Youth Identity

By Dan Florrimell

Almost twenty years ago, sociologist Robert Putnam described the decline of American participation in group activities. The title of the paper which set this out, “Bowling alone”, was reference to the increased number of individual bowlers while the number of bowling leagues had declined. People were placing less faith in social organisations.

In this, Australians have followed our American cousins. While the times were a-changin’ as our parents grew up, we have known no other way; we are most defined by the phenomenon of rampant individualism. Our collective identity is that we have no collective identity.

The evidence for this changing pattern of activity is in the organisations which are failing to appeal to the new mindset. Grassroots sporting clubs, an Australian institution, are in decline. Young people have traditionally been the lifeblood of these groups but that once dependable source of new members is drying up. Without unprecedented government funding, these clubs would likely be struggling to get by.

This extends to a grander scale of institution. Church attendance is at record lows even though Australians are still reasonably religious. Young people are turning away from organised religion. Similarly, Australian political parties are subsisting on ever smaller membership bases. This could be attributed to reluctance to subsume conflicted beliefs where the individual and the organisation differ. This lack of appeal to young people is worrying – these are organisations with immense power and capacity for achieving change, good or bad.

The activity which seems to have taken the place of the above also reflects the new way of thinking. Rather than play sport, often a team activity, gyms are experiencing a massive boom. TV watching hours continue to increase and a recent video game became the highest selling entertainment product of all time. Even Facebook, although an inherently social experience, allows you to control very deliberately who you wish to interact with and how.

But being labelled ‘individualistic’ is not disparagement. Creativity and individualism are brilliant partners, and in the developed world the people just starting their career are more likely than ever to be using their creativity for a job. Even in seemingly hum-drum sectors – corporate roles, administration and IT to name a few – creativity is prized by employers. Not to mention the very valuable and aptly named endeavour of creative accounting.

As well, our generation ought to be the most free-thinking to have ever lived. Much decline in the venerable institutions mentioned above is due to new rejection of traditions and authorities. These once powerful influences seem, in the eyes of many, to have maintained their societal sway by sheer historical inertia.

In the past, sons were expected to follow their fathers into their trade while daughters became wives and mothers, as their own mother had done. This social order is unimaginable to most young people today. We feel far less constrained in choosing our pathway through life, trying to find a rewarding vocation rather than a stable career.

One piece of evidence for this is the significant increase in Development Studies graduates recently, particularly compared to the relatively modest increase in jobs in the sector over the same period. Helping the world's poorest is important work, but the pay isn't great and the competition is fierce. Young people, at least while we study, are prepared to wear that to do something they're passionate about.

Another example of the casting off of tradition is on gay marriage. Polling consistently shows that whatever the overall result, the younger the respondent the more likely they were to be in favour of it. Most young people disregard or are oblivious to religious and political criticism of the idea. Confronted with a critic who argues allowing same-sex marriage flies in the face of thousands of years of practice, many will shrug their shoulders and ask, “so what?” Those critics often seem dumbfounded by this response, but they are observing not apathy but a culture gap.

Rather than political or religious movements, young people seem attracted to single-issue groups. They appeal directly and simply to an audience that knows their values will align neatly, and they’re much more action-oriented and participatory than other formal social organisations. Youths do real and very valuable work in these organisations.

All of this and far more make up the mark individualism has upon our identity.

Putnam thought that the decline in participation would lead to big problems for democracy. It’s easy to see how you could think that, but in reality young people are just choosing a very different path. I’m confident that when the time comes for this generation to step up to the plate, to start making the hard calls when they assume leadership, they'll be able to do it. There's going to be a reshaping of the organisations they lead and passion and creativity will be at the forefront of this transformation.

But there will be lessons to learn along the way. Previous generations have, after all, gotten a lot right and mindlessly discarding tradition is at least as inhibiting as slavish obedience to it.

In particular, we will learn that to achieve in the name of those important personal passions involves sacrifice. That sacrifice often comes in the form most painful to us – the compromise of ideals in the name of results.

Daniel Florrimell is former Campaigns Director of The Oaktree Foundation, Australia’s largest youth-run anti-poverty NGO. He is a recent graduate of Monash University (BA/BEc). Daniel is drawn to big problems that aren’t widely recognised and smart solutions that aren’t yet appreciated.