The Mormon Political Identity
The question this week is a
complicated one: is there a distinct LDS political identity in the United
States, and what does that mean in terms of primordialist and constructivist
arguments about political identity? There's a lot to get into here, so I'll start
by discussing LDS political identity, then move on to cause, and finally I'll
discuss the broader implications.
So, what is a political
identity? As noted by Professor Hawkins and our Political Science 150 class, a
political identity is any sort of identifying characteristic or association
that changes the way that an individual makes political decisions, usually in
the form of voting. Another definition is offered by the textbook Comparative
Politics, by David J. Samuels, that states that political identity consists
of “the ways that individuals categorize themselves and others, and how they
understand the power relationships of domination that exist between groups”
(149). In other words, our political identity is made up of our perspective on
things that shape the way we see the world and vote. This becomes more
complicated when we try to divide where identity, or the way we look at things,
starts to become political. Which parts, exactly, make us change our political
decisions, and which parts are just opinions?
This is the “puzzle” we must
deal with as we look at LDS political identity. The argument is not whether or
not a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is affected by
their religious views, which is undeniably true (assuming they actually believe
the doctrine). Belief is necessary, but insufficient to create a political
identity. An example may best explain the difference. Members of the church
believe that honesty is a virtue. Suppose there was a candidate that that had
demonstratively lied on a previous issue and was not a member of the church.
The voter in question could not vote for them because they believe the doctrine
that lying is bad, or they could not vote for them because they are not a
member of the church. In one case, it is a personal perspective on a point of
doctrine that makes the decision, in the other, it is membership (or lack
thereof) in a community that determines their vote. The real point is this –
did being a member of the church cause the person to vote one way, or
was it something else? In the first case it is a matter of identity, in the
second, of political identity.
The short answer to this is
that yes, within the United States, there is a political identity. It is not
necessarily very frequently invoked, but it does exist. Identifying its causes
can make the issue clearer, and the easiest way to do that is through an
example. Mormons have a reputation for being largely conservative. This is a
matter of identity, not political identity; it all comes back to causation.
Being a member of the church did not cause the members to become politically
conservative. An example of the true LDS political identity was given on
utahdatapoints.com by Quin Monson in the article “Do LDS Dems like Mitt
Romney?” posted on the main page on August 22nd, 2012. Monson points
out that “16% of Democrats from other faiths and 19% of non-religious
Democrats” approve of Governor Romney, while 42% of LDS Democrats approve of
Romney. Those polled all lived in Utah. With a difference that big in the same
geographic area, it is safe to assume that the difference was largely caused
by their faith; they saw someone of the same faith and (theoretically) values
as them, and despite the fact that they disagreed on policy terms, they
still approved of him. In that, we can say being LDS has become, if it wasn't
before, a political identity.
What does this mean beyond
the Mormon world? This has real theoretical ramifications. The two main
theories on political identity are the primordialist and constructivist
positions. Primordialist theories state that our identity (and thus the parts
of our identity that eventually become our political identity as well) is
determined at birth. They include our race, where we are born, the culture of
the area, our religion, our family values, etc. The fact that Utah is so
predominantly Mormon, and that this shift is so powerful, are big arguments in
favor of the primordialist position. Despite our professed political beliefs
across the spectrum, up to (assuming all Mormon Republicans support Romney) 71%
of Mormons support Romney across the board. That is a staggeringly huge number
in political terms.
On the other hand, this
information can be interpreted in favor of the constructivist argument as well.
The primordialist position says that we are inevitably formed by the culture in
which we live – yet we can see serious grounds for claiming that that is simply
untrue. Despite being born into, generally speaking, the same area, religion,
and even circumstances, there are two critical areas of difference. First off,
there are Mormon Democrats. They have already broken out of the
political identity they were born into. Secondly, while many of them did
support Romney, and almost certainly because of his faith, 58% of them did
not. Despite the overwhelming cultural support of Romney by the majority of
people around them, that 58% did not go with the crowd, or their geographic
area, or their religion, or their race, or any other demographic – they made
their own decisions to believe, think, and critically, vote a different
way on this political issue. Their political identity, then, is self-formed,
not merely a product of their upbringing, which lends strong support to the
constructivist claims.
In short, there is Mormon
political identity. That it exists, and occasionally comes out strongly, is
evidence that there is something to the primordialist claims. But the fact that
there is a sizable group that does not conform to these pressures or culture
teachings or what have you is strong evidence that while we are, indeed,
influenced by the factors mentioned by the primordialist theories, they do not
pre-determine our political identity. We are free to choose, after all.
Sources
Samuels, David. Comparative
Politics. New York: Pearson Education, 2013. Print.
Monson, Quin. "Do LDS
Dems like Mitt Romney?" Utah Data Points. 22 Aug. 2012. Web.
<utahdatapoints.com>.
No comments:
Post a Comment