Why Does GenXYZ Think Doing Nothing Is Doing Something & Why Did Boomers Stop Doing Anything?

[omega minimo]

*******WARNING: Extreme Generalizations Ahead********

DISCLAIMER: This is a Thom Hartmann Friendly Zone. Mr. Hartmann is the best at providing informed, relevant, historic, well-researched information on the current results of 26 years of Reaganism (and previous centuries' cycles of tension between Populists and Corporatists). This information is valuable for anyone interested in current friction between Boomers and those that follow them.

:patriot:

The biggest difference between the Baby Boom generation and the Generations with alphabet names is a sense of empowerment or disempowerment.

Baby Boomers lived through times that brought home the notion that "if you ain't part of the solution, you're part of the problem." Along with that goes the sense that we are all in this together, as a nation, as a community. Later generations tend towards thinking that voting doesn't count, so not voting is a statement of lack of faith in a system that is no longer relevant; a negative affirmation of the absence of a sense of participation, of relevance. Boomers were close enough to the realities of women and African Americans who fought and died for the right to vote and participate in common society-- not voting is giving up.

This OP is not an invitation to choose sides and trashtalk at each other. I don't know why these generation wars have popped up. I am between the generations and I have asked questions of both.

What happened to the Baby Boom generation that was engaged or at least aware up through Watergate, the end of the Viet Nam War, the Iran Hostage Crisis...................... manipulated by Reagan/Bush to get rid of Carter and smooth Reagan's "Landslide" and "Morning In America" (both shams). Where were they through the last 26 years of Reaganism that led to where we are now? If there's nothing that could have been done to hammer Reagan's scandals or affect the rise of corporatism or challenge the monopolizition of M$M, then so be it. But honestly, did that generation sit back and watch as the nation was disassembled?

And the generations that have sprung from the Boomers-- is a goodly part of their cynicism, their jaded ennui, a result of hearing the valiant and rainbow colored stories of their parents good old days while watching them adjust their lives to the comforts and cluenessness of Reagonomics? Where would GenXYZ get the notion to question conformity, consumerism and corporatism if they've heard it all before from their (idealistically compromised) parents and watched the hippies turn into the yuppies?

How can young people, who did hear the stories and learn the lessons from Boomer parents, or learned on their own through reading or music or spoken word, young people who KNOW what is going on, how can they voluntarily give up their power, their right to vote, their voice, their right to participate, even if it "doesn't count"? ESPECIALLY if somebody tries to tell them It Does Not Count!!!!

That is what I would like to know.

If we can learn from each other, maybe we can make some changes and even figure out how not to make the same old mistakes all over again.

[havocmom]

1. Are the Rolling Stones releasing a new version of My Generation or something?

Getting silly around here with all the generation gaps in common sense. Is this all Rove's got left? ;)

[Psephos]

8. Actually, that would be The Who. :-) n/t

[Hissyspit]

2. Generational Theory: Strauss and Howe...

Generational Theory in Times of Crisis

William Strauss and Neil Howe's generational theory represents history as a cycle of generational types, "civics," "adaptives," "idealists," and "reactives." The types currently represented are Civics born 1901-1924 and 1982+, Adaptives born 1925-1942, Idealists born 1943-1960, and Reactives born 1883-1900 and 1961-1981. Each type manifests a series of traits based on their interactions with the other living generations and their participation in spiritual awakenings and secular crises. Civics and Idealists are dominant groups, participating in secular or spiritual revivals, respectively, while the Adaptives and Reactives are recessive, born into these periods of upheaval. Generations obviously interact with all the other living generations, reacting against those immediately before them and responding sympathetically to those that share similar traits. The current generation, Generation X or whatever it may be labeled, is Reactive, coming of age in the fervor of Idealists; they have created positive identifications between themselves and the most recent Adaptive and Reactive generations.

The challenges and the grim fortunes projected onto this group, Generation X, are not unprecedented even in the twentieth century. The last generation to face both the negative labels and grin economic outlook was the Lost Generation, another Reactive group. As Howe and Strauss explain, the "Gay Nineties," into which the Lost were born, share a sense of the "spiritual and ideological upheaval" that the late '60s and '70s wrought. The Lost Generation also lived through a violent youth (the murder rate increased 700% between 1900-20), often of their own making, while the economy grew and then gave out as they reached mid-life. The Lost Generation participated in the prosperity of the twenties but were also most impacted by the Depression; the next recessive generation (b. 1925-1942), dubbed the Silent by Howe and Strauss, were also impacted by the Depression as they were born amidst this period of uncertainty. These Adaptive Silents are the grandparents of the current generation, and the new generation have developed a bond with this group who seem to be a calm antidote to the excesses of the Baby Boom generation. Howe and Strauss's theory captures a much wider scope on this phenomena, but this summary helps demystify why educated twenty-somethings now are nostalgic for the iconography of the Depression.

