Saturday, April 15, 2006

College Students Believe...

Recently, Harvard University’s Institute of Politics released their findings on the political attitudes of college students in the United States of America. The study, embraced by both liberals and conservatives as accurate, focused on the topics of current events, religion and morality in politics, and emerging political groups and typology.

I am providing you with a summary of their findings. My analysis of the results is located at the end of the article. All the percentages are directly taken from the report. The poll and survey revealed trends among college students (most of which I wasn’t surprised at all by). My generation of college students is a generation of “we” instead of “me.” This is due in part to the volunteer spirit that tends to dwell inside of my generation’s general attitude.

The numbers the survey discovered, however, reveal far more than just a volunteer spirit. While college students tend to reflect the views of the public on the issue of President Bush’s approval ratings, the college student population and adult population diverge at that point in opinions. College students have grown up in a post 9/11 world. Their worldview began to develop after 9/11; therefore, they tend to have different views than older adults. About 72% of college students believe the United Nations should take a leading role in dealing with international crises. However, that fact is not because the majority of students have lost faith in America; that fact is due to the belief that it is the duty of the United Nations to take such a role. Currently, 72% of college students believe we should begin to withdraw troops from Iraq, with 60% wanting some of the troops to leave Iraq. Only 12% are on the fringe and want all troops out of Iraq. College students tend to be more cautious against attacking Iran, mainly because such a situation might cause a draft eventually.

Unlike with the aging baby-boomer generation, religion is alive and well with college students. Around 70% of college students say religion plays an important role in their lives. Contrary to what some adults believe, students as a body don’t tend to become more atheistic when they enter college. On the contrary, 25% of college students say they have become more religious upon entering college, while 7% of college students report they have become less religious. As is standard in our day and age, the political divide is real when it comes to college students and politics. On the Republican side, 56% of students want their leaders to talk more about religion; on the Democratic side, only 21% of students want their leaders to talk more about religion. The report goes into more detail concerning this divide, however I will not get into that for this article. College students, no matter the party affiliation, are concerned with the moral direction of the United States. These moral issues include, but are not limited to, stem cell research, abortion, homosexual marriage, education, and the war policy. It appears college students tend to view political issues in a moral context; this might explain why such issues as education and the war policy came up in the survey.

The political landscape is shifting with this new generation of college students. No longer do these students wish to be captured by a label, such as conservative or liberal. A new ideological group is forming in the center of the political spectrum. Of interest are two sub-groups of this center ideology – the religious centrists and the secular centrists.

Religious centrists are highly moral and consider abortion and homosexual marriage to be immoral. They tend to support free trade, universal health-care, and protecting the environment. Religious centrists tend to be very optimistic about the future of this country.

(To place these two new groups in perspective, I will include the definition of conservatives and liberals as the survey indicates) Traditional conservative college students tend to support President Bush’s foreign policy, desire more religion in politics, and are against abortion and homosexual marriage. They, like the religious centrists, are optimistic about the future.

Traditional liberals believe in universal health-care, homosexual marriage, abortion, and tend to believe protecting the environment is more important than protecting jobs.

The last group, the secular centrists, tends to be unsupportive of banning abortions and homosexual marriage. Like conservatives, they tend to support President Bush’s foreign policy, and they tend to support allowing the government to monitor terrorists in the United States.

As a whole, Republican college students are twice as optimistic about the future when compared to Democrats. Religious centrists are very likely to vote, while secular centrists are not as likely to vote.

Now, for the part you’ve all been waiting for – my analysis of this data. I tend to agree with nearly every single word in this report. I believe the U.N. should take a larger role in the world’s problems simply because that is their job. It is not and should not be the job of the United States to police the world, although I believe it will inevitably be our job since the United Nations is incompetent in its work. Contrary to popular belief, college students are not Birkenstock liberals who want all our troops out of Iraq this instant. Like the vast majority of college students, I am religious. It is interesting to note that while liberals consider themselves religious, they are leery of including religion in politics. In my mind, that puts doubt on the relevance of their faith. I agree with the majority of students who are concerned with our moral direction as a nation. I don’t consider education and health-care to be a moral issue, although I can easily see how many of my fellow students would see them in that light. With the emergence of the new centrist categories, it gives me nothing but optimism for our nation. College students have historically been liberal. However, with these new centrists at the college level, it shows that even a liberal education system is simply not as effective at indoctrination as it once was in decades past. As students and adults grow older and wiser, they tend to become more conservative. Since liberals do not have quite as powerful of an upper hand at the college level with students, it bodes well for the future of the conservative movement in America.

