Generation Z and Political Incorporation: The Divide Between America's New Electorate Civic Involvement

Introduction: Generation Z in Political Turmoil

For Generation Z, political involvement has revolved around rooting for the “lesser of two evils.” The question for many is no longer: who is the most qualified choice? Rather, the question has morphed itself to be: who is the least likely to disregard my future? This rebirth of political actualization has left many disillusioned with the present state of the nation’s political arena. Generation Z, or “Gen Z” as it is more contemporarily referred, has had the opportunity to vote in a maximum of two presidential elections. Both of these elections have centered around one key figure: Donald J. Trump. As it currently stands in the early months of 2024, Trump is almost guaranteed the presidential nomination for the GOP. If this prediction follows through into November, Generation Z will have been faced with three presidential elections featuring the same political character. Trump’s political opponent in the 2024 presidential election is current President Joseph Biden, who entered the Senate in 1973 (Roche 2020). This means that Biden’s political career has spanned for over 50 years, which is more than double the lifespan of most members of Gen Z. This recycling of political actors leads to a perceived lack of choice, which has the potential to contribute further disregard to a generation which is already becoming disillusioned with the notion of organized politics. With the continuously tightening constraints of the long-standing two party system, there is little hope for any candidate which is outside the purview of mainstream political thinking. When it is becoming increasingly common to choose the best candidate out of two undesirable options, how can one be expected to show continued interest in such a system?

What many members of Generation Z saw in Trump was ignorance to their needs, a fiercely out-of-touch mentality, and a lack of regard for any minority groups. However, this viewpoint is not held constant in every generation, as older cohorts see Trump as a figure attempting to return them to a more traditional and antiquated form of the United States. His primary campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again,” was not meant to resonate within younger generations, as they have no recollection of this time period when America was once “great.” Trump was attempting to appeal to the nostalgia of generations which aged into the Reagan era of politics, during a time that was seemingly simpler and filled with promises of the American dream. To these generations, Trump was not a political nightmare, but a fresh-faced hero who was untouched by the corruption of Washington.?

In the contemporary understanding of generations, there are six different cohorts which are utilized to identify individuals by age: The Silent Generation, Baby Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, Gen Z, and Gen Alpha. According to the Pew Research Center, Gen Z is defined as those born between the years 1997 and 2012, which ages this group between 12 and 27 (Debczak 2024). Within these larger generational groupings, there are several “microgenerations” which appear, including the “Zillenials” located on the cusp of Millenial and Gen Z labeling. These microgenerations serve to further extrapolate the complexities of identifying certain characteristics of generations, meaning that this work contains many commonly held generalities pertaining to members of Gen Z. For clarification, this work will focus on members of Generation Z who have aged into political involvement, meaning that traits of younger members will be largely unconsidered.?

Within the past 5 years, there have been several major political movements which have shaped the views of the American youth. These most notably include Black Lives Matter, March for Our Lives, the Environmental Movement, and the Free Palestine Movement. These have been at the forefront of the Gen Z political experience, and politicians have either largely ignored young protests or delivered empty promises which fail to address these pressing concerns. Generation Z has begun to learn their lesson: you can speak as loudly as you want, but your voice will remain muted. This leads to a lack of perceived political incorporation amongst Generation Z, as they begin to view their political efforts as being unrecognized in policymaking. Political incorporation, as defined by Prema Kurien, is “both a process of learning the rules of the game and an outcome, the ability to influence the political system and policy” (Kurien 2016, 274).?

Generation Z was raised in the booming ages of modern technology: high-speed Internet, smartphones with unlimited capabilities, social media constantly at their fingertips, and a 24-hour news cycle which never seems to cease production. Social media has created a sense of false imagery, but it has also seemed to contribute to a stream of constant information, as legacy news media is no longer the primary source of news dispersion. Gen Z is confronted with modern dilemmas in nearly every platform which they attribute themselves to. There is a shrinking amount of space online which allows for conversation free of political soundbites, and it is now commonplace for every Gen Z member to be an “activist” using these platforms. The fire underneath the hearth of many modern social movements has been ignited through social media, and they continue to burn with the dissemination of easily digested news pieces. Gen Z is also well-versed in utilizing social media to reach a wide audience, and they are frequently turning to Instagram, Twitter, and Snapchat to display both their own lives and their opinions regarding contemporary topics.?

Over any other generation, Gen Z is more anxious, depressed, and unsure about the security over their future. Corey Seemiller and Meghan Grace, two Gen Z “experts,” illustrate the impact of mental health conditions in their book Generation Z: A Century in the Making, stating: “In 2015, 12 percent of boys and 18 percent of girls under the age of 17 had received mental health services for anxiety disorders” (Seemiller and Grace 2019, 149), and 12.5 percent of adolescents of the same age range had at least “one major depressive episode in the last year” (Seemiller and Grace 2019, 149). These adolescents surveyed now range from age 21 to 26, which covers the oldest segment of Gen Z, and those with the ability to vote in previous elections. There are a host of problems which contribute to the increased prevalence of anxiety and depression in members of Gen Z. Seemiller and Grace outline five of these factors: the “fear of missing out” (FOMO), vicarious trauma, the pressure to maintain a personal online narrative, the digital reliving of conflict, and increased screen time (Seemiller and Grace 2019, 150-152).?