[GymGeekAus]

5. Hmmm.

I think that entire thesis needs to incorporate "station" into its analysis. A simple addition of lower class, middle class, and upper class into the generalizations might prove more helpful in characterizing people by era.

It might reveal that there are other, more potent correlations in the four, ahem, arbitrary groupings if it does a more focused analysis.

This gels with Hartman's philosophy, by the way, that the soul of America is tied to the health of the middle class.

[omega minimo]

7. Hissyspit, as Elvis would say

"Thank you, thankyouverymuch"



I'd heard of this cycle theory before. Do you know of a book called "Generations" that studies this?

[orleans]

3. "What happened to the Baby Boom generation that was engaged or at least aware up through Watergate"

i'm right here.

[omega minimo]

9. A lot are here but only a handful answer

"Where were they through the last 26 years of Reaganism that led to where we are now? If there's nothing that could have been done to hammer Reagan's scandals or affect the rise of corporatism or challenge the monopolizition of M$M, then so be it. But honestly, did that generation sit back and watch as the nation was disassembled?"

[DemBones DemBones]

13. We were just trying to earn a living in harder times than our parents had.

Some of them gripe(d) about the Depression but they got to live through the post-war boom, too, when a real middle class was born, with one breadwinner (Dad) supporting Mom and 4 or 5 kids living in a house they owned, in a safe neighborhood, with a maid coming once or twice a week. Now only the rich have those things. Moms had time to cook, do laundry, keep the house clean. We were at war with Korea but nobody worried about it. My older brother joined the Marines, wanting to go to Korea. People were really patriotic back then, the economy was good, everybody liked Ike pretty well.

We're the generation in which dual career couples emerged and it wasn't just about women being empowered. It was about having enough money to feed and clothe your kids and pay rent, buy a house if you were lucky. And it meant spending a lot of your earnings eating out because Mom and Dad were both too tired to cook. Weekends were for laundry, housecleaning and shopping.

Ronald Reagan was popular with the majority of Americans. The media called him "the Great Communicator." The religious right had emerged as a political force and they were snookered into believing Reagan was a good Christian. The man never even went to church! It's pretty damned hard to fight against a popular president. You saw the outpouring of grief when he died after all those years out of office -- that should tell you it wasn't easy to defeat the man on anything.

Our generation had fought against Nixon and LBJ, endured all the turmoil of the sixties and seventies, supported rights for blacks, women, American Indians, so we were kind of tired, and it was a no-win situation with Reagan. Same with Bush I. Clinton made us all feel better and actually left a surplus when he left office, after inheriting the huge Reagan/Bush I deficit. But he did some things that surely had FDR, JFK, MLK, and RFK all rolling over in their graves (not Monica -- they all had women on the side, too.)

I gather you are fairly young so let me ask you what your generation has done to stop Bush II ? And how has that worked out?

Every generation has people who care and try to make a difference, but each generation also has a lot of dead wood and people working against equality, peace and justice. That's the way it's always been and probably always will be. It's hard for idealists like us to understand those with the "I've got mine, screw you" mentality but we must realize their existence.

[omega minimo]

22. What happened to people's bullshit detectors?

“Ronald Reagan was popular with the majority of Americans. The media called him "the Great Communicator." The religious right had emerged as a political force and they were snookered into believing Reagan was a good Christian. The man never even went to church! It's pretty damned hard to fight against a popular president. You saw the outpouring of grief when he died after all those years out of office -- that should tell you it wasn't easy to defeat the man on anything.”

The thing is, anyone paying attention knew that all of that was complete and total bullshit-- unfortunately a lot of people stopped paying attention. The GenXYZ were tots or not born yet, so the question is directed at Boomers. It wasn’t “easy to defeat the man on anything” but how many Baby Boomers even tried? How many resisted swallowing all the bullshit they were fed?

Downthread you say:

“It's hard for idealists like us to understand those with the "I've got mine, screw you" mentality but we must realize their existence.”

