Political
Identity
“I’m
voting for Obama, and I’m a Mormon.” Driving around Utah Valley, one is apt to
come across this bumper sticker. So why is it that this is such a controversial
thing to say? It definitely arouses suspicion in people’s minds, both LDS and
non-LDS alike. In the eyes of
most, the LDS community is seen as
republican. But does this stereotype hold true? Do LDS people really have a
distinct political identity?
It
is easy to look at simple numbers and see that most LDS people affiliate themselves
with the Republican Party. (Patterson.) But at what point does this affiliation
become a widespread political identity? Do LDS Republicans simply need to
outnumber LDS Democrats, or is it once they outnumber them by a certain percent
that this becomes an ‘identity’? Or is it more than that? I am going to argue,
that political identity is more than just a number. And in this case, the LDS
community doesn’t have a political identity of Republican or Democrat, but
rather they have a conservative identity.
Because
of the LDS churches doctrines and standards, members become conservative. It is
a simple fact that the leaders in the church do not support abortion and ask
members to do the same. They do not support drinking and drug use and abstain
from any use of these substances. They are against gay marriage and have openly
campaigned to keep the definition of marriage as between a man and a woman.
These are all very conservative standpoints. And they are standpoints that,
because of the church leaders openness in supporting, the large majority of
members have come to support. But the number of people in the church who
support and affiliate like this doesn’t make it a political identity. Rather it
is the idea of the Mormon lifestyle that supports this identity. The idea that
the LDS religion has very conservative beliefs is what gives the LDS community
a specific political identity.
Through
this, we can see that the LDS political identity is constructivist. The book
defines constructivism as having, “political identities (which) are malleable.”
(Samuels, 153). This definitely applies to the LDS community. These political
identities were not born with each member, rather they were learned through a
study of religion.
Works Cited
Patterson, Kelly. "Who thinks
Governor Romney’s candidacy is good for the LDS
Church?." Utah Data Points. Utah Data Points, 02
09 2012. Web. 11 Oct 2012.
Samuels, David J. Comparative Politics. Minneapolis:
Pearson, 2011. Print.
Kyle Bradarich
ReplyDeleteProfessor Kirk Hawkins
October 10, 2012
PL 150
Blog 5
A Distinctive LDS Political Identity
It is evident that the majority of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (also known as LDS or Mormons) in the United States share a common political identity. When asked, most LDS will say that they are more Republican. A study based on Trinity College's American Religious Identification Survey showed that 59 percent of LDS refer to themselves as Republican, whereas only 27 percent of non-LDS considered themselves as Republican ("US News Study").The most likely explanation for this is that core principles of the Republican Party are also an integral part of Mormon doctrine. A more in-depth analysis for this argument will be made in this article. Furthermore, this commonly shared political identity among LDS may give evidence to both constructivism theory and primordialism theory.
The commonly shared republican political identity among LDS may be viewed as evidence of both constructivism theory and primordialism theory. Individuals’ political identities are the ways in which individuals view themselves in terms of who they are in society and what they believe in. Furthermore, political identities encompass how individuals perceive “relationships of domination and oppression that exist between groups” in society (Samuels 2012, 149). To understand how political identities develop and change, two prevalent theories dominate the social sciences: constructivism theory and primordialism theory. Firstly, constructivism theory, as defined by David J. Samuels in Comparative Politics, “assumes that individuals have some choice over their political identities, but that such choice is constrained by the social context” (Samuels 2012, 153). Members of the LDS church whose political identities provide support for constructivism theory would be LDS members who became converted to the LDS church when they were of older age, and who were raised in families which taught beliefs contrary to the LDS church. In order for these individuals to join the LDS church, they most likely were required to abandon at least some of the core teachings of close family members, such as their previous religion or moral beliefs in practices such as abortion. Thereafter, their identity was shaped profoundly by their membership to the LDS church. Showing that individuals can change their political identity based on social context, this example illustrates evidence of constructivism theory. Subsequently these individuals may become more likely to vote for Republican candidates because the beliefs of the Republican Party more closely resemble the beliefs of the LDS church. On the other hand, others would argue that an analysis of LDS church membership and majority LDS support for republican candidates reveals evidence for primordialism theory. Primordialism theory, as defined by David J. Samuels in Comparative Politics, “assumes political identities are innate and unchanging” (Samuels 2012, 153). Advocates for primordialism theory claim that many of the members of the LDS church are raised in the church from early childhood. Therefore, in light of the common ideologies between LDS and the Republican Party, the fact that many of these homegrown LDS members also consider themselves Republican demonstrates an example of primordialism theory because their political identities were not changed due to social context. If large amounts of LDS members considered themselves Democrats, then one might argue that this would be evidence for constructivism theory. As it stands, evidences for both constructivism and primordialism theory remain relevant and prevalent in today’s society as illustrated by the political identities of LDS members living in the United States.
I liked your essay and thought that it had a good stance and point of view; however, you did not include how primordialism and constructivism add to your argument. I feel like this would have supported what you said very well. Other than that you did a great job.
ReplyDeleteI agree that there is very obviously a more conservative leaning in LDS political idealogies. However, I think it is more of a primordialist-type thing because so many members have been as much their whole lives. I would be interested to see if there is a difference in political ideologies of people who have been members their whole lives and people who have joined the church later in life.
ReplyDeleteI agree that there appears to be a conservative tendency with members of the church (this is obvious). It seems to me, though, that whether the membership associates with a certain party is not relevant to defining political identity. Perhaps the political identity of the church includes elements found in the platforms of multiple parties (this is the case in my opinion) and therefore some will associate with one party and others with another. The real question is whether the LDS demographic differs distinctly from others in political decisions (which could just mean a difference in distribution among the demographic). Good essay, though. It was interesting to read.
ReplyDelete