Generation Z is more digitally connected, movement-oriented, and likely to be depressed and anxious. Generation Z is also less likely to be politically heard, politically incorporated, and politically involved. How can a generation possibly be both more digitally connected and less politically involved? As the future of political turnover looms nearer, it is important to understand why this upcoming generation is so disillusioned with politics, government, and those that run the system. How does the perceived lack of political incorporation impact the civic engagement and political participation of Gen Z, and what other factors contribute to their sense of disconnect and disengagement from traditional political processes? How does Gen Z involvement compare to that of the Baby Boomer generation, and why was such disengagement not evident within the latter generation??

A History of Political Participation: How Gen Z and Baby Boomers Stay Politically (Un)Involved

Political participation has varied greatly over the span of several generations, as it is commonplace for methods of interaction to change across time. One effect of time on political participation is the expansion of ideological differences, which has created a distinct association between the terms “conservative” and “Republican,” as well as between “liberal” and “Democrat.” This crossing over between ideological and partisan identities has strengthened party loyalty, as it is much more commonplace to assign oneself with a particular political party in accordance with one’s ideological identity. Thus, when an individual is participating politically, they are most likely to involve themselves by voting for members of their own party, by petitioning for their local party officials, and by joining political organizations that are guided by party affiliation. This is more common in Gen Z because they have no recollection of ideology and partisan identity not being a homogenous concept, as “each succeeding cohort born in the twentieth century has grown up under increasingly divergent partisan coalitions” (Phillips 2022, 1487). This increasing divergence of partisan coalitions means that the electorate and representation of Gen Z’s parents and grandparents was more moderate than the electorate that Gen Z is currently aging into. Members of Gen Z have been born into a time period of increasingly fierce opposition which was more foreign to those of earlier generations, as “people born earlier have a more vivid memory of the parties as ideologically heterogenous coalitions, a time where opposing partisans were less alien” (Phillips 2022, 1487).?

Another effect of both time and an expansion of ideological differences has been the rise of affective polarization in the American electorate. This phenomenon is often viewed through the lens of Social Identity Theory, as “people internalize their partisan affiliations as part of their senses of self and want to feel positively about the groups they identify with” (Phillips 2022, 1485). In turn, when one’s own party loses an election, it feels like a personal defeat for the individual themselves. Generation Z is at the forefront of this phenomena, especially as social media has perpetuated the narrative of one’s party being a reflection of their character. It is now easier for an individual to identify what party a peer belongs to, as social media content often reflects one’s political affiliations. This further contributes to the in-group/out-group mentality, as it is now easier to create echo chambers of those who hold the same political views while completely tuning out those whom one might not agree with.?

In order to properly grasp the disillusionment of Generation Z, I find it important to identify a generational counterpart which reflects opposite outcomes: The Baby Boomer Generation. Members of the Baby Boomer Generation, or as they are more commonly referred to as “Boomers”, are born between the years 1946 and 1964. In their formative years, they experienced the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the looming threat of nuclear extinction at the hands of Cold War conflicts. This generation was raised in a time of seemingly endless conflicts, which instilled within them a mentality of preservation and self-reliance. The sheer size of this generation as compared to others has increased their influence on politics, as the voting pool which emerged was substantially larger.?

With their voting power, the Baby Boomer Generation actually turned the electorate more conservative, even though they were brought up in an era of rather progressive movements, such as the anti-war movements and the Civil Rights Movement. This trend of conservatism is not limited to the scope of the Republican Party, as it has permeated into the forecasting of candidate selection within the Democratic Party. In the 2020 Democratic Primary in Michigan, “...77% of voters under 30 chose Bernie Sanders for his progressive policies, while 72% of voters over 65 favored Joseph Biden” (Wu 2021). In comparison to Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden is rather moderate in his policies, especially the ones which he highlighted in his campaign. These more moderate policies included regulations on fracking, a public option for health insurance, and tuition-free community college. Sanders took many of Biden’s policies a step further, as he advocated for Medicare for All and free undergraduate education programs for all students, regardless of family income. The progressive and liberal policies of Sanders are found to be more attractive amongst younger voters, while the more moderate and conservative policies of Biden find a receptive audience amongst older Democrats. In this way, Baby Boomers are turning the electorate as a whole more conservative, both within the Republican and Democratic parties.?

Additionally, in the 1992 elections, the Baby Boomer generation was amongst the highest cohort turnout at 75% (Alwin 1998, 52-53). Generally, these trends have remained stagnant, but most recent elections have reflected that younger generations, such as Gen X, Millennials, and Gen Z, have begun to outnumber Boomers in elections. As younger generations continue to replace the effect of Baby Boomers on the electorate, the impact of such a shift will soon begin to unfold for analysis. Currently, it is difficult to assess such an impact, as 2024 will be the first presidential election in which many members of Generation Z are eligible to vote. If current trends of disinterest towards both presidential candidates remain stagnant, it is likely that Generation Z will not have as profound of an impact as other emerging generations have in past elections.