That IS the Greed Is Good decade in action! And the apparent inaction of people to respond to a load of Reaganstic horseshit at the time is why we are where we are today! I’m not interested in blame but truly curious as to how Boomers see it (and saw it then)-- so far, on DU, they mostly DON”T see it-- or won't say.

Your sigline:

"Indifference is a weapon of mass destruction."

We are now suffering the effects of that Boomer/Reagan Era indifference. Like the OP says, Thom Hartmann does an excellent job of revisiting the history that Baby Boomers ignore (for the most part).

“I tried to summarize what was going on with us older boomers then -- busy earning a living, raising kids, trying to have a life, being tired, and realizing we'd hit a brick wall with Reagan.”

That “brick wall” was an illusion and so far, this thread has produced no evidence that people have the sense to say (then or now) “The Emperor has no clothes” and “this illegal immoral war scandal is unacceptable and impeachable” 20 years ago and now we have the same issues, with the same cast of characters, only unimaginably WORSE, due to the complacent cocooning of those who were ‘busy earning a living” while our common national life and the Commons were eviscerated.

[Hippo_Tron]

4. I apologize for my part in the generation wars...

By trying to get attention paid to my thread by using an extremely inflammatory subject line. That being said I still heavily resent the idea that I need to be drafted into national service because Paris Hilton and Jenna and Barbara Bush need to be taught a lesson.

On to your subject matter in particular, I agree with this analysis.

[mykpart]

6. A lot of us boomers got burned out, used up and disillusioned.

And don't forget, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are all baby boomers too! (Not sure what that means, exactly, but interesting to note.)

[Fleshdancer]

10. Since we're on the topic of over generalizations....

As a tail ender of the X generation, I would like to point out that I am personally sick and tired of baby boomers telling me that they were perfect and I am (insert whatever insult the greatest generation said about the baby boomers back when they were my age).

I hate to break it to you but growing up during the 80's and 90's was slightly different than growing up during the time of Vietnam, the introduction of the pill, battles over civil rights, and the assassination of JFK, RFK, and MLK. Was it you or was it just the time you grew up in?

Sure we Xers didn't start revolutions, we just grew up being told we wouldn't do anything...oddly enough this was around the same time the internet bubble was inflating and suddenly Xers all over the country were becoming wealthy CEO's. Sure it was somewhat short lived but we didn't exactly have wars to fight and parents around to rebel from but hey, we did our best with the message we had. After all, we grew up during the message of trickle down economics, right?

:eyes:

[omega minimo]

11. Who told you this?

"we just grew up being told we wouldn't do anything"

[DemBones DemBones]

14. I'm a baby boomer and have never claimed to be perfect

or told anybody they "wouldn't do anything." I always told my students they COULD do things.

[Blue_In_AK]

19. I'd like to know who are these boomers telling you these things...

I'm a boomer and it sure isn't coming from my mouth. Every generation faces its own challenges and does the best it can. I agree with the poster up thread that a lot of us maybe put political matters on a back burner during the Reagan and Bush I years, but we were busy raising you younger people, and again trying to do the best we could. Now that my own kids are grown and I've got more time, I'm back being political again. I never really lost the old idealism. I don't really feel like I sold out. I was just busy trying to put food on my family, dealing with an abusive alcoholic spouse, and trying to stay alive.

These generation wars are silly and counterproductive, IMO.

[Porcupine]

12. Much of what the boomers did was undone for GenX.

Disclaimer: I was born in 1965. I am the last of the boomers or the first of the GenX'ers both.

By the time I hit college in 1985 it was clear that much of what the boomers worked for in the 60's and 70's was going to be undone with little political opposition from the Powers That Be on the legislative left. I voted for Boxer in her first Congressional run.

Union protections were gutted. College grants were being replaced with loans. Leftists in South America were assasinated left and right. The environmental protections that existed didn't seem to be enough to moderate massive sprawl or protect the last of the old growth redwoods. Pot was still inexplicably illegal and penalties for possesion increased during the Reagan/Bush I years. The No-Nukes movement had some nice marches but the media was learing to ignore us. Access to health care was declining even then.

At first we marched but it was clear that we weren't getting anywhere. At the start of Gulf War I it was as clear then as it is now that that war was a set-up by the right to give Bush 42 a boost.

