BLOGGER
An International Affairs major, Tyler Bugg is a senior in the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia. He is Associate Editor of the Georgia Political Review and has...
Where do young people come down on questions of faith, values, and public life? How do they relate their values to public policy issues including education, economic inequality, and the environment? These questions, critically important for the 2012 election, are at the center of a campus conversation being organized by the Berkley Center and Georgetown University. This blog features an ongoing conversation about these issues between students selected as Millennial Values Fellows through a national competition. You can read and comment on their blogs here.
To learn more about the project, visit the Campus Conversation on Values page.
OTHER POSTS
Millennials on Social Media and Politics
November 15, 2012
Millennials on Social Issues and Diversity
November 12, 2012
Hira Baig (Rice) on Why the Presidential Election Matters to Millennials
November 7, 2012
Millennials on Religion and Interfaith Work
November 7, 2012
Ryan Price (Drake) on E Pluribus Duo
November 6, 2012
Mohammad Usman (DePauw) on Unpredictable Millennials
November 5, 2012
Millennials on Affirmative Action Policy
November 3, 2012
Seth Warner (Vassar) on What Happens as the "God Gap" Widens
November 2, 2012
Josina De Raadt (Dordt) on How Social Media Is Like Wii Bowling
October 31, 2012
Zachary Yentzer (Arizona State) on the Next Greatest Generation
October 29, 2012
Brice Ezell (George Fox) on Post-Racial America? Race, Millennials, and the 2012 Election
October 25, 2012
Tyler Bishop (Vanderbilt) on a Future of Hashtags #whatitmeansforus
October 23, 2012
Brice Ezell (George Fox) on How the People Can Heal a “Divided,” Partisan Nation
October 4, 2012
Hira Baig (Rice) on Religion and American Democracy
October 4, 2012
Tyler Bishop (Vanderbilt) on How It’s All About Relatability: Voter Turnout
October 3, 2012
Josina De Raadt (Dordt) on Mistaking Politics for a Hollywood Blockbuster
October 2, 2012
Mohammad Usman (DePauw) on the Internet Solution
October 1, 2012
>> more
AT THE CENTER
EVENTS (5)
PUBLICATIONS (3)
Diverse, Disillusioned, and Divided: Millennial Values and Voter Engagement in the 2012 Election
October 4, 2012
October 4, 2012
LETTERS (2)
RELATED RESOURCES ON MILLENNIAL
Tyler Bugg (University of Georgia) on Reengaging Voters in Productive Political Discourse
June 25, 2012
In my favorite coffeeshop, I’m always drawn to the smallest booths. The tiny, corner booths outside of the flow of traffic and the churning of the roaster. For me, small space is cozy space. It’s where I can best locate my creative focus in order to, ironically, do the work in understanding the world around me.
But in understanding the world, in the comfort of the tiny booth, there’s also so much of the world I miss, so much of the “traffic” that passes me by.
Likewise, politicians and candidates today are missing too much of the traffic. The cozy booths of their own ideas, the political party space to which they must restrict themselves per the rules of ideological acceptance, and the quick-fix campaign messages are isolating them from the very nature of politics, the most primary activity hinged on elections: discourse.
This year’s election season is certainly not immune. We’ve come into a political era where civil and honest conversation has become both immensely easier and challengingly hard. Social media makes the legwork near effortless; how quickly and virally campaign catchphrases can be shared, “liked,” and retweeted is unprecedented.
But speed is almost never substantive. How helpful is the fast spread of campaign headlines when their contents are the dull, shallow, dead ends of dialogue?
Politicians aren’t totally to blame, though. Voters, too, have been missing too much of the traffic. The response to campaigns’ hollow rhetoric, especially among Millennials, has been a rejection in total. They’ve slammed shut the door into the conversation of campaign politics, and more than half have kept it tightly locked, remaining unsure that they’ll even take the time to vote in the November presidential election. Even worse is that not many seem to mind the trends that are continuing to erode campaign confidence.
With candidates keeping behind their teleprompters of one-liners and voters keeping behind their own unconfidence, there’s no one to meet conversation in the middle.
The ongoing challenges facing the year’s election cycle, and ones in the future, is that the citizenry (doesn’t) talk about the election cycle. They’re hearing and accepting and demanding nothing more than the television attack ads, radio spots, and the name bashing saturating both. They stop short the conversations we could be having, and should be having, and not only during the peaks of time when partisan pundits become ferociously interested in gaining chambers seats and shouting a political victory.