While there are many methods of remaining politically active, the main form of political activity that will be reflected is voting. It’s difficult to assess other forms of political involvement amongst Gen Z, as data is still developing in other areas, such as grassroots involvement and donating to political campaigns. When comparing the voter turnout of Baby Boomers in contrast to Gen Z, there is a large disparity present between the two. In the 1972 presidential election, eligible Baby Boomers turned out to vote at a rate of 54% (Winerip 2012). This rate has only stood to increase with subsequent elections. In 2016, Generation Z members turned out to vote at a rate of 40.10%, while 68.66% of Baby Boomers voted in the same year (Seemiller and Grace 2019, 267). This nearly 30-point gap is reflected almost identically in 2020, as the United States Census Bureau reports that 51.4% of Gen Z members voted in this election year, as compared to the 76% of Baby Boomers. 2020 saw a record number of people turn out to vote, no matter the generation they belonged to. It is difficult to determine if Gen Z turnout in the 2020 election can be attributed to a sense of self-motivation or to the general urgency pushed by both parties during both the campaign and election processes.?

The recasting of the same political characters for another election season may come into conflict with Gen Z motivation to vote, especially as their sense of choice is further depleted. These years are pivotal to the political impression of Gen Z, as “political engagement or disengagement during the impressionable years build habits that tend to be followed later in life” (Stoker 2014, 278). One’s early political habits have a long-lasting effect on the forecast for later involvement, which further strengthens the importance of understanding the issue at hand.? It is important to note that while overall voting rates are low amongst Gen Z, there is a greater participation rate amongst minority groups. According to the Pew Research Center, the racial and ethnic makeup of eligible Generation Z voters in the 2020 election was: 55% Non-Hispanic White, 22% Hispanic, 14% Black, 5% Asian, and 5% some other race or multiracial. When compared to the Baby Boomer generation during the same time, the makeup is as follows: 75% Non-Hispanic White, 9% Hispanic, 11% Black, 4% Asian, and 2% some other race or multiracial (Pew Research Center, 2020). The racial and ethnic makeup of an electorate is significant, as it has the potential to influence the types of candidates which run and are elected, as well as the subsequent policies which follow. As Generation Z continues to age and create a more ethnically and racially diverse landscape, there is a greater potential for policies which will inherently benefit those of minority populations.?

Remaining Uninvolved in an Increasingly Involved World

Generation Z is constantly in a whirlwind of information overload: who’s doing what, who they’re doing it with, and why they’re not a part of it. With such information serving as an incessant stimulus, it’s hard to escape the notion that they’ve been left out of the decision-making process. As mentioned previously, political incorporation is broken into two parts: the process of learning the “rules of the game,” and “the ability to influence the political system and policy.” As compared to other generations, Gen Z has less political interest, political knowledge, and political efficacy (Anderson et al. 2021, 70). This decline in interest and knowledge could be attributed to a variety of reasons, such as the lack of attention towards civics classes in secondary education, the expansion of sources which provide false information, or the lack of civic engagement which is translated within the family unit. As Gen Z continues to grow less knowledgeable about the system, they will become increasingly wary of joining or contributing to it in any manner.?

As mentioned previously, the calls for change from Generation Z have remained relatively ignored. Despite various protests and movements, there has been little perceived effort by government entities to address Gen Z grievances. When there is attempted policy from one branch, other entities step in to counter it. Take for example Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan, which was implemented by an executive order. This plan would greatly advantage younger generations, most notably current Gen Z college students and recent graduates. However, the conservative-majority Supreme Court ruled that this policy was unconstitutional, which completely subverted the benefits that would be funneled towards eligible loan recipients. Gen Z has loudly proclaimed their disdain for the high cost of college and the loans which accumulate in order to fund higher education. When a politician attempts to address such concerns, there are forces which subvert these efforts, leaving the needs of Gen Z unaddressed and neglected. This leaves the generation feeling powerless in government affairs, as their perceived political influence does not sway policymakers to enact timely change. Left without adequate political knowledge and a lack of perceived influence, Generation Z is relatively unincorporated into the current state of politics. As many within the generation are too young to run for office, this perceived lack of political incorporation is likely to stretch on.?

The first major conclusion I’ve come to regarding Gen Z and political incorporation is the impact of emotions and the lack of affinity amongst young voters and current politicians. Humans are often propelled to make certain decisions based on their emotional reaction to a person, situation, or outcome. Many contemporary political scientists tend to separate, or fail to recognize, the effect of emotions in political decision making amongst the American electorate. It is easy to assume that votes are cast in a manner that is logical and predicated on rational thought, but there is research which reflects that affinity plays an increasing role in the trend of political disengagement. Affinity, as defined by Nathan Manning and Mary Holmes, is the “spontaneous liking” for someone or something based on “some feeling of connection or commonality” (Manning and Holmes 2014, 702). Politicians rely on a sense of affinity amongst their constituents, and they must present themselves in a manner which appeals to the widest array of identity groups. This search for affinity comes to a clashing point when considering Gen Z voters, as candidates can no longer wholly represent the diverse identities of their constituents.?