We had our asses handed to us on a plate and the lefts "representatives" in Congress sat on their hands while it was happening. To be sure there were always a few firebrands but never the unified support on issues the GOP has organized. Clinton was generally regarded to be just slightly better on average than Richard Nixon.

So we generally said to hell with that and set out to improve our personal lives. The structures that supported the left withered for lack of new blood. Now kids think politics is a waste of time; a no-win game for suckers. We have yet to prove they are wrong.

[DemBones DemBones]

15. Good synopsis. I graduated from high school in 1965

and I think you've summarized the 80s and 90s very well from the point of view of those who were young then. I tried to summarize what was going on with us older boomers then -- busy earning a living, raising kids, trying to have a life, being tired, and realizing we'd hit a brick wall with Reagan.

[Gwerlain]

16. It is unfortunately simple.

The boomers grew up, and had kids, and got jobs, and stopped wanting to do much politics. So they started voting based on the little they had time to catch on TV or in the newspaper, and the Reprehensible Media Machine took over. Not to mention the fact that the Reprehensibles always were the party of the rich- and the boomers felt rich. So they acted like they think rich people oughta act. Dumb? Absolutely.

Meanwhile, out of their remaining, atrophied sense of duty, they taught their kids that politics was important- all the while, the kids watching them ignore it. Again, dumb? Absolutely. Thinking the kids won't sense both that they aren't doing it, and that they feel guilty about not doing it, and finally that they are trying to assuage that guilt by teaching their children a bunch of stuff that their actions say isn't really important. Bad idea.

So the kids grew up, and rebelled by totally ignoring politics to the point of not even voting. This: a) lets them do the thing that will make their parents feel the guiltiest, b) lets them think they're being cool by rebelling, and c) lets them feel they're different from their parents, who in their eyes have fucked everything up.

And there you have it. Cynical? Absolutely.

I'm at the very tail end of the boom, some might even call me Gen-X, and I'm not impressed with y'all who preceded me- you (and please don't take this personally, if you're on here you're at least trying, which is more than I can say for most boomers) have totally sold out, stopped paying attention, and let the country go to hell in a handbasket, and there are too many of you for the people who are actually capable of thinking their way through it to vote you down. Wake up before it's too late.

I'm at the very beginning of Gen-X, some might even call me a boomer, and I'm not impressed with y'all who come after me- you (and please don't take this personally unless you didn't vote, in which case I am most definitely talking to you) have totally sold out, stopped paying attention, and are in the process of wrecking the only chance you have of a future. The world isn't going to die out, and there isn't going to be a big war and destroy everything; it's just gonna keep on slowly getting worse, and worse, and dirtier, and dirtier, and at some point, the differences we might have made had y'all bothered to listen long enough to figure out that maybe, despite what you thought you saw, there was a chance, have all gone away and now you get to live in a dirty, nasty world that ain't ever gonna get better. Wake up before it's too late.

That's my take on it, anyway. At least, the parts I don't like. So don't borrow trouble.

[omega minimo]

24. That's very good

Well stated, thank you. It is a reiteration of much of the OP without a real reply-- with your insight, maybe you can answer the question:


“How can young people, who did hear the stories and learn the lessons from Boomer parents, or learned on their own through reading or music or spoken word, young people who KNOW what is going on, how can they voluntarily give up their power, their right to vote, their voice, their right to participate, even if it "doesn't count"? ESPECIALLY if somebody tries to tell them It Does Not Count!!!!”

I am interested in the reasons and so far we have only discussed the excuses. I have talked to people who don’t vote, on the eves of the past two elections, and can’t comprehend how giving up the right to vote is seen as taking a stand or sending a statement or..... anything.... I listen and hear nothing. I resist the temptation, when faced with:

“So the kids grew up, and rebelled by totally ignoring politics to the point of not even voting. This: a) lets them do the thing that will make their parents feel the guiltiest, b) lets them think they're being cool by rebelling, and c) lets them feel they're different from their parents, who in their eyes have fucked everything up. And there you have it. Cynical? Absolutely.......”

I resist the temptation to call that, not “cyncial” but “spoiled brat” and even-- “stupid.”

The thing I don’t get is people of any generation, any American generation, counting on the Founders principles being there for them while they do worse than nothing to safeguard them for themselves.

I am closer to you in the timeline than you think, so as for the final “you” business about lackadaisical Boomers and voluntarily disenfranchised Boomer-spawn, PLEASE POINT THAT THING AT SOMEONE ELSE!!

