Young people who exaggerate hopelessness
"What characterizes today's youth is the collapse of ideals, disillusionment, and consequently, to a greater or lesser degree, skepticism." This phrase has come to mind now that the topic of [the youth movement] is being discussed again. loss of confidence in democracy among young CatalansBut the charm of the phrase is that it belongs to the philosopher José Luis López Aranguren, taken from the book European Youth and Other EssaysPublished... in 1961! A good phrase to begin putting into perspective the alarm about today's youth supposedly turning to the far right.
The first thing to note is the discrepancy between a certain idea of youth as bearers of grand ideals of social transformation and, in general, their ephemeral actual commitment. In every expectation of social change—this also happened with the independence movement—the same mistake is made: imagining that the presence of several young people during the toughest moments of the confrontation guarantees the future success of the project. And it doesn't. The opposite cliché is also common: how often, faced with "revolutionary" youthful expressions, is the response simply that these are things that are cured with age?
The problem is that in every era, biased interpretations of young people's ideological profiles stem from the temptation to burden them with adults' hopeful expectations or to unload all the fears of the moment. And yet, young people's life trajectories are always uncertain because the social frameworks in which they will have to live are unpredictable. The truth is that the caricatures made of young people say more about the spirit of the times in which they are imagined than about the young people themselves. In other words, they are a mirror of adults' fantasies and apprehensions. That's why we're now afraid they might turn to the far right.
Without going into methodological questions, The ICIP survey that has set off alarm bells Several points can be considered. First, the questions pollsters ask and what they want to know are often one thing, and what respondents understand and mean by their answers is another. So, what does it mean when 24% of young men (aged 18 to 24) say they disagree with the statement "although democracy may have problems, it is always preferable to any other form of government"? Well, different and contradictory things. First, it certainly includes both supporters of reactionary authoritarian ideas and anti-capitalists who are averse to liberal democracies. Furthermore, it's not easy to know what these imprecise "other forms of government" suggested in the question might be. Finally, and even more simply, it can be understood as an angry response expressing deep discontent, if not irritation, with the democracy they are familiar with.
The other thing to keep in mind is that young people are not a homogeneous group. To understand this, in addition to age and gender, we should know more about that 24% who are "disaffected" with democracy. For example, significant data on their education levels, their political experiences in their country of origin or those of their parents, their religious affiliations, and even the type of neighborhoods they live in. I've written this before, and I'll repeat it: it's not so much that young people "become" right-wing, or anti-feminist, or that they distrust democracy, but rather that there are new segments of the population—from here or from abroad—that are changing the existing ideological landscape. This is less common among older people, the group with the most stable opinions, as surveys show.
It would be a grave error, then, to assume the existence of changes in young people's mentality and not understand that what we primarily have are new groups of young people with diverse mindsets. If we take for granted that we have an extremely fragmented society, any analysis of reality should begin with the recognition of each of these fragments and their respective mentalities. Erik H. Erikson wrote that "biographies are inextricably interwoven with history." Yes, and now we should add that, more specifically, within each of the social histories—what Vicente Villatoro calls "bubbles"—that coexist in the same physical space.
And, in any case, given the social and political context in which the current surveys are conducted, it would be good to recall a saying, I believe by Max Scheler: "Disillusioned hope finds solace only, unconsciously, in exaggerating despair." Yes: perhaps what the polls accurately capture, and what we should learn to interpret correctly, is that desperate exaggeration of hopelessness.