Due to a variety of factors, politicians are now commonly viewed as celebrity figures, which places them into a realm which is completely separate from our own. This comes to clash when considering the viewpoint of Gen Z, as “...the elite educational and professional backgrounds of most politicians mean that connections with everyday life and ‘ordinary’ people tend to be superficial and must be performed rather than based on experience and actual shared social positions, as they may have been in the past” (Manning and Holmes 2014, 702-703). We are more likely to vote for politicians that resemble our identities and the identities of those whom we surround ourselves with. The average age of the American electorate is growing younger, as more Millennials and Generation Z members are eligible to vote with every passing election cycle. However, the average age of candidates fails to reflect this change. In 2020, America saw the two oldest presidential candidates run against each other, both of them being white, heterosexual men. The American electorate is growing increasingly diverse, but this is not properly reflected in the candidate choices. This creates a lack of affinity amongst young voters, which “... may produce unease or anger or disgust, or just annoyance at the people and structures that complicate, or fail to understand the importance of local conditions and ways of life” (Manning and Homes, 2014, 705). These subsequent emotions create a sense of disillusionment within Generation Z in regard to the system which is meant to represent them. This leads to a reduced desire to participate in elections, affiliate with political parties, and financially contribute to political candidates.?

The lack of affinity with political candidates leads into a large-scale issue which is the second major conclusion of this work: the absence of affiliation and connection with a particular political party. This lack of affiliation with party politics is not a new phenomenon. Phillip Converse, a prominent political scientist, noted that partisan strength did increase with age between 1952 and 1964, but that the next decades presented a decline in partisan attachment. According to additional findings by the Pew Research Center: “...younger voters are considerably more likely than older voters to opt out of identifying directly with a party… ?only about half (52%) of voters under 25 identify directly with a party (38% Democrat, 14% Republican). About half instead say they are something else or independent, with 28% leaning Democratic and 20% leaning Republican” (Pew Research Center 2024). By this analysis, Baby Boomers are likely to have stronger partisan connections than the subsequent generations that follow. Paul Abrahamson attempts to explain this phenomenon: “Young adults may have been socialized to learn weak party attachments during a formative socialization period. Having learned weak partisan loyalties, these weak attachments persist as they age” (Abrahamson 1979, 80). Coupled with socialization, Generation Z remains relatively unaffiliated with current political parties because they feel unaligned with both the Democrats and the GOP. The limited choices fail to encompass the ever-growing diversity of Generation Z, and they are misrepresented by both parties.?

Increasingly, members of Generation Z are becoming frustrated with the Republican party, in part due to the MAGA era of Trump. In 2016, Trump was able to secure the presidency because he dug into a sense of nostalgia which appealed to “declining segments of the electorate: older, rural, white, and non college-educated voters” (Fisher 2020, 40). In other terms, Trump is the candidate who represents what Gen Z is not - they’re not old, they’re moving to urban sectors, they’re growing ethnically diverse, and they’re the most educated generation. 2020 presidential election polls indicated that 65% of eligible Gen Z adults voted for Biden, which is 11% more than any other generation (CNBC). As another presidential election looms closer with the same two candidates, it will be difficult to determine if Gen Z truly feels disenfranchised with the Republican Party, or just Trump as a political figure. Gen Z may also be unlikely to affiliate with the GOP due to their lack of regard for topics which they consider imperative - particularly gun restrictions, climate awareness, cheaper public education, and advocacy for expanding gender and sexuality policies.?

While there was a notable preference for Biden in the 2020 election, there is dually a lack of association between Gen Z voters and the Democratic party. Biden’s victory can likely be attributed equally to both the young voter disconnect with Trump and the appeal of Biden himself. It wasn’t that Biden was a particularly alluring candidate, but more that Trump was a particularly unappealing choice for Gen Z. While Democrats are in greater alignment with the ideals of Gen Z, they are still unsuccessful at addressing their major concerns. The current Democratic Party is more moderate than the upcoming generation, which has the potential to weaken their influence amongst more progressive independents.?

The lack of affiliation with either party is largely attributed to the notion that members of Generation Z are becoming increasingly issue-based, which is the third finding reflected within this work. The concerns of this generation seem more pertinent to their future than ever before, as irreversible consequences are beginning to unfold as policymakers fail to take action on pressing issues. Because Gen Z sees neither party as the promoter of their concerns, they then feel unincorporated into the political sphere in traditional ways. Due to their perceived lack of incorporation in more traditional spheres, Gen Z has started to make their mark through social movements, which can be extremely political in nature. Many of these social movements revolve around extremely political issues, and most intermix humanitarian concerns within their demands for change. While there have been many social movements which would be categorized as more politically liberal in nature, there seems to be a lack of widespread organization for the formation of politically conservative movements, especially when considering Gen Z involvement in their formation and endurance. This may be in part due to the difficulty in understanding Rightist social movements through the lens of contemporary social movements as “...rightist movements fit awkwardly into the theoretical templates of social movements that were largely developed in studies of feminism, the New Left, and civil rights. Such progressive movements, based on ‘claim making by disadvantaged minorities’ are poor models for movements of privileged groups” (Blee and Creasap 2010, 271). Many Rightist movements today stand as “countermovements” to the more progressive social movements which are highlighted on social media and other news outlets. Unfortunately, there has been little research conducted on Gen Z involvement in such countermovements, meaning that it is difficult to gauge their level of participation in these Rightist movements over others.?