If I were one of the lameasses you’re lecturing at the end there, I wouldn’t be asking these questions, AGAIN, :eyes: I would have already just believed the overgeneralizations and quit wondering what motivates people to give up their responsibilities with their rights.

:hi:

[Gwerlain]

29. You're not very good at...

reading; it wasn't a repetition of the OP- it was an explanation of WHY. But I'm not really interested in justifying myself to someone who's more interested in venting than having a conversation, so good bye.

[omega minimo]

31. It is unfortunately simplistic

OM:
“What happened to the Baby Boom generation that was engaged or at least aware up through Watergate, the end of the Viet Nam War, the Iran Hostage Crisis...................... manipulated by Reagan/Bush to get rid of Carter and smooth Reagan's "Landslide" and "Morning In America" (both shams). Where were they through the last 26 years of Reaganism that led to where we are now? If there's nothing that could have been done to hammer Reagan's scandals or affect the rise of corporatism or challenge the monopolizition of M$M, then so be it. But honestly, did that generation sit back and watch as the nation was disassembled?”

Guerlain:
“The boomers grew up, and had kids, and got jobs, and stopped wanting to do much politics. So they started voting based on the little they had time to catch on TV or in the newspaper, and the Reprehensible Media Machine took over. Not to mention the fact that the Reprehensibles always were the party of the rich- and the boomers felt rich. So they acted like they think rich people oughta act. Dumb? Absolutely.”

**It’s very good, it is another view of the same thing; where is the “Why” you say you provided?

Oh, I see. The answer is “Greed Is Good.” The cliche I left out of “Reagan's "Landslide" and "Morning In America" (both shams).” Greed Is Good was a sham too and Reaganomics have trickled down to the dangerous mess we have today.

Oh wait! I included it after all: “hearing the valiant and rainbow colored stories of their parents good old days while watching them adjust their lives to the comforts and cluelessness of Reagonomics...”

“Comforts and cluelessness of Reagonomics” = Greed Is Good = “...the boomers felt rich. So they acted like they think rich people oughta act. Dumb? Absolutely.”

I am not so sure the Boomers felt rich, although The Powers That Be groomed the public (from the 80's til now) to identify with The Rich, as you say. What I am interested in is Boomers saying WHY or HOW they identified with what was clearly a load of total bullshit (the whole Reagan Era package of crap), rather than tell us again they were busy putting food on their families.

OM:
“And the generations that have sprung from the Boomers-- is a goodly part of their cynicism, their jaded ennui, a result of hearing the valiant and rainbow colored stories of their parents good old days while watching them adjust their lives to the comforts and cluenessness of Reagonomics? Where would GenXYZ get the notion to question conformity, consumerism and corporatism if they've heard it all before from their (idealistically compromised) parents and watched the hippies turn into the yuppies?”

Guerlain:
“Meanwhile, out of their remaining, atrophied sense of duty, they taught their kids that politics was important- all the while, the kids watching them ignore it. Again, dumb? Absolutely. Thinking the kids won't sense both that they aren't doing it, and that they feel guilty about not doing it, and finally that they are trying to assuage that guilt by teaching their children a bunch of stuff that their actions say isn't really important. Bad idea.”

**The answer will not be how it happened but why people decided to let it happen.

Guerlain:
“So the kids grew up, and rebelled by totally ignoring politics to the point of not even voting. This: a) lets them do the thing that will make their parents feel the guiltiest, b) lets them think they're being cool by rebelling, and c) lets them feel they're different from their parents, who in their eyes have fucked everything up. And there you have it. Cynical? Absolutely.”

**As I said before, I am asking a question in the open-minded interest of NOT calling that what it really is: “not “cyncial” but “spoiled brat” and even-- “stupid.” ” Voluntarily giving up their rights and their power, in order to lash out at the parental unit is infantile and impotent. How is that supposed to work? That is a Karl Rove wet dream, that is. The people I've talked to who think non-voting shows they "don't support the system" are meanwhile benefitting from living in "the system" and that makes them spoiled or hypocritical, not "cynical." So how bout that question:

OM:
"That's very good. Well stated, thank you...with your insight, maybe you can answer the question:"

“How can young people, who did hear the stories and learn the lessons from Boomer parents, or learned on their own through reading or music or spoken word, young people who KNOW what is going on, how can they voluntarily give up their power, their right to vote, their voice, their right to participate, even if it "doesn't count"? ESPECIALLY if somebody tries to tell them It Does Not Count!!!!”

