I disagree with the University types who want to stereotype everyone by age into a generational culture, or a certain behavior criteria.
During the 1960's the boomers were a pot smoking, war protesting, free love, woodstock attending, draft card burning bunch of useless human beings. Kicker: Not all of them were.
And, after many of the 60's youth got that stuff out of their flesh, they went on to become rather successful in their businesses and became rather boringly model citizens.
In the subsequent years, 70's 80's 90's and on, I really don't see a trend of anything less than youthful rebellion and fact finding about life. Drugs have played a part in the destruction of many lives, but even those into drugs in youth became the model citizen later.
I do see the results of more education as the generations progressed. In the 60's to 80's, college was not a "given" for many people. In fact many of the pre-boomer generation actually found college less than necessary. Most boomers who did attend college (me included) did NOT find it necessary for a successful earnings career. A degree was more about the piece of paper than about what was learned.
That changed, of course, as time passed. Tech required the higher education. (BTW early boomers hated the idea of a "computer"} Today, no child can exist without one or at least access to one.
Changes: Education
Tech
More Far Sightedness
Less acceptance of the "establishment"
More interest in distrust of the government.
Less optimistic outlook on the future.
Still, you find high quality, well motivated, far reaching, and can do traits in about all generations.
Stereotyping a generation's traits has more to do with people's general attitudes of life than it has to do with a scientific study.
(boy will I draw the fine on this one, and this is my first post in a long time!!!)
Commencement speech: You're not special
"During the 1960's the boomers were a pot smoking, war protesting, free love, woodstock attending, draft card burning bunch of useless human beings. Kicker: Not all of them were.
And, after many of the 60's youth got that stuff out of their flesh, they went on to become rather successful in their businesses and became rather boringly model citizens."
In fact, this is the great divide in this generation. Either they loved the ideals of the 60s or they hated them, and they have not changed their personal views since 1980. They are fairly evenly divided. These are today's leaders for the most part. John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi. Take your pick.
The more overarching question is whether you believe history is linear or cyclical. And if cyclical, what is the frequency of the wave. Your description is largely linear and limited to one lifetime. If you have not read "The Fourth Turning", that would give you a perspective on the generational or cyclical theory of history.
Jacob explored an aspect of it here: http://earlyretirementextreme.com/peak- ... d-ere.html
And, after many of the 60's youth got that stuff out of their flesh, they went on to become rather successful in their businesses and became rather boringly model citizens."
In fact, this is the great divide in this generation. Either they loved the ideals of the 60s or they hated them, and they have not changed their personal views since 1980. They are fairly evenly divided. These are today's leaders for the most part. John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi. Take your pick.
The more overarching question is whether you believe history is linear or cyclical. And if cyclical, what is the frequency of the wave. Your description is largely linear and limited to one lifetime. If you have not read "The Fourth Turning", that would give you a perspective on the generational or cyclical theory of history.
Jacob explored an aspect of it here: http://earlyretirementextreme.com/peak- ... d-ere.html
This generation did indeed grow up playing sports where they were told that everyone was a winner and no one was a loser. Score was not kept. Everyone got a trophy. The bell curve was tossed out of grading so everyone could "earn" an A.
While they were not competing with one another they were the first generation to compete with adults for the low-wage jobs that some of us here found to be character-builders when we were their age. To add insult to injury, the hardest job I ever had - bar none - was the one I had as a kid. It has since been replaced by a machine.
All the while their grandparents became the wealthiest generation in human history, in large measure through tax-deferred means, while the government was borrowing from their children to finance daily expenses. Grandma and grandpa will continue to demand exorbitantly expensive government funded personalized medicine and will vote with their demographic-tsunami to ensure that the government borrows from their great-great-grandchildren to finance it.
That's what happens when you grow up not keeping score. You are defeated before you even learn the rules of the game.
