjoyed his time, was active in many things, made great music, explored the world and his own psyche, he planned protests and carried them out, was really alive and did more in his short time than most do in their extended odld age.

                    • Molly …
                      12 March 2018 at 5:36 pm

                      greywarshark, I didn’t remark on positivity as an attitude – “But I really think the request for positivity is both inane, and dismissive.” – I was talking about the request, though more accurately, I should say, the implied insistence for positivity.

                      There needs to be space, within the progressive movement for both those who can move forward with positivity and those who force spaces open, sometimes with understandable anger and frustration. I’m not advocating for violence, just for a cessation of this method of shutting people up by telling them “…if only you had a better perspective….” then I would listen to you, support you etc.

                      How about listening to those that have been disenfranchised, without requiring them to make the best of their situation?

                      It may make us uncomfortable until we get used to it, but that does not give us the right to demand a certain tone before listening. This requirement adds to the suppression of voices, and I don’t agree with it at all.

                    • greywarshark …
                      12 March 2018 at 7:46 pm

                      Okay Molly, the new government should be told all the problems and difficulties they should know asap so they can start making changes. Even prioritise things so they can start with cheaper policies that they don’t have to go on their needs to Treasury for.
                      Not long to the Budget so I would get the stories to them, so that
                      the song is ‘You are always on my mind’.

                      I won’t comment on disability again.

                    • Molly …
                      12 March 2018 at 9:32 pm

                      Hi grey, I think we are talking at cross purposes. I have no idea why you are referencing the government and the budget, when I was just discussing David Mac’s need for positivity when asking for change.

                      I’ve been back over the thread, and can’t see where I’ve referenced the government or any specific instance, and not got into disability at all. Maybe leave it at that?

  8. JOHN IRVING 8
    11 March 2018 at 3:46 pm

    It’s a good thing voting picture is the opposite way round or we old faŕts would probably deservedy stuffed by the young

  9. Stephen Bradley 9
    11 March 2018 at 5:30 pm

    Yes there have been attacks on the union movement. But not only from the usual quarters of multi-national corporations, Farmers, rich domestic millionaires, and their glove puppets in the bureaucracy and professions, but also and critically from within the Labour Party. Let’s see if this Labour-led government can seriously reverse the anti-Labour trend of the last three decades.

  10. SPC 10
    11 March 2018 at 8:54 pm

    Social conservatism/secure in property/advantaged by focus on low taxes.
    Progressive/insecure in property/need support to study and for family.

  11. bwaghorn 11
    11 March 2018 at 9:26 pm

    “If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty you have no brain.” Winston Churchill

    • Incognito 11.1
      11 March 2018 at 10:20 pm

      If you’re not a progressive you have no spine or guts.

      • bwaghorn 11.1.1
        12 March 2018 at 3:29 pm

        I don’t want to be standing for half a day in the bread queue because some utopian halfwit got there way . that doesn’t make me anti progressive it just makes me value caution matched with a realistic understanding of how the world works

        • Incognito 11.1.1.1
          12 March 2018 at 10:38 pm

          Huh?

          I just added to Churchill’s quote; it was not at all aimed at you personally and I’ll leave it at that.

  12. Jackel 12
    11 March 2018 at 11:46 pm

    Old people have just gotten used to the mess and it has kinda grown on them. Young people haven’t. Nor should they.

  13. R.P. Mcmurphy 13
    12 March 2018 at 3:30 am

    this cohort will not get off their arses until their i-pods get taken away. The youf dat I see are petulant truculent and arrogant without having done anything to earn a vote or faced any sort of hardship whatsoever. if the writer sees them as just future consumers and voters for their own personal benefit then so be it.

  14. Doogs 14
    12 March 2018 at 7:44 am

    I think that one very important factor is being forgotten here, or possibly ignored, and that is the increasing trend for people to be more environmentally aware. I use environment here in a very broad way to encompass the atmosphere, the land, the oceans and the people.

    People, and young people in particular, are becoming more sensitised to the fact that everything is interlinked and all things depend upon each other. This is a concept which perhaps a majority of older folk and the well off seem incapable of understanding. Humans are products of their time, and the thinking of the 40s and 50s (my era) is so seriously outmoded in the current world scene that people who are steeped in that aura are out of step with what the world now needs.

    And here’s the kicker – these young people who are growing up with global environmental attitudes will maintain their views and continue them into the remainder of their lives as they age. Thus the shift in attitude will continue as the old, rigid and often selfishly dogmatic approach among older people will slowly die out. Truth to tell, if it doesn’t then it will be the world that will die out and all of us with it.

  15. Ovid 15
    12 March 2018 at 8:28 am

    Fears of a ‘youthquake’ at this year’s election

    Interesting phrasing in that newshub piece. If people wanted voter participation, they’d talk in terms of hopes of a youthquake.