“I am interested in the reasons and so far we have only discussed the excuses.”

**I am sorry that is as far as we can go. Maybe asking people to identify their individual reasons or personal dilemmas resulting from all of us going along for Mr. Toad’s Wild Economic Ride Of National Doom Brought To You By The Following Sponsors.... maybe no one wants to expose that they, that we, are responsible. Whether that’s comfy Boomers or smug post-Boomers.

One other big difference, and maybe it stems from a sense of dis/empowerment, is that one generation can have open-minded discussion without feeling threatened, and another has been trained to feel so “special” and have “good self-esteem” that backfired into passive aggression and touchiness. They're sense of "I'll disempower myself cuz you already did anyway" infantilism and "Don't Tell Me What To Do!!1" includes discomfort with any dialogue that seems "challenging."

OM:
“I am closer to you in the timeline than you think, so as for the final “you” business about lackadaisical Boomers and voluntarily disenfranchised Boomer-spawn, PLEASE POINT THAT THING AT SOMEONE ELSE!!”

“If I were one of the lameasses you’re lecturing at the end there, I wouldn’t be asking these questions, AGAIN, I would have already just believed the overgeneralizations and quit wondering what motivates people to give up their responsibilities with their rights.”

**Your assumption-filled blame lecture really doesn’t give you the right to claim that you’re “not really interested in justifying myself to someone who's more interested in venting than having a conversation”

OM
“This OP is not an invitation to choose sides and trashtalk at each other. I don't know why these generation wars have popped up. I am between the generations and I have asked questions of both.”

“If we can learn from each other, maybe we can make some changes and even figure out how not to make the same old mistakes all over again.”

**You have beautifully illustrated from another angle the same things that I did. I don’t want to assume and merely “vent” about the generations, I want to hear what THEY have to say, not what good “readers” like you and me ( or is it “I” :evilgrin: ) have to say about them.

That makes it too easy for everyone to always think someone else is the bad guy.

And if we get people to think or even talk about it, they may question their own Go Along To Get Along behavior and life decisions that make them give up their responsibilities with their rights.

Understanding those motivations.

Undoing those machinations.


:hi: Goodbye. Happy Thanksgiving.

[NuttyFluffers]

17. cuz we're Taoist...

and we love pissing you off to no end.

:silly:

[omega minimo]

28. Punks trumped (permanently) "pissing you off to no end"

"Taoist" shit

[Jamastiene]

18. Why blame new generations (X, specifically, ahem) for what older generations had

ample time to fix? And why blame the Boomers either for that matter, (because I know you'll disagree with the first question probably.)

Look, it's our corrupt government that is fucking us over. Now is not the time for a generation war. This corrupt government of ours is filled to the eyeballs with fatcats who have been living in high cotton for ages now and doing nothing really. They need to be reeled in and used bad examples so we can find a better new government. I think 2008 should be our crowning glory when it comes to wiping the slate clean and voting in some great new people in. I mean really, they will be gung ho to fix some shit for at least a year before the begin ignoring us like that last batch did. That is the best we can get, sadly.

[Ron Green]

20. Slavery and addiction are the natural state.

Life on earth is full of fear. The corporatists seek to use this fact, and the populists seek to ameliorate it. The idealism of the Baby Boomers in their 60's heyday had to be reeled back in, because corporate values cannot be sustained by sharing; there must be addiction, if not to actual substances, then to consuming, or brand loyalty, or some such.

Good religion, good government, good business - all these are necessary and could help, but bad religion, government and business are what we've got.

Fear is easy - love is difficult. I think that's the gist of it.

[omega minimo]

27. Warning: Brilliant Overgeneralizations Ahead!

“Fear is easy - love is difficult. I think that's the gist of it.”

You have the gist of it. It is radical to suggest that we, individually and collectively, (even now) have a right to choose.

:hug:

‘There's always a picture bigger than the one we see.’

[Hidden Stillness]

21. A Few Opinions

Here are some random opinions on generations, etc., that I have been thinking about for a long time; this is a favorite topic of mine, the flow of time, etc. (By the way, I loved your cute joke during the OP: "I don't know why these generation wars have popped up." Of course, there are always wars about all things here on DU.)

