The surprising lessons Millennials took from 9/11

A new study suggests that 9/11 and its aftermath left Millennials 'deeply skeptical' of US military intervention abroad. They're supportive of humanitarian action.

|
Suzanne Carr Rossi/The Free Lance-Star/AP/File
About 75 students from the University of Mary Washington protest the Board of Visitors on April 17, 2015, after their meeting at the Jepson Alumni Center in Fredericksburg, Va. The group wants the university to divest in fossil fuels and have been protesting for a few weeks.

A new study suggests that Millennials' views of America's role in world have been shaped by 9/11 – but perhaps not the way some might expect.

Millennials – those Americans born between 1980 and 1997 – are “deeply skeptical” of United States military intervention in foreign countries, the study by the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute notes.

Although the 9/11 attacks took place during a “critical period of opinion shaping” for the generation, it did not generate “greater concern about terrorist attacks and increased support for aggressive foreign policies,” the study found.

Instead, Millennials “perceive the world as significantly less threatening than their elders do, and therefore show increased support for a more restrained foreign policy even as they still support global engagement through diplomacy and trade,” the report finds. “Millennials are less concerned about supposed national security threats, more sanguine about the new distribution of power and the rise of China, and least likely to describe themselves as a ‘patriotic person.’ ”

Indeed, Millennials appear to regard 9/11 as evidence of a need for greater US restraint. The Cato Institute researchers, for example, point to a 2011 Pew Research Center study that found that Millennials are more likely than older generations to believe that the US’s own policies may have contributed in some way to the 9/11 attacks.

Having been witness to what they widely consider to be the failures and waste of the US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, they are less likely to support military force in “what may be a permanent case of ‘Iraq Aversion,’ ” the study posits, which is equivalent to what young adults in the 1960s and '70s called “Vietnam Syndrome.” 

In part as a result, perhaps, Millennials remain particularly supportive of humanitarian interventions to prevent large-scale humanitarian crises, “so long as it doesn’t involve US-centric solutions to the internal politics of other nations.” 

This should all be considered important grist for any political campaign, note authors A. Trevor Thrall and Erik Goepner, who used extensive polling data to probe the opinions of Millennials. 

They concluded the report with some advice for presidential candidates who might be tempted to stake out hawkish positions as the campaign heats up.

These hopefuls “should not waste time trying to convince Millennials that Russia’s behavior spells the start of a new Cold War or that China’s rising power signals the need for massive increases in the defense budget,” they advise. 

“Nor should candidates try to convince Millennials that US grand strategy must revolve around a sacred duty to eradicate international terrorism.”

Millennials now make up one quarter of the US population and an increasingly important voting block.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to The surprising lessons Millennials took from 9/11
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2015/0616/The-surprising-lessons-Millennials-took-from-9-11
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe