The Disappearance of Virtue From American Politics

[JA]

The Disappearance of Virtue From American Politics - The Atlantic

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Personally, I would certainly like to see virtue and ethics become more common today; this would also include sensitivity towards other groups - particularly ones who are underprivileged. There is a lot that every person could gain from focusing on strengthening their moral character, educating themselves, paying more respect to others, and even cultivating some of the traditional Christian and Stoic ethical values that have long been virtues in our society. However, by targeting the blame at millennials, Sen. Sasse is completely missing how millions of Americans, even the majority of us, simply do not fit into the group to whom he is speaking. Most of us are not part of the upper-middle-class, nor are the millennials to blame for our institutions decaying to their current state; the older generations are solely responsible for that and, of them, particularly those in positions of power and influence.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Ben Sasse is going down in 2020 if he doesn't abandon his seat for the big job. Talking down to voters and calling them stupid for the problems that he and the rest of Washington are either ignoring or outright causing is usually a Democrat characteristic.

[Green Line]

Senator Sasse is the best member of Congress.  He is correct.

[Beet]

Typical conservative. Virtue has often been a minority in American politics. Andrew Jackson, anyone? The Senate's refusal to regulate lynching? Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter? Well cultivated individuals have generally been a minority.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Typical conservative. Virtue has often been a minority in American politics. Andrew Jackson, anyone? The Senate's refusal to regulate lynching? Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter? Well cultivated individuals have generally been a minority.

Ben Sasse is the poster boy of the GOP's economic nihilism wing. What is virtuous about cutting my brother's Medicaid to fund wars abroad?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I'm in partial sympathy with Sasse, but I don't need to hear this from a Republican Senator.

[Maxwell]

What's so innovative or interesting about saying "gee wilikers millenials suck, they don't work hard, blah blah blah"? Doesn't Time Magazine do an article about that just about every chance they get?

[Reluctant Republican]

Sasse is probably my least favorite current politician. He has that faux boy scout earnestness and bland talk of exceptionalism that I so despised in Rubio.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

What's so innovative or interesting about saying "gee wilikers millenials suck, they don't work hard, blah blah blah"? Doesn't Time Magazine do an article about that just about every chance they get?

Yeah, if Sasse wants to claim--and, again, I'm in partial sympathy with this--that a lot of younger people have been brought up lacking ~character~, he should assign responsibility for this to the people who, you know, brought them/us up that way.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yeah, the problem is very real but it goes beyond "muh kids these days". From what little I know, my impression most of what went wrong in Western societies took place at some point in the late 1970s and 1980s, when suddenly it was all about getting rich and famous and any greater ideal was seen as silly or outmoded. Conservatives can point to the 1960s and counterculture, but you can't deny that the movements of the 1960s were about making the world a better place and not just about hedonism (although it's true that quite a few hippies later converted into yuppies). Regardless, what we're seeing now is a product of at least 40 years of moral erosion, not something you can blame millennials for.

[Zioneer]

Virtue is disappearing, huh?

[RFayette]

What's so innovative or interesting about saying "gee wilikers millenials suck, they don't work hard, blah blah blah"? Doesn't Time Magazine do an article about that just about every chance they get?

Yeah, if Sasse wants to claim--and, again, I'm in partial sympathy with this--that a lot of younger people have been brought up lacking ~character~, he should assign responsibility for this to the people who, you know, brought them/us up that way.

That's precisely the point he has made in interviews - that it is a parenting problem, hence why his book is for parents to help kids cultivate character.  

Ben Sasse is correct again, as he usually is.  Not quite Ted Cruz level, but still a massive FF.

[RFayette]

Yeah, the problem is very real but it goes beyond "muh kids these days". From what little I know, my impression most of what went wrong in Western societies took place at some point in the late 1970s and 1980s, when suddenly it was all about getting rich and famous and any greater ideal was seen as silly or outmoded. Conservatives can point to the 1960s and counterculture, but you can't deny that the movements of the 1960s were about making the world a better place and not just about hedonism (although it's true that quite a few hippies later converted into yuppies). Regardless, what we're seeing now is a product of at least 40 years of moral erosion, not something you can blame millennials for.

I think you are oversimplifying the 1960's.  At least in the United States, crime rates (including murder, rape, burglary, robbery, etc.) skyrocketed over that time period, from historic lows in the 1950's.  We also saw similar explosions in out-of-wedlock birth rates and other forms of social deviancy where the key "spike period" was the '60s as opposed to the late '70s or '80s, and were often unrelated (at least directly) to social reform movements.  I could see the argument that the 1970s and 1980s locked in some of those negative trends from the '60s, but the root of where those trends started to take place seems pretty clear.