While they were not competing with one another they were the first generation to compete with adults for the low-wage jobs that some of us here found to be character-builders when we were their age. To add insult to injury, the hardest job I ever had - bar none - was the one I had as a kid. It has since been replaced by a machine.
All the while their grandparents became the wealthiest generation in human history, in large measure through tax-deferred means, while the government was borrowing from their children to finance daily expenses. Grandma and grandpa will continue to demand exorbitantly expensive government funded personalized medicine and will vote with their demographic-tsunami to ensure that the government borrows from their great-great-grandchildren to finance it.
That's what happens when you grow up not keeping score. You are defeated before you even learn the rules of the game.
@Ego
Well said.
@HSpencer
You are correct that individual details won't blatantly fall in to generational classification, but from 50,000 feet it works nicely. Generational cycles Are made up of millions upon millions of small things, which aren't evident in detail. It's kind of like the Farside cartoon where a caveman is looking through a microscope and says, "It's a mammoth!". The generational characteristics are more obvious the more distance you have from the individual.
I wish the Boomers had kept more of their 60's values. We would be better off.
Well said.
@HSpencer
You are correct that individual details won't blatantly fall in to generational classification, but from 50,000 feet it works nicely. Generational cycles Are made up of millions upon millions of small things, which aren't evident in detail. It's kind of like the Farside cartoon where a caveman is looking through a microscope and says, "It's a mammoth!". The generational characteristics are more obvious the more distance you have from the individual.
I wish the Boomers had kept more of their 60's values. We would be better off.
@jacob re foreign generational history h-- You might be interested in the biography of Sophie Scholl if you have not read it. Short summary here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Scholl
Book: http://www.amazon.com/Sophie-Scholl-Ger ... 0752446754 Not free, but well worth reading.
If I were a history teacher of 20th Century Europe, I would have the students read that and the Anne Frank diaries together.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Scholl
Book: http://www.amazon.com/Sophie-Scholl-Ger ... 0752446754 Not free, but well worth reading.
If I were a history teacher of 20th Century Europe, I would have the students read that and the Anne Frank diaries together.
Now that I'm 50, I feel entitled to say: "Hey, you kids, get off my lawn!"
No, really, this intergenerational sniping has been going on since the dawn of humanity. It's why the Athenians made Socrates, the so-called corruptor of youth, drink the hemlock.
So, let's just let the kids be kids. Most of them will figure it out without too much blood or angst.
Except that I AM getting really tired of seeing everyone under 30 walking the streets with their gaze cemented on a perpetually poised smartphone. I mean, age and experience has taught me that nothing is THAT interesting and no one is THAT important that connectivity MUST be maintained 24/7. Stop and smell the roses... or smile at a stranger.
No, really, this intergenerational sniping has been going on since the dawn of humanity. It's why the Athenians made Socrates, the so-called corruptor of youth, drink the hemlock.
So, let's just let the kids be kids. Most of them will figure it out without too much blood or angst.
Except that I AM getting really tired of seeing everyone under 30 walking the streets with their gaze cemented on a perpetually poised smartphone. I mean, age and experience has taught me that nothing is THAT interesting and no one is THAT important that connectivity MUST be maintained 24/7. Stop and smell the roses... or smile at a stranger.
@Maus
The smartphones--tablets, what next? I personally don't want any smartphone calls or worse "texts", but I do want to have help when I am (at my age) in some kind of a jam. So to me, the phone can put a tow truck or EMT near me, where in my previous life it might have been more difficult.
Don't get confused, I am the one who rails against cell phones in general. The other day I was with wife and we traversed way out into the boonies a really long way off from civilization as we know it. So had the reliable vehicle gone down, or in my aged neglectfulness, I had forgotten to fill er' up, I might have needed a hand.
I would prefer privacy. However tech offers me a way to reach out for help. Also wife's aged mother could have problems and her Lifeline phone would ring our cell.