Even amongst the ideologically divided Millennial Values Fellows group, themselves reacting to a political climate of hyper-partisanship, one point of consensus could be reached: a new– and better– conversation must be ignited.
That’s an important first step. But I would add that it must start with the voter, the community of voters (and perhaps more importantly, the communities of those not yet compelled to vote). Much of today’s high apathy and low confidence, especially within the messages of political campaigns, could be corrected if the voters were included– and included themselves– in the political discussion. That discussion has become too much of a whisper between candidates, billionaire donors, and celebrity endorsers. Until it starts and ends with the constituents elections most effect, neither the voters nor public officials can empower the political system towards progress.
Meanwhile, an authentic commitment to community must be refueled from the positions of officialdom. The job of public service, especially during election season, isn’t to merely echo the complaints of constituents or offer an affirming head nod to their desires. That only cultivates the myth of a closeness, a connection for what the public needs. It’s a cheap way to secure votes. The job of public service is to help facilitate the conversation that’s missing, to support the positive change towards progress. Political leaders are elected to be just that– leaders, not regurgitations.
In a few words, the best solution to strained discourse is stronger compassion: an reopening of our political minds and public spheres, and reinvestment in the equal voice of all perspectives, and in the mutually constructive dialogue that bridges them all for a brighter tomorrow, regardless of election night results.
Likewise, politicians and candidates today are missing too much of the traffic. The cozy booths of their own ideas, the political party space to which they must restrict themselves per the rules of ideological acceptance, and the quick-fix campaign messages are isolating them from the very nature of politics, the most primary activity hinged on elections: discourse.
This year’s election season is certainly not immune. We’ve come into a political era where civil and honest conversation has become both immensely easier and challengingly hard. Social media makes the legwork near effortless; how quickly and virally campaign catchphrases can be shared, “liked,” and retweeted is unprecedented.
But speed is almost never substantive. How helpful is the fast spread of campaign headlines when their contents are the dull, shallow, dead ends of dialogue?
Politicians aren’t totally to blame, though. Voters, too, have been missing too much of the traffic. The response to campaigns’ hollow rhetoric, especially among Millennials, has been a rejection in total. They’ve slammed shut the door into the conversation of campaign politics, and more than half have kept it tightly locked, remaining unsure that they’ll even take the time to vote in the November presidential election. Even worse is that not many seem to mind the trends that are continuing to erode campaign confidence.
With candidates keeping behind their teleprompters of one-liners and voters keeping behind their own unconfidence, there’s no one to meet conversation in the middle.
The ongoing challenges facing the year’s election cycle, and ones in the future, is that the citizenry (doesn’t) talk about the election cycle. They’re hearing and accepting and demanding nothing more than the television attack ads, radio spots, and the name bashing saturating both. They stop short the conversations we could be having, and should be having, and not only during the peaks of time when partisan pundits become ferociously interested in gaining chambers seats and shouting a political victory.
Even amongst the ideologically divided Millennial Values Fellows group, themselves reacting to a political climate of hyper-partisanship, one point of consensus could be reached: a new– and better– conversation must be ignited.
That’s an important first step. But I would add that it must start with the voter, the community of voters (and perhaps more importantly, the communities of those not yet compelled to vote). Much of today’s high apathy and low confidence, especially within the messages of political campaigns, could be corrected if the voters were included– and included themselves– in the political discussion. That discussion has become too much of a whisper between candidates, billionaire donors, and celebrity endorsers. Until it starts and ends with the constituents elections most effect, neither the voters nor public officials can empower the political system towards progress.
Meanwhile, an authentic commitment to community must be refueled from the positions of officialdom. The job of public service, especially during election season, isn’t to merely echo the complaints of constituents or offer an affirming head nod to their desires. That only cultivates the myth of a closeness, a connection for what the public needs. It’s a cheap way to secure votes. The job of public service is to help facilitate the conversation that’s missing, to support the positive change towards progress. Political leaders are elected to be just that– leaders, not regurgitations.
In a few words, the best solution to strained discourse is stronger compassion: an reopening of our political minds and public spheres, and reinvestment in the equal voice of all perspectives, and in the mutually constructive dialogue that bridges them all for a brighter tomorrow, regardless of election night results.