I am of the Baby Boom generation, but actually have never really identified with a lot of their phoniness and crap, their getting credit for what they did not do, etc., but actually identified and agreed with more of what the New Deal generation did. Just a few examples: there was a study from, I think it was, the University of Toledo (Ohio) on what the actual "average anti-war protester" was, using membership, film from protests, and other demographic measures. They found, contrary to the media claim, that the average anti-VietNam-war protester was not a college-age male, but a woman, a "housewife" as they called it, of about 35 years of age. Also, as to the "we fought for women, blacks," etc., claim, I remember fighting and arguing, hopelessly, with males my own age about feminism and why we were actually equal. They were as bigoted as any group I ever heard of. Also, the "idealistic" hippies and their "mind-expanding" drugs often just wanted to get high and could be as judgmental and violent as anyone else.

I think a lot of the change up to the present (since 1980s, etc.) can be traced to an effect that the ever-present media has on the psyche. There are many studies showing that people who watch/listen to a lot of TV have a generalized, non-directed anger and unpleasant feeling, feel "put upon," etc., and it doesn't matter what the content is, because it is now all so saturated with this confrontational, hostile, attacking tone. We are now more reactive to the sense that we are "always being told what to do," because, as a fact, we are, by a media which is fundamenally different from anything it was before. It is now just pervasive. Also, during the early years of the 20th Century, during the time of Upton Sinclair, Eugene V. Debs, and the great radical Progressives, there actually was almost no media, except for newspapers, which had to be read, had few pictures ("visuals") of any kind, and were generally low-key and "factual"as opposed to hysterical (like arch-con media of today--nothing but annoying and anti-thought). They actually lived more in a world of "wide open spaces" where people were not trying to control their every thought from all angles, all the time, and still had the more natural sense that they could accomplish what they wanted if they worked for it. I think the current world of corporate media everywhere has a distressing effect of making you feel "closed in" and unable to move, "watched" all the time, all discussions actually begun and ended already, by the same pre-determined round of "consultant experts" and their very same round of comments, always the same order of events and to the same end, and it eventually makes you feel that the world itself is dead, and "not really out there," but that your very access to it is blocked by the rich people who own everything, as if you couldn't get to the shore because of all the rich people's mansions, having bought up all the property. People are surrounded by media and corporate thought-control all the time now, as they were not then, and it makes people now feel hopeless and totally "loomed over," unable to affect anything anymore, where no one would have had that feeling at the beginning of the last century, because it was not there.

When the thought-realm of the psyche goes from the actions of the external world, to the endless rounds of ruminations of the interior, and its appearances, and worries, and false fronts, and "what ifs," and so much propaganda from elsewhere that even the personality itself starts to dissolve, and you give THEIR answers by habit and not your own, and you feel their attention and judgment even when you are alone, and not just going out into the world to meet it when you get there, when you can't even remember your own opinions or how you put things anymore, then you realize something new and horrible has been done to people, that the corporate oppressor never had access to as a tactic before now, and medies consolidation. This is a moral issue, too.

The New Deal generation was more concerned about "Good Government" (the famous phrase), getting a law passed or a new Federal department to run a program that would solve a problem--they believed that government can, and should, solve problems--and that eventually the just society would be at its highest level and would then "run itself." I remember the kids of my generation, a little older than me, rebelling against just that very thing, as it they were being made to conform to the "middle class straightjacket," etc. Then the whole approach became "fight against the Establishment," break away, etc., which is ultimately totally selfish and does not help anything. They ONLY fought, which is different from fighting and organizing, fighting and establishing things, etc. David Hilliard of the Black Panther Party recently gave a speech (on C-SPAN) criticizing those who today, only "go to protest marches--and then go home," rather than organizing, follow-up, intelligent work, setting up programs for the poor, etc.

My nephew, who has become a wonderful, very left Democrat, and who was always smart and fair-minded, became very politically active and aware, very anti-Bush and anti-Republican, because of Sept. 11th and the totally corrupt, totally botched reaction to it. I think a lot of that generation was unaware until that event. Growing up in the most propagandized environment--corporate mind-control passing as popular opinion--"Government is bad," "taxes are bad," "corporations are fun/hip/freedom/where all good comes from," "there is no history; nothing existed before this current sales pitch"--they cannot possibly be intelligent and educated about American history, the populism of the American people, etc., and they aren't. They are complete assholes about what the Roosevelt Administration accomplished, and then pretend to criticize them. They think debate is based on slogans, and tricking people into appearing stupid. It is a long way back from that corporate cult to the real country.