Trade Offs? I give up my own privacy and lose my immediate contact with the world. We choose here. The tech is out there, but if we don't get a 3G or 4G "plan"---(I still don't know what a "G" is, but I suspect it is some kind of bandwidth speed or something)------so we are behind the times, or what?
I don't like people who walk through a store or down the street using these smartphones and ignoring everyone else, but maybe I am wrong, and instead I need to learn to do the same thing they are? In my normal stupor, I can probably either only listen or look at the smartphone, or I can put it in my pocket and go along as I consider normal for me to do.
The "cellphone" has both saved lives, and through the improper use of it (using/texting while driving or walking) has taken lives of user or others or both. The cellphone has isolated people into it (as you pointed out) and made us have a portable version of our PC with us at all times. The same can be said for the tablets, gameboys and what ever else is being used to cordon people off from being actually involved in life. (Wow, was that statement too strong?)
To conclude, I remember in the mid 1960's, my driving my 1954 Ford 2 Door Hardtop, and stopping at Beverley's Drive In to make a call to my girlfriend (now wife) to see if I could stop by and see her for a few minutes. Beverley's had a phone that you could use from the car!!! You just pulled up and dropped in a dime and made the call. I will not end this by saying "those were the good old days" even if they were. I don't want to offend those Under 30 folks in your post!!!!
The smartphones--tablets, what next? I personally don't want any smartphone calls or worse "texts", but I do want to have help when I am (at my age) in some kind of a jam. So to me, the phone can put a tow truck or EMT near me, where in my previous life it might have been more difficult.
Don't get confused, I am the one who rails against cell phones in general. The other day I was with wife and we traversed way out into the boonies a really long way off from civilization as we know it. So had the reliable vehicle gone down, or in my aged neglectfulness, I had forgotten to fill er' up, I might have needed a hand.
I would prefer privacy. However tech offers me a way to reach out for help. Also wife's aged mother could have problems and her Lifeline phone would ring our cell.
Trade Offs? I give up my own privacy and lose my immediate contact with the world. We choose here. The tech is out there, but if we don't get a 3G or 4G "plan"---(I still don't know what a "G" is, but I suspect it is some kind of bandwidth speed or something)------so we are behind the times, or what?
I don't like people who walk through a store or down the street using these smartphones and ignoring everyone else, but maybe I am wrong, and instead I need to learn to do the same thing they are? In my normal stupor, I can probably either only listen or look at the smartphone, or I can put it in my pocket and go along as I consider normal for me to do.
The "cellphone" has both saved lives, and through the improper use of it (using/texting while driving or walking) has taken lives of user or others or both. The cellphone has isolated people into it (as you pointed out) and made us have a portable version of our PC with us at all times. The same can be said for the tablets, gameboys and what ever else is being used to cordon people off from being actually involved in life. (Wow, was that statement too strong?)
To conclude, I remember in the mid 1960's, my driving my 1954 Ford 2 Door Hardtop, and stopping at Beverley's Drive In to make a call to my girlfriend (now wife) to see if I could stop by and see her for a few minutes. Beverley's had a phone that you could use from the car!!! You just pulled up and dropped in a dime and made the call. I will not end this by saying "those were the good old days" even if they were. I don't want to offend those Under 30 folks in your post!!!!
-
dot_com_vet
- Posts: 603
- Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:07 am
HSpencer, I was an anti-cellphone type for a long time too.
Now, that I have a smartphone, it's replaced everything from a countertop radio to hardcopy books.
I used to travel out of town with two laptops, a pager, and cellphone. Now I just take the smart phone.
It's certainly not ERE friendly, I think they're way overpriced. But for someone still working up to ER(E), and using it for business, it's well worth it.
Now, that I have a smartphone, it's replaced everything from a countertop radio to hardcopy books.
I used to travel out of town with two laptops, a pager, and cellphone. Now I just take the smart phone.
It's certainly not ERE friendly, I think they're way overpriced. But for someone still working up to ER(E), and using it for business, it's well worth it.