I tend to think the biggest reason for this is that the mid '60s was the coming of age of the Baby Boomer generation, which grew up in a period of immense prosperity and a philosophy of lax parenting, courtesy of Dr. Spock and others, in response to wanting kids to experience nothing like the immense hardship the GI Generation suffered through the Great Depression and WWII.  The importance of 'scar tissue,' as Sasse terms this formation of resilience, toward the building of character is of immense importance.  I think we'd have common ground in that social norms of responsibility for one another was a component of that character development.

[The_Doctor]

Ben Sasse is the poster boy of the GOP's economic nihilism wing. What is virtuous about cutting my brother's Medicaid to fund wars abroad?

Philosophically I argue there's another side of the coin here. Why should we prop up Medicaid for a population that abuses it (which goes to 77 million Americans I think?). To me state funded Medicaid should go to those whose costs are impossible to finance through insurance and should be a last resort, not a first. I don't know why your brother is on Medicaid and most likely he should be on it, so I'm not singling him out here.

As for wars I submit that - yes I'm a realist neoconservative - that projecting American strength abroad protects our nation. We can argue about which wars do that but we shouldn't retreat from global engagement, including military ones.

EDIT: to be clear my Medicaid reforms would go hand in hand with a health insurance system closer to maybe Switzerland.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yeah, the problem is very real but it goes beyond "muh kids these days". From what little I know, my impression most of what went wrong in Western societies took place at some point in the late 1970s and 1980s, when suddenly it was all about getting rich and famous and any greater ideal was seen as silly or outmoded. Conservatives can point to the 1960s and counterculture, but you can't deny that the movements of the 1960s were about making the world a better place and not just about hedonism (although it's true that quite a few hippies later converted into yuppies). Regardless, what we're seeing now is a product of at least 40 years of moral erosion, not something you can blame millennials for.

I think you are oversimplifying the 1960's.  At least in the United States, crime rates (including murder, rape, burglary, robbery, etc.) skyrocketed over that time period, from historic lows in the 1950's.  We also saw similar explosions in out-of-wedlock birth rates and other forms of social deviancy where the key "spike period" was the '60s as opposed to the late '70s or '80s, and were often unrelated (at least directly) to social reform movements.  I could see the argument that the 1970s and 1980s locked in some of those negative trends from the '60s, but the root of where those trends started to take place seems pretty clear.

I tend to think the biggest reason for this is that the mid '60s was the coming of age of the Baby Boomer generation, which grew up in a period of immense prosperity and a philosophy of lax parenting, courtesy of Dr. Spock and others, in response to wanting kids to experience nothing like the immense hardship the GI Generation suffered through the Great Depression and WWII.  The importance of 'scar tissue,' as Sasse terms this formation of resilience, toward the building of character is of immense importance.  I think we'd have common ground in that social norms of responsibility for one another was a component of that character development.

Oh, I didn't mean to deny that there were problems with social norms (or lack thereof) in the 60s, or that those are in no way connected to what came later. As I said, it's certainly striking how the idealistic hippies of the 1960s became the ruthless careerist yuppies of the 1980s. Still, I don't think there's a clear cut case to make that the link between the two is anything close to deterministic, or even that it's the major driving force. Other things happened between 1968 and 1981 that put society on a different track - the 1973 crisis, neoliberalism, the development of TV, etc. My point is simply that the two periods have clear differences and that the 1980s consolidated all the negatives from the 1960s while adding new ones on top of them.

[SingingAnalyst]

I agree. I cannot imagine Jimmy Carter or Gerald Ford calling McCarthy voters "crazy" or the other side's voters "deplorable" or calling for the other candidate to be locked up. Carter took heat for telling Playboy he lusted in his heart. Trump bragged about what he could get away with as a celebrity, and we all know the result.

[Indy Texas]

Typical conservative. Virtue has often been a minority in American politics. Andrew Jackson, anyone? The Senate's refusal to regulate lynching? Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter? Well cultivated individuals have generally been a minority.

Ben Sasse is the poster boy of the GOP's economic nihilism wing. What is virtuous about cutting my brother's Medicaid to fund wars abroad?

I guess you didn't read your hero Trump's budget proposal, did you?

[RFayette]

Yeah, the problem is very real but it goes beyond "muh kids these days". From what little I know, my impression most of what went wrong in Western societies took place at some point in the late 1970s and 1980s, when suddenly it was all about getting rich and famous and any greater ideal was seen as silly or outmoded. Conservatives can point to the 1960s and counterculture, but you can't deny that the movements of the 1960s were about making the world a better place and not just about hedonism (although it's true that quite a few hippies later converted into yuppies). Regardless, what we're seeing now is a product of at least 40 years of moral erosion, not something you can blame millennials for.

