Key Identity: College or Not?

Quote of the day:
“In Pennsylvania, Obama did everything conceivable to win over Clinton’s working-class voters. The effort was a failure. The great uniter failed to unite. In this election, persuasion isn’t important. Social identity is everything. Demography is king.”
--David Brooks, in today’s New York Times

David Brooks’ column today points out a gradual yet profound demographic and cultural shift that’s happened in the U.S. since the 1950s. It’s worth spending a couple minutes reading it, if you haven’t already.

He suggests that the social hierarchy that was present for many generations has given way to an education hierarchy.

Due to the fact that there is now such a large percentage of college graduates, they are forming a sort of tribal cohort and making life decisions accordingly. So are those with no college degree.

While there is little conflict between these groups, there is a certain common worldview that is prevalent among the well-educated, and another among the less-educated, Brooks says.

These two groups supersede anything regional, though they tend to live in separate parts of cities and counties. They are, in effect, distinct tribes.

In the Presidential campaign we endlessly hear about “black and white,” “working class and elites,” “rich and poor,” “urban and rural,” “women and men,” “young and old” and so forth.

It’s very interesting to consider that the real determinant may be “college degree or no college degree.”