Samuel Moyn’s essay argues America’s political and economic power is structurally locked by aging demographics, donor class concentration, and self-reinforcing low youth turnout.
Key Takeaways
Median Congressional age crossed 60 after 1990; in 2024, median primary voter age was 65, reaching 71 in New Mexico.
Americans 55+ cast 44% of presidential votes in 2020; seniors turned out 6x more than 18-34 year-olds in 2024 primaries.
Roughly 90% of House seats are decided in primaries, where elder turnout dominance is most extreme.
The median campaign dollar donated in US elections comes from a 66-year-old donor; youth candidates often still serve old-money interests.
Moyn frames age as the current “modality of class” – wealth accumulation compounds with longevity, concentrating both political and financial power in the oldest cohort.
Hacker News Comment Review
Commenters are split on structural fixes: term limits and age caps are popular intuitions, but the Venice counterexample (Doges routinely in their 80s, longest-stable European republic) complicates the “old = bad governance” framing.
A recurring practical concern: young people’s lower civic organization skills are partly a consequence of gerontocracy itself – elders occupying organizing roles deprive younger cohorts of learning opportunities.
Several commenters flag that the problem extends far beyond politics into tenure-protected academia, law firm partnerships, and corporate boards (Apple board average age cited as 68), making succession planning rare across institutions.
Notable Comments
@tsunamifury: calls gerontocracy “likely the worst issue humanity will face over the next 50 years, even more than climate change” – resources rerouted to elder preservation over families.
@johngossman: Venice counterargument – Doges commonly governed in their 80s while young neighboring monarchs produced instability; age alone does not predict governance quality.
