Unjustly ignored, though, is the fact that Downs first pointed out the "issue attention cycle." Here. It's a quick read, but a good one, and I implicitly reference it enough.
First, there is a "pre-problem" stage, at which people don't really talk about an issue. Then, the discovery stage, caused by dramatic events. Next, discussion of the costs of action. Interest then wanes because of those costs, the difficulty, competing social pressures, etc., and finally, at the "post-problem" stage, attention moves on to something else. Often, another event draws attention to another problem, and round-and-round-we-go.
Smart guy, Tony. Not every issue goes through the cycle, but the issues that do are generally the ones that draw attention through some precipitating event. Like, for example, gun control, through "mass shootings."
No, this time isn't different.
Every issue has a core of people devoted to the cause, but that's not most people. Most people are only marginally interested in politics at most. If you are reading this... you're weird.
I'm weirder because I'm writing this, but whatever. The point is that no matter what you think is happening to society at the broader level, there is never more than a tiny core of people devoted to any one cause. The rest move on in the Downsian issue attention...
Hey! What's that?
And did you see that? I got to write, "Downsian," and not have it be about spatial models! I know, that doesn't mean anything to you, but it means something to me!