Friday, October 19, 2012

Blog 5: Political Identity

            The pervading conventional wisdom in this country is that there is a strong correlation between the LDS Church and membership in the Republican Party. This conclusion is supported by data. Of the fourteen LDS congressmen currently serving in the US House of Representatives or Senate, eleven or 78% are Republican. This trend extends beyond positions of leadership. This proportion is affirmed by the results of a 2011 survey that concluded 74% of Mormons identify with or lean towards the Republican Party (The Pew Forum). This percentage is roughly 30% higher than the national average.
            It is safe to say that there are strong ties between members of the LDS church and the Republican Party. And although this association is not universal, it is high enough to indicate that there is something about the church’s teachings or culture that drives individuals to the party. To analyze this relationship, we must establish whether Republicans are driven to the LDS Church, or Mormons are driven to the Republican Party. In general, the LDS Church strives to be apolitical. In addition, missionary lessons are based solely on religious doctrine and theology. So one can reasonably infer that church membership is rarely politically motivated.
            Some aspects of LDS political identity are an example of constructivism. The LDS Church is relatively diverse, and many members join as adults. Despite wide differences in upbringings, the LDS church still maintains a strong correlation with conservative politics. This suggests that something about becoming a Mormon compels people to adopt conservative politics. Primordialism, or the idea that political identity stems from deep psychological processes early in life, does not have a strong explanation for how diverse backgrounds could lead to such political unity. In addition, there are many children who eventually stray from their parent’s political beliefs despite being raised in a strongly LDS and conservative home. This shows that one’s political identity can change over time.
            Constructivism, the idea that political identity is malleable and subject to external factors (Samuels, 2012), is supported by the LDS/Republican trend. Some components of LDS doctrine are likely to influence an individual’s opinion about conservative politics. The most prominent LDS teaching that is likely to have this effect is a strong belief in traditional families, and that homosexuality and abortion are sins. The Republican Party also holds these values, and opposes the allowance of gay marriage and abortion. The LDS Church leadership often stays silent about specific policy ideas, but one notable exception to this was their endorsement of the controversial Proposition 8 in California, which defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The explicit support of this policy confirmed that the LDS Church itself does indeed support some socially conservative political views.
            Aside from gay marriage, there are not many official public statements about political issues for Mormons to cling to. For example, although the LDS Church opposes the use of drugs, they have not taken an official stance on its legality. I believe the two-party system itself is the primary motivator behind many Mormons who adopt most or all of the positions of the Republican Party. When forming or solidifying one’s political identity, individuals look at the positions they have and then for a party that shares them. Many individuals will have issues that they don’t have an opinion on yet, but they will seek a party that shares their existing ideas. So a Mormon who opposes gay marriage, but is unsure about economic policy, will probably join the Republican Party in America.
The binary approach to parties and their positions will often lead that person to gradually or immediately accept the other positions of that party, likely because they respect the intellectuals with whom they agree. This is why there is such a strong correlation in America between Keynesian economics and pro-choice views on abortion, or Laissez-Faire economics and opposition to gay marriage. There is not a logical link between the two (in fact, they are opposites in terms of government control), and yet the two-party system has led to many individuals holding both opinions. This strong party influence is another strong piece of evidence to support constructivism.
Sources
Samuels, David J. Comparative Politics. Pearson Education, Inc. New Jersey, 2013.


No comments:

Post a Comment