The phrase “children will likely be children” has lengthy been used to excuse unhealthy conduct. It grew out of a centuries-old concept that youth itself ought to confer some type of immunity — that immaturity, carelessness and even cruelty are merely a part of rising up. What started as a forgiving nod to childhood mischief has advanced right into a cultural permission slip, a solution to flip irresponsibility into inevitability. It’s now used to dismiss the dangerous decisions of adults because the pure impulses of kids. “Youngsters will likely be children.”
This indulgent logic now echoes by the politics of MAGA. When Republican figures or their allies say or do one thing offensive, it’s dismissed as a prank, a joke or “younger individuals being silly.” However when Democrats or their allies run afoul of cultural sensibilities, it’s handled as proof of ethical decay. Critics on the best need swift motion in opposition to violators on the left; they demand accountability. This isn’t a code of ethics. It’s a code of exceptions that doubles as a governing philosophy.
One damning latest instance comes from a Politico report on a leaked group chat of younger Republicans buying and selling racist epithets, celebrating sexual assault and making antisemitic jokes about fuel chambers and loving Hitler. In a time of heightened political polarization, these messages display how sure factions of the Republican Occasion can so blithely dehumanize their perceived political opponents. Initially, occasion leaders denounced the messages, figuring out them as hateful and bigoted and calling for broad condemnation. Members of the group chat, ranging in age from 24 to 35, faced real consequences, with some even losing their jobs. Inside little greater than a day, nonetheless, the brand new default place was to dismiss the racist and violent rhetoric of this group chat because the youthful indiscretions of kids.
Talking on “The Charlie Kirk Show,” Vice President JD Vance supplied a forceful protection of the members, arguing that “the fact is that youngsters do silly issues, particularly younger boys — they inform edgy, offensive jokes. That’s what kids do.” He continued, “I actually don’t need us to develop up in a rustic the place a child telling a silly joke, telling a really offensive, silly joke is cause to ruin their lives.” Vance went on to characterize the general public outcry as “pearl-clutching” and admonished critics to “develop up.” Framing the group chat as a lapse in judgment fairly than a mirrored image of character, the vice chairman urged listeners to “give attention to the actual points” as a substitute of “what children say in group chats.”
Distinction this dismissive framing with how Vance responded to offensive feedback within the wake of the Charlie Kirk assassination. Vance didn’t provide the indulgent “children will likely be children” line, as a substitute urging People to deal with any expression of glee over the dying or help for the killer as a reportable offense. “Whenever you see somebody celebrating Charlie’s homicide, name them out,” he mentioned, including, “and hell, call their employer.” When the offenders had been vital of the best, the vice chairman decidedly didn’t deal with their feedback as youthful indiscretions. As an alternative, they had been probably career-ending scandals.
The double customary will not be restricted to Vance and individuals who joked about Kirk’s killing. Extra just lately, Republicans have directed their outrage at Jay Jones, a former Virginia delegate and Democratic candidate for legal professional normal. Jones, as soon as seen as a rising star within the occasion and a voice for generational change, grew to become the middle of a political firestorm after the discharge of private text messages he despatched in 2022. In these messages, he fantasized about violence in opposition to a outstanding Republican chief — remarks that had been instantly condemned across the political spectrum. Republican officers, led by Home Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana, referred to as the feedback “unforgivable” and “disqualifying,” demanding that Jones end his campaign. The swiftness and severity of their response stood in stark distinction to their indulgent protection of bigotry and cruelty amongst their very own ranks, similar to when the State Division employed Darren Beattie, a controversial former speech writer to be the undersecretary for public diplomacy and public affairs, or when Vice President Vance defended a DOGE staffer after his historical past of racist tweets was uncovered.
It might be unhealthy sufficient if the Republican double customary on cruelty prolonged solely to rhetoric and private conduct, however it is usually a window into how they wield power — for example, targeting Democratic cities for federal crackdowns and making an attempt to trigger ache in Democratic areas throughout the federal government shutdown.
The “children will likely be children” moniker as soon as described the innocent errors of youth. Within the fingers of Vance and different Republicans, nonetheless, it has turn out to be an excuse for bigotry, cruelty and impunity. The identical individuals who demand mercy for themselves insist on mercilessness for everybody else. They describe their very own abuses as jokes and their grownup decisions as childhood antics. It alerts to supporters that loyalty excuses every thing, and to critics that any slip invitations private {and professional} retribution. Finally, the hazard of “children will likely be children” politics will not be that it excuses childishness — it’s that it permits the infantile to rule.
Marcus Bell is an affiliate professor of sociology and criminology at SUNY Cortland.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated evaluation on Voices content material to supply all factors of view. Insights doesn’t seem on any information articles.
Viewpoint
Views
The next AI-generated content material is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Instances editorial workers doesn’t create or edit the content material.
Concepts expressed within the piece
- The article argues that Republican leaders apply a scientific double customary when evaluating offensive conduct, dismissing racist, antisemitic, and sexually violent feedback from younger Republicans as innocent youthful indiscretions whereas concurrently demanding extreme penalties for Democrats who make equally offensive statements.
- The creator contends that Vice President JD Vance exemplifies this inconsistency, having supplied indulgent defenses of younger Republicans’ offensive jokes as typical adolescent conduct whereas calling for employer accountability in opposition to those that celebrated a political determine’s assassination, thereby treating equivalent conduct in another way based mostly on partisan affiliation.
- The piece maintains that this selective utility of requirements extends past rhetoric to how Republicans wield governmental energy, together with focusing on Democratic cities for federal enforcement actions and making an attempt to inflict financial hurt on Democratic areas throughout budgetary disputes.
- The creator asserts that this sample serves as a message to supporters that occasion loyalty excuses misconduct whereas signaling to critics that any transgression will invite retaliation, in the end allowing these characterised as “infantile” to train political authority.
Completely different views on the subject
- Analysis demonstrates that each Republicans and Democrats interact in inconsistent functions of political requirements based mostly on partisan benefit fairly than precept, suggesting the conduct described will not be uniquely Republican.[2][3] Knowledge reveals that 92 % of Republicans supported congressional oversight throughout the Biden administration in 2022 in comparison with solely 65 % throughout the Trump administration, but Democrats equally shifted their help for media scrutiny from 85 % throughout the Biden administration to 63 % throughout the Trump administration.[3]
- Students have recognized what they time period “democratic hypocrisy” as a widespread phenomenon throughout each events, with each Republicans and Democrats supporting power-solidifying insurance policies when their most popular events are in energy, indicating this represents a systemic function of polarized American politics fairly than proof of 1 faction’s distinctive ethical failings.[2]
- Political disagreements over requirements consistency, similar to these concerning Supreme Court docket nominations, can mirror legit disagreements about precedent and constitutional interpretation fairly than mere partisan opportunism.[1] Some argue that differing political contexts create principled distinctions fairly than easy hypocrisy.
- Analysis signifies that robust partisan id amplifies inconsistent functions of ideas throughout the political spectrum, suggesting the underlying drawback stems from broader polarization dynamics affecting each events fairly than the ethical character of 1 faction particularly.[2]