As has been shown by the lack of identification with modern political parties, Gen Z are no longer fascinated by the hat tricks of political parties, as they need to see real change which back up the promises that have been made for decades. John Della Volpe explains this notion by stating, “... to recruit Zoomers for any meaningful attachment to a political campaign meant connecting them to a cause with a higher purpose than electing a specific candidate” (Della Volpe 2021, 152-153). This can be witnessed in the young progressive backing of Bernie Sanders in the 2016 presidential election. Sanders represented a call for a “higher purpose” for many, as he passionately campaigned on issues which were pertinent to young demographics. This attachment to Sanders is rather fascinating when viewed in the context of the disconnect felt between Gen Z and presidential candidates Biden and Trump. As another old, cisgender, and white man in the fold of politics, it could be assumed that young voters wouldn’t be drawn to a candidate like Sanders. One potential explanation could be the lack of alternative options in the 2020 election, as most candidates were seen as slightly different varieties of each other. If a younger candidate were to hold the same progressive ideals as Sanders, it could be safely assumed that they would be able to consolidate more support due to their young age and ability to create a familiar attachment with Gen Z voters.?

For as long as Generation Z adults can remember, the world could be accessed through their fingertips. The rapidly advancing technology of their upbringing had the potential to increase connectivity amongst their peers and to bring about a greater sense of unification. However, technology has proven to contribute to isolationism rather than connection, which has created a growing sense of individualism amongst Gen Z teenagers and adults. There is a paradoxical relationship between technology and connectivity which is evident here. How could far-reaching technology create such a divide between its users? Recently, there was a study conducted which empirically explains this paradoxical relationship. In this study of 1787 young adults aged 19 to 32, it was found that “using social media 2 or more hours each day doubled the odds for perceived social isolation compared with use less than 30 minutes each day” (Small et. al 2020, 183). This could be due to the elevation of peers and their crafted image at the hands of social media, which creates social divides between certain groups. Social media usage proves to be a toxic cycle, as Gen Z feels like they’re missing out whether they’re using it or not. Increasingly, Gen Z has seen themselves as being collective entities on social media rather than a part of a particular group, as there is a diminishing number of social spaces outside of social media and technology. Individualism as a concept is not the issue. However, the rapid expansion of such individualism is becoming dangerous in contemporary spaces. Individualism is the enemy of collective action, as it encourages self-interest and dismantles the strongholds of social movements. The concept of individualism is dangerous to democratic involvement, as it “... stunts engagement in electoral politics because individuals perceive change and risk management as individualized projects. Late modernity teaches citizens to be responsible for shaping their own lives rather than collectively creating social change” (Suchowerska 2013, 92). While Gen Z has participated in a variety of social movements, they are relatively short-lived. The Gen Z mindset is one which is incredibly individual, as it has been impressed by other generations to be self-reliant and self-motivated. The influx of potential hazards to the futures of Gen Z members has created a need to consider one’s own wellbeing over the needs of a community. This limits the capacity for change within social movements, as they are not as empowered by greater collective action.?

The Influence of Period Effects on the Disillusionment of the American Electorate

When contemplating what generation would be best suited to compare with Generation Z, it soon became clear that in many ways, the Baby Boomer Generation is the antithesis of everything that Gen Z tends to stand for. This is partly the product of generational effects, as these cohorts are the result of the events, figures, and innovations which occurred during their upbringing. Additionally, the Baby Boomer generation was not raised with the same technological advancement which perpetuated every facet of Gen Z life. The rapid nature of news media in the Gen Z upbringing created a narrative of constant stimuli, where world events were becoming increasingly entangled with individual spheres of reality. Baby Boomers drew much of their news information from legacy news sources, such as Fox News, CNN, and the New York Times. In order to gain current information, one would have to actively seek it out, whether that be through radio, television, or newspapers. There was the ability to remove oneself from the current affairs, which is absent in Gen Z, and this lent to a different perspective for the Baby Boomer generation.?

Additionally, the increased landscape of technology in contemporary Gen Z life has created a diverse perspective from that of Baby Boomers by drastically shortening attention spans, impairing social and emotional intelligence, creating technology addictions, and adversely impacting cognitive and brain development (Small et. al 2020, 182-183). Technology has proved to be a detriment to the cognitive abilities of young adults and children, who are developing under the careful care of cellphones, tablets, and other technology forms. In a study of children aged 8 to 12 years, “more screen and less reading time were associated with decreased brain connectivity between regions controlling word recognition and both language and cognitive control” (Small et. al 183). From this, it is clear that Gen Z sees, understands, and digests the world and its current events in a different manner than Baby Boomers.?