[omega minimo]

25. HS

“They found, contrary to the media claim, that the average anti-VietNam-war protester was not a college-age male, but a woman, a "housewife" as they called it, of about 35 years of age. Also, as to the "we fought for women, blacks," etc., claim, I remember fighting and arguing, hopelessly, with males my own age about feminism and why we were actually equal. They were as bigoted as any group I ever heard of. Also, the "idealistic" hippies and their "mind-expanding" drugs often just wanted to get high and could be as judgmental and violent as anyone else.”

I have talked to older Boomers who recall that a lot of the “solidarity” was actually a bunch of young folks going to where the party is. Yet the pervasive idealism is still idealized, as in this post inspired (by this thread or the generational wars?) to OP:

“I was a child of the sixties, born less than a year before the so-called Summer Of Love, when millions of American's young people stood up and said "we believe that this is all about MORE than this." Innocents, each and every one of them. Idealists who thought that a social conscience was a good thing. People that worried about war, and hunger, and poverty, and the rights of the downtrodden.”

“Each and every one of them”? Well, no. That’s part of the dirty little secret my questions ruffle and part of why, so far, the questions are unanswered. I have kept the line open, only to resist the ultimate obvious and regrettable answer that people-- including comfy, cozy, cotton-wool wrapped clueless Americans-- are bloody hypocrites.

From that OP:

“It's hard to imagine an age group that has so disconnected with the rhythyms of the natural world that surrounds us, that has turned such a blind eye to the truly amazing wonders of the Earth and universe and tries to mask its general ennui and irrelevance in the expressions of trend-setting musical angst and the acquisition of new and marvelous electronic toys.”

Well gee, a few here have mentioned IN PASSING the ascendance of MEGALOWMEDIOCRACY INCORPORATED but don’t seem to really fathom how devastating the media monopoly has been, from the first inklings during the rise of Reaganism, through the NAFTA, GATT, 1996 Telecommunications Act of Clinton, through the censorship of Gulf War One and Two....to the half-assed, hatemonger media we have now.

You get it:

“I think a lot of the change up to the present (since 1980s, etc.) can be traced to an effect that the ever-present media has on the psyche.”

My comment would be to quote the whole rest of your searingly brilliant post. So glad you showed up.

“When the thought-realm of the psyche goes from the actions of the external world, to the endless rounds of ruminations of the interior, and its appearances, and worries, and false fronts, and "what ifs," and so much propaganda from elsewhere that even the personality itself starts to dissolve, and you give THEIR answers by habit and not your own, and you feel their attention and judgment even when you are alone, and not just going out into the world to meet it when you get there, when you can't even remember your own opinions or how you put things anymore, then you realize something new and horrible has been done to people, that the corporate oppressor never had access to as a tactic before now, and medies consolidation. This is a moral issue, too.”

“Growing up in the most propagandized environment--corporate mind-control passing as popular opinion--"Government is bad," "taxes are bad," "corporations are fun/hip/freedom/where all good comes from," "there is no history; nothing existed before this current sales pitch"--they cannot possibly be intelligent and educated about American history, the populism of the American people, etc., and they aren't. They are complete assholes about what the Roosevelt Administration accomplished, and then pretend to criticize them. They think debate is based on slogans, and tricking people into appearing stupid. It is a long way back from that corporate cult to the real country.”

[Cleita]

23. Why are the boomers getting all the credit for the generation

that came before them, the silent generation, my generation? We were born between 1935 and 1944, then the the boomers arrived. We knew the end of the depression and were well acquainted with WWII and the Korean War. We were the ones who knew that the way things were going after Kennedy was assassinated was wrong.

Around 1965 we started to rebel against the status quo. We led the baby boomers, who were still in high school and college into our cause. We were the ones who fought for civil rights and burned our bras for women's rights. We inspired the baby boomers and to their credit they followed.

I give them a lot of credit for picking up the gauntlet and pushing forward, but they didn't start it, we did, the silent generation.

[omega minimo]

26. True

As a Tail-End-Of-the-Boom-er, I learned that what I *thought* were the focus of Boomers were actually the front edge of the Boom (the cusp you are referring to)


:hi:

[treestar]

30. Everything is the Boomers fault because they are the most

numerous, and I am one, on the younger end of it.

The fifties were child dominated, the sixties college student dominated, the eighties career dominated, the nineties having a family dominated, the country is doomed to being middle aged dominated and then elderly dominated.