I think you are oversimplifying the 1960's.  At least in the United States, crime rates (including murder, rape, burglary, robbery, etc.) skyrocketed over that time period, from historic lows in the 1950's.  We also saw similar explosions in out-of-wedlock birth rates and other forms of social deviancy where the key "spike period" was the '60s as opposed to the late '70s or '80s, and were often unrelated (at least directly) to social reform movements.  I could see the argument that the 1970s and 1980s locked in some of those negative trends from the '60s, but the root of where those trends started to take place seems pretty clear.

I tend to think the biggest reason for this is that the mid '60s was the coming of age of the Baby Boomer generation, which grew up in a period of immense prosperity and a philosophy of lax parenting, courtesy of Dr. Spock and others, in response to wanting kids to experience nothing like the immense hardship the GI Generation suffered through the Great Depression and WWII.  The importance of 'scar tissue,' as Sasse terms this formation of resilience, toward the building of character is of immense importance.  I think we'd have common ground in that social norms of responsibility for one another was a component of that character development.

Oh, I didn't mean to deny that there were problems with social norms (or lack thereof) in the 60s, or that those are in no way connected to what came later. As I said, it's certainly striking how the idealistic hippies of the 1960s became the ruthless careerist yuppies of the 1980s. Still, I don't think there's a clear cut case to make that the link between the two is anything close to deterministic, or even that it's the major driving force. Other things happened between 1968 and 1981 that put society on a different track - the 1973 crisis, neoliberalism, the development of TV, etc. My point is simply that the two periods have clear differences and that the 1980s consolidated all the negatives from the 1960s while adding new ones on top of them.

My point is that the "hippie" movement is only a small part of the 1960's and the cultural changes of that era.  My point was that the parenting changes post-WWII, which manifested themselves through the '60s as these children came of age, explain much of the downhill trends seen since then.  These demographic/generational changes form the core of the decline in morality.  Granted, I think we may be talking about different things, since we likely see issues like economic inequality a bit differently, so we are going to disagree on how to interpret neoliberalism, but I'd imagine that where there is common ground - the basic social institutions, represented by things like divorce rates, out of wedlock births work force participation, social network strength, etc. very much have their roots in problems of societal changes in the 1960s.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

The upcoming generation always seems more decadent than the one currently in power because the generation in power holds the reins of narrative.

People have been irresponsible hedonists for all of history. I'm perfectly fine with attempting to correct that, but in order to do so we should have a proper historical perspective on the problem.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Yeah, the problem is very real but it goes beyond "muh kids these days". From what little I know, my impression most of what went wrong in Western societies took place at some point in the late 1970s and 1980s, when suddenly it was all about getting rich and famous and any greater ideal was seen as silly or outmoded. Conservatives can point to the 1960s and counterculture, but you can't deny that the movements of the 1960s were about making the world a better place and not just about hedonism (although it's true that quite a few hippies later converted into yuppies). Regardless, what we're seeing now is a product of at least 40 years of moral erosion, not something you can blame millennials for.

I think you are oversimplifying the 1960's.  At least in the United States, crime rates (including murder, rape, burglary, robbery, etc.) skyrocketed over that time period, from historic lows in the 1950's.  We also saw similar explosions in out-of-wedlock birth rates and other forms of social deviancy where the key "spike period" was the '60s as opposed to the late '70s or '80s, and were often unrelated (at least directly) to social reform movements.  I could see the argument that the 1970s and 1980s locked in some of those negative trends from the '60s, but the root of where those trends started to take place seems pretty clear.

I tend to think the biggest reason for this is that the mid '60s was the coming of age of the Baby Boomer generation, which grew up in a period of immense prosperity and a philosophy of lax parenting, courtesy of Dr. Spock and others, in response to wanting kids to experience nothing like the immense hardship the GI Generation suffered through the Great Depression and WWII.  The importance of 'scar tissue,' as Sasse terms this formation of resilience, toward the building of character is of immense importance.  I think we'd have common ground in that social norms of responsibility for one another was a component of that character development.

"Scar tissue" ? Seems like an odd metaphor. Isn't scar tissue generally weaker than the original skin? 
Some of Sasse's recommendations for encouraging character seem like good and important ideas, but one can't assume facing tougher challenges automatically makes one more resilient or, especially, more virtuous. It depends very much on the relational and psychological resources children have available to them in meeting and interpreting these challenges.

[Technocracy Timmy]

My point is that the "hippie" movement is only a small part of the 1960's and the cultural changes of that era.  My point was that the parenting changes post-WWII, which manifested themselves through the '60s as these children came of age, explain much of the downhill trends seen since then.  These demographic/generational changes form the core of the decline in morality.  Granted, I think we may be talking about different things, since we likely see issues like economic inequality a bit differently, so we are going to disagree on how to interpret neoliberalism, but I'd imagine that where there is common ground - the basic social institutions, represented by things like divorce rates, out of wedlock births work force participation, social network strength, etc. very much have their roots in problems of societal changes in the 1960s.