The large question which remains to be answered is: why is the high political involvement which is perceived within the Baby Boomer generation not reflected in the political habits of Generation Z? While it has been established that generational effects have contributed to the distinct perspectives between Generation Z and the Baby Boomer Generation, there is a deeper facet to the divide. The key contributor to alternate perspectives on political involvement is the concept of period effects, which is defined as “experiencing an event, circumstance, or societal force regardless of age” (Seemiller and Grace 2019, 21). These effects have the innate ability to transcend age or generational cohorts, and they will impact not only the political beliefs of individuals, but also their morals and values, personal interests, perspectives of government and society, and religious affiliations. The types of major events between the Baby Boomer generation and Generation Z have differed substantially. These events, and the way in which the government responded, have had a major impact on the political perspectives of both generations, as well as their willingness to participate in political activities.?

The formative years of Baby Boomers rested on two pillars: conflict and progressive movements. In regard to conflict, older Boomers witnessed the unfolding of the Korean War, fought in the Vietnam War, and were threatened by nuclear attacks throughout the Cold War. This instilled within the Baby Boomer generation a certain responsibility to one’s national security in addition to a level of pride in the apparent strength and resiliency of the nation. While conflict marked a notable portion of Boomer upbringing, there was also the aspect of social movements, which resulted in substantial changes in the status quo of American society. Movements such as the Civil Rights Movement, the feminist movement, and the antiwar movements all produced citizens which were engaged in the present state of politics and policy. Whether individuals were in support of these movements was of no significance, as the presence of their opposition created a deeper political impact. There also emerged a substantial counterculture movement, which worked to suppress the impact of the more progressive movements which were taking place. What is remarkable about these events was not merely the fact that they happened, but that the government was active in responding to such movements. The active anti-war movement in opposition to the American presence in Vietnam, coupled with other factors, served to pressure the government to remove themselves from foreign lands. Additionally, the emergence of the Civil Rights Movement and the feminist movement helped form an onslaught of policy which transformed societal dynamics for certain minority groups. In these cases, the government was extremely responsive to the demands of the public, and it served to produce substantial changes and reform.?

There are several major events which have transpired in the time of Generation Z, and they have all created period effects which altered perspectives of political involvement. As opposed to the events of the Baby Boomer Generation, it is more difficult to categorize the recent events which have affected members of the Gen Z cohort. Since the turn of the century, there have been several distinct conflicts, crises, epidemics and social changes, many of which members of Gen Z can actively recall. The September 11th terrorist attacks are likely the first major event that the oldest members of Gen Z can remember. The subsequent War on Terror in the Middle East has spanned throughout the lifetimes of this cohort, and it has been a constant fissure in understanding perspectives of foreign conflict. Other major events, such as Hurricane Katrina, the 2008 financial crisis, the housing crisis, and the election of Barack Obama as the first Black president, are all early moments which are permanently seared into the minds of Gen Z members. Additionally, recent social movements have come to define the priorities of Gen Z in politics. Climate change reform, Black Lives Matter, pro-choice protests, March for Our Lives, and pro-Palestinian movements are only scratching the surface of the multitude of issues which Gen Z has dedicated themselves towards.?

With this in mind, what separates the period effects of Baby Boomers and Gen Z isn’t the type of events which transpired, but the response (or lack thereof) from policymakers. Boomers witnessed their concerns be met and addressed by their elected representatives, whereas Gen Z has seen themselves overlooked several times over. In hindsight, the government of the Baby Boomers was more proactive at addressing the concerns which were highlighted through major social movements. The Civil Rights Movement helped produce the historically significant Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 1965. The anti-war movements helped reshape the public’s view of the Vietnam War, which influenced how the war was conducted. The feminist movement paved the way for anti-discrimination laws and brought widespread attention to issues, such as sexual assault, in the workplace. The New Right emergence in the 1970s laid the groundwork for the attractiveness of conservative policies introduced by Reagan in the 80s. There is a clear thread which runs through these distinct movements: they all had a clear impact on policy making and agenda setting at the federal level.?

Gen Z has retrospectively learned of their government falling short on events which happened in the early years of their lives - such as the response to Hurricane Katrina, the questioning of the legitimacy of Obama’s candidacy, and the large bailouts which were given to the corporations that caused the Great Recession of 2008. All that Generation Z has known is disappointment at the hands of the government that their parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents put into office. In his book, Fight: How Gen Z is Channeling their Fear and Passion to Save America, John Vella Dope sums up the experience of Generation Z in one sentence: “For most of their lives, Gen Zers have been failed by our nation” (Vella Dope 2021, 18). Whereas the concerns of Baby Boomers were addressed, Gen Z has been conditioned to learn that their own agendas don’t align with the interests of those who have the power for change.?

