590
submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

American political ideology as a whole has shifted left in recent years, but women are becoming even more liberal, according to Gallup.

The survey data, released Wednesday, shows that while the country remains largely center-right, the percentage of those identifying as or leaning liberal has increased over the past three decades, and is now just 1 percent under it’s all-time high.

Roughly 36 percent of adults identify as conservative, 25 percent as liberal and the rest identify as either moderate or unsure, according to the poll.

When broken down by gender ideology, women in the youngest and oldest age groups said they were more likely to identify as liberal.

Women ages 18-29 were 40 percent more likely to be liberal in 2023, a slight decrease from 41 percent in 2022 and 44 percent in 2020, but still higher than the 30 percent in 2013. Those ages 65 and older were 25 percent more likely to identify as liberal — a slight increase from the 21 percent reported in 2013.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] karashta@kbin.social 79 points 9 months ago

The American political system has done nothing but ratchet to the right for about a hundred years.

It's so far right that people think liberals are left wing. That shit is center right lmao

[-] themadcodger@kbin.social 21 points 9 months ago

That was my thought when they said X identified as conservative, Y liberal, the rest moderate or unsure.

How about none of the above since they're all right of center?

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 22 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Are you guys referring to the labels as applied to the Democratic party, or the people who self-identify as one or the other?

Because while I think it's generally fair that the Democratic party is center-right (largely absorbing any half-relevant positions Republicans once had), self-identifying liberals especially of youth and women probably are leftist despite colloquially referring to liberal. In that respect I'd imagine most of these people are effectively Social Democrats by European standards; meaning a mixed bag of regulated markets combined with a strong national government and select nationalized industries (eg, medical insurance). Basically the Nordic Model.

[-] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Social democrats and market socialists. The issue is that Lemmy loves to insist on the idea that liberalism and leftism are not compatible, which is an outdated, reductive idea.

Liberalism is just the idea that individual liberty is critical to democratic agency. Myself, and basically every other contemporary leftist of consequence, would argue that democratic agency is also critical to socialism as well.

The only place where this is a controversial take are internet forums where "leftism" means "violent revolutionary fan service" and the participants are, in turn, educated entirely within this framework which exists basically nowhere in the academic mainstream.

[-] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The issue is that Lemmy loves to insist on the idea that liberalism and leftism are not compatible, which is an outdated, reductive idea.

Well to the previous commenter's point, that may just be the result of two people using different definitions of the terms.

Plenty of people do consider their "liberal" beliefs to be incompatible with "leftist" beliefs as evidenced by how many called anybody to the left of Biden as "too radical" during the 2020 primaries. We can debate about the terms but at the end of the day those people have made it clear they openly acknowledge fighting anything to the left of whatever Biden is.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

There's a world of difference between "saying something is not viable" and "fighting against something".

[-] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world -2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

You voted against our interests. You and I are not on the same side.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

I mean, in the sense that you're on the side of the Russians, that's correct

[-] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world -3 points 9 months ago

Buddy if the only choice I have in this country is to support Russians or a strike blocking, genocide supporting piece of shit then our democracy has already failed.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Also, your choices are:

A. Support a strike blocking, genocide supporting piece of shit, or

B. Support the Russians AND support a strike blocking, genocide supporting piece of shit.

Your perfect candidate is not running, if they even exist.

[-] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world -3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That's not a democracy buddy. Like if not voting for Biden is a vote for Russia then you're only a very reasonable step away from saying "And a vote for Russia is a crime". Game over man.

Your perfect candidate is not running, if they even exist.

There were plenty of great options in the 2020 primaries. Piece of shit Boomers rejected all of those.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

But like...it literally is a crime.

Do you want to vote for Russia?

Ah fuck you're just another tankie troll aren't you.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

If you're against democracy then we're also not on the same side.

[-] go_go_gadget@lemmy.world -3 points 9 months ago

I'm not. You are.

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social -4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

a mixed bag of regulated markets combined with a strong national government and select nationalized industries (eg, medical insurance). Basically the Nordic Model

So liberal in exactly the same sense American democrats are.. People not liking that "liberal" is a negative in any circle left of those who consider themsleves that, doesn't change what it means..

https://medium.com/the-simulacrum/the-nordic-model-is-not-a-socialist-model-it-is-capitalist-bbe828d17a8a

https://truthout.org/articles/fascism-is-possible-not-in-spite-of-liberal-capitalism-but-because-of-it/

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

No, not necessarily. Social Democracy is one-step further left on the spectrum when considering a balance between Free Markets versus total nationalization and closed markets within the purview of a functioning Democracy. In essence, a truly mixed economy with a strong welfare foundation and regulator control rods for the markets. For all intents, the progressive-left of the Democratic party are Social Democrats while the mainline "corporate dems" are ostensibly Liberals.

Tankies dreams' aside, markets & trade aren't going away anytime soon.

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social -3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That's a lot of words to say you don't understand what liberalism is.. No mount of "strong welfare" counteracts support of capitalism and the oppression and inevitable fascism that comes with it. Because yes, necessarily.

The fact that you think me saying all of this makes me a tankie is a perfect demonstration of your lack of understanding of these terms and ideas (and/or of your unwillingness to challenge your bias and think outside of the parameters capitalism has set for you).

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world -2 points 9 months ago
[-] JayDee@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago

Classical Liberals and especially Neoliberals (what the Democratic party is) are solidly against nationalized industries and while liberalism is ok with either laissez-faire or regulated markets, neoliberalism is strictly anti-regulation.

Socially democratic nations (Nordic nations being the most consistently socially Democratic) have nationalized industries (Norway has its energy, transportation, finance, and communications all nationalized).

Probably the closest the US has ever been to social democracy was when social security and the new deal were enacted. The Democratic party has never been majority Socially Liberal to my knowledge, which is one step right from Socially Democratic, which is yet another step right from Democratically Socialist.

[-] Econgrad@lemmings.world -5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I mean that's what I am, the problem is whenever I use the word social Democrat as an American people have no idea what I'm talking about so I just call myself a Christian socialist instead. After all that's just a more muscular version of social democracy.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

How many environmental regulations were there in 1924? How many black people could vote? Child labor laws? Could you vote in primaries, or did party bosses in literal smoke filled rooms choose a candidate? Could states shut down newspapers and ban non-Christians from holding office?

If we go back about ten more years, women can't vote, and Senators are still chosen by state legislators rather than a popular vote.

Why are leftists so quick to forget their successes?

[-] cheesebag@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

For real; that comment was either made by a child, or someone severely ignorant of history

[-] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago

This is a pet peeve of mine: the term “liberal” has gone through a semantic shift in the US. It used to mean “generally left leaning”. I think maybe the word “progressive” has taken on this role now.

I think the confusion comes from the fact that many European languages always used the cognates of “liberal” to mean “free market”, I.e. “economically conservative”. This is also how the term is used in some academic fields, like economics. But this is precisely the opposite of the other meaning!

It’s pretty clear the article is using the first meaning. They even use “leaning left” interchangeably with “liberal”.

My theory is that since Americans have been interacting with Europeans more online since the 2000s, the terms have become conflated.

[-] uis@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

To not spam same text I will link it

load more comments (28 replies)
this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024
590 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19148 readers
2185 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS