The independents are very hot at this time, and will be in the predictable future.
According to a Great surveys in charge By CNN, almost half of all Americans, 44%, call themselves independent, while only 28%and 27%, respectively, identify themselves as Republicans or Democrats.
I have a theory of why. But I have to launch some elegant terms to explain it.
“Independent” is what semiotics students call a “Vacuum significant“, A term that has very little substantive content, if any.
It is difficult for young people to believe today, but Republican and Democratic labels used to work in the same way. A little more than one generation, if he claimed to be on one side or another, he would have to ask a monitoring question to discover whether he was conservative or liberal, pro-life or probortist, for the rights of weapons or against, etc.
Today, the same goes for independents, who used to be a code for “swing voters” or “centrists”. Not anymore. According to the survey, some are “democratic lookalikes” (24%) and others are “Republican looks” (12%). They reject the label but finally vote as not. The rest is among the “checked” (27%), “the disappointed environment” (16%) and the “optimistic strangers” (22%). The demography and ideologies of these groups varies widely. In summary, calling himself independent says something, that he does not like party labels, but it is not a unique ideological or political signifier for everyone.
That leads me to an even more pretentious term: “institutional isomorphism. “This describes the process by which apparently different organizations become similar to each other.
The fast food chains that once had a very specific niche now expand their offers to capture the market share outside their lane. These days you can get Espresso with your Dunkin breakfast 'wrap and get Starbucks donuts. History Channel, A&E and MTV once they had a very specific program, now all sell reality shows and generic entertainment.
The reason why Independent became an empty signifier is that the republican and democratic parties, and the widest right and left, succumbed to institutional isomorphism.
Consider the vast constellation of institutions associated with the right: Fox News and their cable imitators, as well as most of the websites and right -wing websites, groups such as the NRA, CPAC, Turning Point US “Trumpy”. In fact, it is easier to list those who did not. If you love President Trump, you would not have it otherwise. But if you don't, and you lean on the right, you probably call yourself independent.
Meanwhile, the Democrats are in a dead end these days because the progressive bases, the activist groups, the universities and the “main” media converged in an undifferentiated ideological spot.
Consider the American Union of Civil Liberties. Once a very narrow lane remained, vigorously defending the rights of the first amendment, regardless of how unpopular they did. In recent decades, it has become largely indistinguishable from other generic progressive lobbying attire, prioritizing the conventional objectives of “social justice” even at the expense of the rights of the first amendment.
The ideological, financial and cultural pressure to adjust to the right and left is intense. In a competitive market, I would think that some Ivy League schools would have resisted the “Wake” tide, but almost all went with the current.
The reasons for the ideological convergence to the right and left are economically and sociologically complex, but politically the main driver is our main system. Why is almost all the main main presidential candidates almost identical to their competitors, at least on important issues? Why do the primary republican candidates of Congress compete on who would support Trump more?
The short answer is that the primary voters and donors of the party, and the demanding of ideological media have very narrow and concentrated conformist demands, and in the absence of their support, the candidates cannot go to the general elections. The pressure to conform does not end the nomination. In the Republican Party, Trump support is the only fire test to be a republican “good”. For Democrats, it is a tight set of problems, but “resistance” for Trump is the most important.
The result is that general electoral voters are caught in choosing the less objectable candidate, which was chosen by a process that discourages the deviation from the intra -participation consensus. I do not see that this dynamic ends soon, so I expect a future in which almost everyone is called independent, regardless of what they want to say with that.
UNKNOWN: @Jonahdispch