Finally, you might want to know where I would consider myself in the college political spectrum. It would consider myself a traditional conservative in general. I usually support the Bush’s pre-emptive strike philosophy, and I believe abortion to be a heinous crime against humanity. I am a staunch free market supporter, and I believe in as small of a government as realistically possible in our day and age. However, I also tend toward the religious centrists in that I tend to be rather protective of the environment (the economy, however, still comes first in my mind). I also support homosexual marriage because I believe the GOVERNMENT has no right to deny that right to its citizens. As you can see, though I consider myself a traditional conservative, you can’t really put a single label on me. The Republican (and Democratic) party should consider this for future elections. College students can’t be put in a box, and therefore the Republican Party (and Democratic) needs to make sure and address the issues that college students care about.

I am very optimistic about the future of the country and the conservative movement. Though it is always hard work to keep the country moving forward, I believe this next generation will easily be able to continue the American dream of liberty, economic freedom, and a strong America in the world.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

I also support homosexual marriage because I believe the GOVERNMENT has no right to deny that right to its citizens.


I guess you bought into the liberal augment.

Can we really say that any of us can play the role of husband or wife, regardless of what nature has endowed us with? Can we really believe that a child will find all she needs from a mother in two loving, nurturing men? Can that child find what he needs from a father in two strong, compassionate women? And this gets us to why same-sex families are actually cruel – they intentionally deny every child they touch either their biological mother or father – all in the interest of fulfilling adult desire.

Anthropology tells us no human society, ancient or modern, primitive or civilized has ever sustained itself with a buffet-like family model – just pick what suits you. Whether this is done in an effort to serve “fairness” cannot soften the consequences. We cannot escape that male and female matter. And so, in redefining marriage, the court and same-sex marriage proponents diminish all of our humanity by saying we are only generic persons randomly equipped with either sperm or eggs. This deconstruction will not be without profound and painful consequences.

Anonymous said...

You're misinterpreting the data and the argument.

Children in single parent homes generally fare better psychologically and materially than children in orphanages. Children in two-parent homes generally fare better psychologically and materially than children in single-parent homes. Studies that ACTUALLY STUDY what effect two moms or dads have on a kid say there just isn't enough information to draw a conclusion. You're saying it's better to leave children alone, miserable, transferred from foster home to foster home never having a stable family environment, for what reason? Based on a lack of evidence and a vague notion that boys have a penis/girls have a vagina? Yes, and there are male/female gender roles. No one is denying that.

Maybe we should take children away from single mothers, or not allow mothers or fathers to adopt unless they can show they are married. Furthermore, if the purpose of family is to maintain some abstract "unit" to develop children into adults, I think fertility tests are in order. No reason to get married if you can't pop out the little ones.

Anonymous said...

A good, analytical post, though. Very interesting, and I feel fairly representative.

Anonymous said...

"I also support homosexual marriage because I believe the GOVERNMENT has no right to deny that right to its citizens." Al Gore

Anonymous said...

Your words: "I also support homosexual marriage because I believe the GOVERNMENT has no right to deny that right to its citizens."

You could easily use this "liberal" argument to support other liberal causes.

"I also support Abortion because I believe the GOVERNMENT has no right to deny that right to its citizens."

"I also support the legalization of drugs because I believe the GOVERNMENT has no right to deny that right to its citizens."

"I also support socialized healthcare because I believe the GOVERNMENT has no right to deny that right to its citizens."

Etc..... ;)

Anonymous said...

The foundational building block of society, that element which has always been responsible for social order and peace, is the family, and it has been virtually destroyed. The family is to be a man, his wife and their children. The man provides for the wife and children, the wife nurtures and educates the children, and the children obey their parents. In a community of families, each adult holds the other adults and children accountable for their actions. The family is based on marriage.

Marriage is an institution of God and therefore hated by Satan. Satan has worked very hard, primarily through communications media such as TV, movies, news journalists, and entertainment in general to convince women that marriage is detrimental to their freedom and fulfillment in life. Satan has deceived women into believing that they are the same as men and that all differences are the result of culture. Satan has worked very hard to convince women that their sexual gratification should come from outside of marriage, preferably with other women. Satan has worked hard to divide men and women and have them at war with one another, and because of this, the violence between men and women dramatically increased beginning in the 1980's. After the rapture, more than likely, the family as it is known today will be eliminated. Children will become wards of the state and marriage will be discouraged.

Civil war has been the theme of the 1980's and 1990's and will continue into the end times: man vs. women, black vs. white, Moslem vs. Jew, Catholic vs. Protestant, Moslem vs. Christian, one Moslem faction vs. another Moslem faction, one black African tribe vs. another black African tribe, nation vs. nation, people vs. people. Whatever divides people into different groups Satan uses to inspire hate, strife and violence.

Homosexuality and all sorts of perverse behavior have come to be accepted as normal. The world dictator(anti-christ) himself will not have the normal sexual attraction to women and may be asexual. Many theologians believe that he will probably be openly homosexual as indicated in the Bible in the book of Daniel 11:37; "and he will show no regard for the gods of his fathers or for the desire of women...". And therefore after the rapture more than likely marriage will be discouraged or illegal, and homosexual and lesbian relationships highly encouraged.

Anonymous said...

Wow.

Anonymous said...

I don't know if Jonathon is legit or not, but my response is -

How, in any way, shape, or form, does two men having sex affect you? How, in any way, shape, or form, does two women marrying affect you? Gay sex is different than drugs or polygamy or abortion. When you get strung out on crack, you are much more likely to commit crimes. Polygamy tends to force women into submission, and abortion is entirely debateable because who knows if you're actually killing a person besides God.

But unless they're doing it in the street, it doesn't affect you, and that's illegal for everyone, anyways. What you're saying is that you've decided above all else you are right and others have to conform to your sense of right. That, I think, is a privledge given only to God, and possibly not even to him. You don't have to condone it and can speak against it, like some on this site speak against Islam, because they think it's wrong. But there's a line we cannot cross - we cannot be the arbiters of private decisions. The slippery slope goes both ways.

Anonymous said...

Just ignore the typos, grammatical errors and broken sentences in that previous post. I have no idea what happened to my understanding of the English language.

Anonymous said...

Hey Mr. K,

We were talking about your stance on gay marriage over at the blue voice, and we like it. So if you want to write and peice about why you support it and have IT PUBLISHED at the blue voice, let me know.

Unknown said...

Wouldn't Buddah Dave have a stroke if Caleb posted on TBV?

Anonymous said...

"Hey Mr. K,

We were talking about your stance on gay marriage over at the blue voice, and we like it. So if you want to write and peice about why you support it and have IT PUBLISHED at the blue voice, let me know.

Posted by davejoch | 4/19/2006 11:47 AM "


Some asshole is using my name. Real cute. I was definitely asleep at 11:47 am this morning. Yeah, that's right. Asleep.

This one was far less funny than the one where my evil twin is a screaming vitriolic liberal conservative-hater.

David Buccola said...

Caleb,

Well holy shit! I actually enjoyed this post. It was quite informative. It's interesting to see how the younger college students are relating to the world and seeing their place in it.

The one thing that gave me hope was what you said about your generation being the "we" generation. Perhaps a sign that capitalism is in trouble.

dave

David Buccola said...

Mr. K apparently doesn't know what Capitalism is all about. We is not the foundation of capitalism, I can assure you. It is the epitome of the indivdualistic ideology. It is based on competition among individuals not cooperation. The capitalist uses capital to exploit workers and steal their surplus labor. Do you think sweatshops are an abberation of capitalism? Look at what was going on in this country a hundred years ago. We were a third world nation before there was such a term. That was capitalism run amok. And the only thing that changed that was workers organizing themselves into unions and fighting back.

Capitalism is certainly not about "we." Capitalism reigns supreme and yet 30,000 people die each day due to malnutrition. This in a world that abounds with food; in a world where we actually pay farmers not to grow certain crops because we just have too many; in a world where some people will burn corn up in their cars rather than give it to those who are hungry. Capitalism benefits the few at the expense of the many.

dave