What is also interesting to note is how these different generations respond and adapt to stress and major global events which are evident in period effects. This is witnessed in the COVID-19 pandemic and its subsequent aftereffects, which halted the world and the daily lives of those in it. A recent study published in 2023 highlights the narrative of older generations adapting to stressful circumstances of the global pandemic in a more proactive way than younger generations like Gen Z. This study concludes that “older adults are more successful at navigating COVID-19 mental health concerns and maladaptive coping behaviors,” and they show “less reactivity overall to stressors than younger adults” (Grelle et. al 2023, 3). Previously, it has been established that Gen Z suffers from mental illness at unprecedented rates, and mental health risk factors have been further perpetuated by the onset of the global pandemic. The reasons for such disparities in mental health adaptation are relatively unknown, but the article suggests that it could be due to older generations’ experience with trauma and crises (Grelle et. al 2023, 3). Such findings give way to the question: does mental health have an impact on potential Gen Z involvement with typical political processes? One thing is for certain: amongst Gen Z members, there is a struggle to combat pressing feelings of hopelessness. Members of Gen Z, roughly 42%, are about twice as likely as Americans over 25, about 23%, to battle feelings of hopelessness (Stern 2022). This sense of hopelessness could be reflective of the increasingly volatile nature of world events in addition to the lack of support which many generational members feel. Hopelessness creates a sense of complacency with the current system, as there is no expectation for the future to improve under any system. Perhaps Baby Boomers are more involved in part due to their greater sense of optimism for the United States and the policy outcomes which they produce. The disparities in mental health are important to consider when gauging Gen Z involvement in politics, especially as Baby Boomers have significantly higher rates of success in navigating mental health concerns.?

Conclusion: The Future of Politics in the Hands of a Disillusioned Generation

Generation Z is less politically educated, politically interested, and politically engaged, and these trends are not fully or properly articulated in modern political science. They vote at a lesser rate than any other generation, as they have been conditioned to believe that civic engagement is no longer rewarded with policy which is pertinent to their futures. This has led to a generation which is disengaged with politics in a way which has not been reflected in previous generations. Factors such as a perceived lack of political incorporation have created a hesitancy to become involved with a political system which refuses to value Gen Z input. Period effects, the decline of affinity amongst politicians and constituents, the prioritization of issues over party politics, and an increase in individualism are all additional factors which have influenced the Gen Z interest in political involvement.?

The Baby Boomer generation had the highest voter turnout in the 2020 election, even as COVID-19 threatened the health and wellbeing of susceptible aging populations. Baby Boomers have been more involved because they have witnessed their protests be met with the force of a cooperative and understanding government. They have witnessed a government which is responsive to their political desires, and they have rewarded such responsiveness by active political participation and strong party loyalty. Policymakers are sympathetic to the needs of the aging, which comes at the cost of disenfranchising the nation’s fledgling adults.?

While this writing may seem rather bleak to the hope of the nation’s political future, there is a glimmer of redemption. Generation Z has proven that they care deeply about the security and wellbeing of their futures, and they have reflected this care through public demonstrations and online attention. This generation not only has a passion for their own futures, but for the futures of those yet to come. There are a whole host of issues which plague both this generation and those to come, and there is little time left to identify solutions. Gen Z is aware of this lack of time, and the inattentiveness by the government to address pertinent issues leaves behind feelings of resentment and a sense of increasingly divergent policy priorities.?

In a technologically forward society, it is becoming increasingly difficult to remove oneself from the expansive landscape of party politics and current events. Technology permeates nearly every facet of Gen Z existence, and it is easy to point fingers to fault it for decreased cognitive functioning and other increasingly common issues. However, it is imperative to address technology and its capacities for change in the hands of Gen Z. In the last 10 years, there have been several social movements which have started or expanded in an online space. This can be credited to the expanded network of social media, which allows for the recognition of shared experiences amongst populations. Issues which were once kept stifled were suddenly under the lens of society, as victims were more likely to recognize similar circumstances through the testimonies of others. In this way, technology and social media instilled a sense of collectiveness, and perpetrators could no longer intimidate victims into silence. This was witnessed in the #MeToo movement, as women came forward with allegations of sexual assault and harassment against celebrities, public figures, and executives within their organizations. It is unlikely that such collectiveness could have occurred without the presence of social media. Through its usage, the mantra of the movement rang through: you are not alone in your plight. Other movements which found space and collective action online include: #BlackLivesMatter, #BringBackOurGirls, #HeforShe, and #YouAintNoMuslimBruv (Hitchings-Hales and Calderwood 2017). These movements found leverage as Gen Z began to make their way into diverse technological spaces, and younger generations can largely be credited with their expansion online.?

Additionally, the increasingly diverse identities of Gen Z have led to a greater appreciation for others and their respective rights. Earlier generations were unwilling to openly confront racism, homophobia, misogyny, transphobia, and a variety of other societal ills. For Gen Z, identifying and correcting these issues isn’t just a choice, but an active priority (McBeth 2022, 454). While they may not be involved in contemporary politics in traditional ways, there is hope that as Gen Z ages and replaces the current cast of policymakers, they will have the courage to address the societal injustices which have been left untouched.?