The millennial generation (along with the tail end of Gen X) has actually reversed a lot of these trends and in many cases it dates back to the mid 1990's right when they began coming of age. And early signs thus far suggest that this will be the case with Homelanders aka Gen Z as well.

-Youth risk behavior as monitored by the CDC has been declining across the board from 1991-2015. These risk behaviors include not wearing a bicycle helmet or seatbelt, having sex, drinking alcohol, and smoking cigarettes, etc.
-Teen pregnancy, birth rate, and abortion rate have all fallen since they peaked in the 90's.
-Crime rates have plummeted 60-70% since 1995.
-Suicide rates among the youth have been steadily declining since the 90's.
-From 1990 to 2013, the share of high school grads with AP course credit rose from 12% to 39%
-Record breaking high school graduation rates for millennials so far.
-SAT scores have been rising, particular for math, which is amazing given that more and more teenagers are now taking the test.

Sources: I, II, III, IIII.

I think this is why a lot of the "family values" rhetoric from the GOP doesn't resonate well with millennials. They're already by and large doing the things they've been asked to do. And even then they get berated by boomers who accuse them of a lot of society's moral degradation when by most accounts, boomers constituted higher crime rates, drug use, teen pregnancy, etc. when they were coming of age.

[RFayette]

Yeah, the problem is very real but it goes beyond "muh kids these days". From what little I know, my impression most of what went wrong in Western societies took place at some point in the late 1970s and 1980s, when suddenly it was all about getting rich and famous and any greater ideal was seen as silly or outmoded. Conservatives can point to the 1960s and counterculture, but you can't deny that the movements of the 1960s were about making the world a better place and not just about hedonism (although it's true that quite a few hippies later converted into yuppies). Regardless, what we're seeing now is a product of at least 40 years of moral erosion, not something you can blame millennials for.

I think you are oversimplifying the 1960's.  At least in the United States, crime rates (including murder, rape, burglary, robbery, etc.) skyrocketed over that time period, from historic lows in the 1950's.  We also saw similar explosions in out-of-wedlock birth rates and other forms of social deviancy where the key "spike period" was the '60s as opposed to the late '70s or '80s, and were often unrelated (at least directly) to social reform movements.  I could see the argument that the 1970s and 1980s locked in some of those negative trends from the '60s, but the root of where those trends started to take place seems pretty clear.

I tend to think the biggest reason for this is that the mid '60s was the coming of age of the Baby Boomer generation, which grew up in a period of immense prosperity and a philosophy of lax parenting, courtesy of Dr. Spock and others, in response to wanting kids to experience nothing like the immense hardship the GI Generation suffered through the Great Depression and WWII.  The importance of 'scar tissue,' as Sasse terms this formation of resilience, toward the building of character is of immense importance.  I think we'd have common ground in that social norms of responsibility for one another was a component of that character development.

"Scar tissue" ? Seems like an odd metaphor. Isn't scar tissue generally weaker than the original skin? 
Some of Sasse's recommendations for encouraging character seem like good and important ideas, but one can't assume facing tougher challenges automatically makes one more resilient or, especially, more virtuous. It depends very much on the relational and psychological resources children have available to them in meeting and interpreting these challenges.

Sasse's point is that resilience is what builds up strength, including facing hardship.  One of his biggest criticism of current parenting is that most kids enter college with next to no work experience because of a lack of pressure from parents, which in human history is an anomaly (he discusses this at length in his TedX talk in 2013 before he was elected to the Senate).  His argument is that this change has led to less resilience than in the past.

While, as Technocracy Timmy noted, many trends have improved to an extent since their nadir, the problem of little work experience in high school has intensified over time. 

[Kingpoleon]

I'm in partial sympathy with Sasse, but I don't need to hear this from a Republican Senator.

Indeed. All Republican Senators lack virtue.

[Beet]

Typical conservative. Virtue has often been a minority in American politics. Andrew Jackson, anyone? The Senate's refusal to regulate lynching? Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter? Well cultivated individuals have generally been a minority.

Ben Sasse is the poster boy of the GOP's economic nihilism wing. What is virtuous about cutting my brother's Medicaid to fund wars abroad?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Typical conservative. Virtue has often been a minority in American politics. Andrew Jackson, anyone? The Senate's refusal to regulate lynching? Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter? Well cultivated individuals have generally been a minority.

Ben Sasse is the poster boy of the GOP's economic nihilism wing. What is virtuous about cutting my brother's Medicaid to fund wars abroad?

Sanchez is somehow under the delusion that T***p's purported "economic populism" is anything more than empty posturing.