As a follow-up, Neil Howe addressed the speech and some similar thoughts in a new blog post a couple days ago:
http://blog.lifecourse.com/2012/06/dear ... qus_thread
http://blog.lifecourse.com/2012/06/dear ... qus_thread
Howe is money. The Worst Generation is still screwing us. The sooner we (GenX) help the millennials gain office and power over the Boomers the better.
The sooner we can get the Boomers out of any legitimate position the better.
http://blog.lifecourse.com/2012/06/once ... -silent-2/
The sooner we can get the Boomers out of any legitimate position the better.
http://blog.lifecourse.com/2012/06/once ... -silent-2/
I think it is a good speech for (mostly) spoiled GenX and Y generations (I'm in my early 30's). For many, the existing hardship is relying on more money from mom and dad because they never learned what it takes to take care of yourself.
Nothing like the growing population to highlight how small the planet is becoming, and that even if you have a unique fingerprint, it sure looks a lot like all the others. They need to know that we will all be completing globally for jobs.
Too bad the youth doesn't look up from their iphones long enough to think about real issues or to keep their car on the road.
Nothing like the growing population to highlight how small the planet is becoming, and that even if you have a unique fingerprint, it sure looks a lot like all the others. They need to know that we will all be completing globally for jobs.
Too bad the youth doesn't look up from their iphones long enough to think about real issues or to keep their car on the road.
Generational issues seem like they are "in the air" these days. I am seeing an article about it every couple days:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/24/opini ... -back.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/24/opini ... -back.html
I don't know, I see people aged 10 to 80 frequently looking at their smartphones. Okay, slightly more younger people look at their smartphones, but younger people tend to be a bit more social than older people. I think people of all ages are shifting towards a more "electronic way of being", which is causing them to have shortened attention spans and become more asocial.
Another generationally themed story:
It almost seems as if we’re trying to raise a nation of “adultescents.”
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/b ... z1yoFtcEif
It almost seems as if we’re trying to raise a nation of “adultescents.”
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/b ... z1yoFtcEif
Thanks for the link @Ego—I hadn’t heard the term “snow-plow parents” before, but it brought to mind this couple, accused of planting drugs in the car of a school volunteer who wasn’t giving sufficient attention to their offspring:
http://newportbeach.patch.com/articles/ ... conspiracy
If true, it would set a new standard for snow-plowing!
I didn’t care much for the original speech as he seemed to be picking on the students for the very attitudes inculcated by their parents and by the school, each for their own reasons. If an individual feels special-without-a-cause, unless that attitude is carefully fed and protected, reality will do its job as a corrective soon enough. The evils that @Jacob mentions come from feeling special just by belonging to a group, nation or tribe—that kind of gang-related false pride can do a lot of harm.
And the speaker should have been more careful about what he asked for—does anyone really want children resigned to mediocrity before they’re even out of the gate? To prepare them for real life, perhaps they should pursue a Diploma in Mind-Bending Monotony, with modules such as “Dream Abandonment”, “Petty Workplace Politics” and “Dealing with Mug Theft”:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/soci ... 2062531819
Who took my stapler?
http://newportbeach.patch.com/articles/ ... conspiracy
If true, it would set a new standard for snow-plowing!
I didn’t care much for the original speech as he seemed to be picking on the students for the very attitudes inculcated by their parents and by the school, each for their own reasons. If an individual feels special-without-a-cause, unless that attitude is carefully fed and protected, reality will do its job as a corrective soon enough. The evils that @Jacob mentions come from feeling special just by belonging to a group, nation or tribe—that kind of gang-related false pride can do a lot of harm.
And the speaker should have been more careful about what he asked for—does anyone really want children resigned to mediocrity before they’re even out of the gate? To prepare them for real life, perhaps they should pursue a Diploma in Mind-Bending Monotony, with modules such as “Dream Abandonment”, “Petty Workplace Politics” and “Dealing with Mug Theft”:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/soci ... 2062531819
Who took my stapler?