As Gen Z ages and continues to enter the political arena, there will be an expanded interest in conducting research on their political involvement. While current trends reflect rather discouraging data, upcoming elections may prove to reverse such projections. Gen Z may not be voting at steady levels, but they do participate actively in social movements, which gives a glimmer of hope for their future political forecasting. Perhaps the future will reflect a different narrative surrounding political involvement: one that is not defined simply by voting, but by active participation in addressing social inequalities that transcends the bare minimum involvement. It is possible that Gen Z doesn’t want to transcribe to the norms of current political involvement, and that their involvement seems minimal because it looks different than what older generations expect of them. Time will reflect how these norms will shift as certain generations drop off from political involvement and Gen Z and subsequent generations continue to enter the political mainframe.?

Bibliography

Abramson, Paul R. 1979. “Developing Party Identification: A Further Examination of Life-Cycle, Generational, and Period Effects.” American Journal of Political Science 23 (1): 77-96

Alwin, Duane F. 1998. “The Political Impact of the Baby Boom: Are There Persistent Generational Differences in Political Beliefs and Behavior?” Generations: Journal of the American Society on Aging 22 (1): 46-54.

Anderson, Kim, Jakob Ohme, Camilla Bjarnoe, Mats Joe Bordacconi, Erik Albaek, and Claes de Vreese. 2021. Generational Gaps in Political Media Use and Civic Engagement: From Baby Boomers to Generation Z. New York: Routledge.?

Barroso, Amanda. 2020. “Gen Z eligible voters reflect the growing racial and ethnic diversity of U.S. electorate.” Pew Research Center, About 1 in 5 eligible Gen Z voters in U.S. are Hispanic | Pew Research Center

Blee, Kathleen, Kimberly Creasap. 2010. “Conservative and Right-Wing Movements.” The Annual Review of Sociology 36 (1): 269-286.?

Debczak, Michele. 2024. “These Revised Guidelines Redefine Birth Years and Classifications for Millenials, Gen Z, and Gen Alphas.” Mental Floss, Here Are the Age Ranges for Millennials, Gen Z, and Gen Alpha (mentalfloss.com)

Della Volpe, John. 2022. Fight: How Gen Z is Channeling their Fear and Passion to Save America. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Fisher, Patrick. 2020. “Generational Replacement and the Impending Transformation of the American Electorate.” Politics & Policy 48 (1): 38-68.?

Grelle, Kaitlin, Neha Shresthra, Megan Ximenes, Jessica Perrotte, Millie Cordaro, Rebecca Deason, and Krista Howard. 2023. “The Generation Gap Revisited: Generational Differences in Mental Health, Maladaptive Coping Behaviors, and Pandemic-Related Concerns During the Initial COVID-19 Pandemic.” J Adult Dev. 16 (1): 1-12

Hitchings-Hales, James, and Imogen Calderwood. 2017. “8 Massive Moments When Hashtag Activism Really Worked.” Global Citizen, 8 Massive Moments When Hashtag Activism Really Worked (globalcitizen.org)

Kurien, Prema. 2016. “Race, Religion, and the Political Incorporation of Native Americans.” Journal of Religious and Political Practice 2 (3): 273-295.

Manning, Nathan, and Mary Holmes. 2014. “Political Emotions: A Role for Feelings of Affinity in Citizens’ (Dis)Engagements with Electoral Politics?” Sociology 48 (4): 698-714.

McBeth, Mark K. “Coddles or Engaged? Teaching Political Tolerance to Generation Z Students.” 2022. Journal of Political Science Education 18 (4): 438-457.?

Pew Research Center. 2024. “Age, generational cohorts and party identification.” Age, generation and party identification of registered voters | Pew Research Center

Phillips, Joseph. 2022. “Affective Polarization: Over Time, Through the Generations, and During the Lifespan.” Political Behavior 44: 1483-1508.?

Roche, Darragh. 2020. “What Joe Biden Has Achieved in 40 Years of Politics.” Newsweek, What Joe Biden Has Achieved in 40 Years of Politics (newsweek.com)

Seemiller, Corey, and Meghan Grace. 2019. Generation Z: A Century in the Making. New York: Routledge.

Small, Gary, Jooyeon Lee, Aaron Kaufman, Jason Jalil, Prabha Siddarth, Himaja Gaddipati, Teena Moody, Susan Bookheimer. 2020. “Brain health consequences of digital technology use.” Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience 22 (2): 179-187.

Stern, Caryl. 2022. “Generation Z is Waging a Battle Against Depression, Addiction, and Hopelessness.” Walton Family Foundation, Generation Z is Waging a Battle Against Depression, Addiction and Hopelessness (waltonfamilyfoundation.org)

Stoker, Laura. 2014. “Reflections on the Study of Generations in Politics.” The Forum 12 (3): 377-396.?

Suchowerska, Roksolana. 2013. “A Generational Model of Youth’s Engagement in Politics.” International Review of Modern Sociology 39 (1): 89-109

Winerip, Michael. 2012. “Boomers, Millennials and the Ballot Box.” The New York Times, Voter Turnout for Boomers and Millennials - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

Wu, Carissa. 2021. “The Generational Divide in Politics.” The Science Survey, The Generational Divide in Politics – The Science Survey