The baby boomers and the price of personal freedom

The Guardian ^ | 22 August 2010 | Will Hutton

[Right Wing Assault]

What do I have in common with someone born in 1946?

You were both born in the same 18 year window.

[Nervous Tick]

You better sneak up on me from my left side, Rachel.

Don’t hear so good out of that ear anymore.

Don’t screw up though, girl, ‘cause I shoot back. :-)

Remember that old saw: old age and treachery beat youth and vigor every time...

[Smokin' Joe]

The biggest difference was TV. Never before had the ability to so throughly distort reality been available to so many to be so widely distributed. Not even the newspapers could look at you with such gravitas and say " and that's the way it is..."

[ansel12]

See post 80, first we would need to stop using the official definition, and remove all history and data that used the official definition, and then acknowldege that we will label an 8 year period of births, a “generation”.

[Freedom56v2]

Well, I am hoping that we as a nation and we as a generation can turn this thing around. I don’t want to give in and say fait accompli—that it is Off the cliff we go to our doom It won’t be easy to turn around, but I cannot wake up in the morning thinking that we are doomed.

[celtic gal]

I am a boomer and I do not consider myself in the group this clown seems to find himself. My education was NOT free, I did NOT smoke pot or use drugs, I was NOT into free love, and all the BS he is feeling guilty about. Nope, I had my nose to the grindstone getting my degree and then I went into the service for a career. Some of us knew how blessed we were to be Americans and served in her interests.
This author can go somewhere else for absolution.

[ansel12]

I supported an aggressive war and finishing it, I could not understand why the old people were so weird and inadequate in leadership, and that applied to decades of chaos and drifting, weakness, and radical liberalism by the pre boomer generations.

I have always been baffled by what happened to the grownups from roughly 1935 to 1980.

Everyday of my young life seemed to reveal another disaster from JFK or the Warren court, or Lyndon Johnson, or Ted Kennedy, or the Generals, or the NAACP, or, the Church Commission, or the media, or the naming of undercover spies resulting in their deaths, or College administrations promoting Communism, or Watergate, or letting government employees unionize against us, or the creation of massive, permanent agencies, or letting the teacher’s become nationalized and letting them take charge of our schools.

Some people forget that our Vice President resigned in disgrace, and then was quickly followed by our President resigning in disgrace, or that the Supreme Court made abortion legal in 1973, this boomer stuff about the children and teens is ridiculous, and it is covering up for decades of literal madness in the adults that were leading America before 1980. The boomers finally getting old enough to start gaining power in the late 1980s and 1990s, without question was an improvement for America.

[wintertime]

mainly full employment
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Well...I graduated from my professional school in 1979 and was punched in the nose with Carter’s stagflation.

It was a eight year struggle on the very financial edge of ruination to get my practice up and running.

[ansel12]

If you want to be reminded of just how radically left the adults of that time were and the media, then go check out the DVDs of the 1960s, “Smothers Brothers Show”.

It was prime time TV of radical politics, and direct to the camera lectures, that were softened with jokes and occasional music.

I just watched some of them again, and trust me, your memory does not do it justice, it was hardcore leftism delivered by corporate establishment and millionaire business people.

[tbw2]

He’s in the UK. Maybe they have a different definition. Or their baby boom ran out ten years sooner.

[Inyo-Mono]

The baby boomers. Born between 1945 and 1955, The guy is an idiot, the boomer generation is those people born from 1946 to 1964. All these "generations" are inventions of the human mind. There is no "correct" definition but some definitions make far more sense than others. When you think about it, a "generation" should group together individuals with a similar experience based upon their era of birth.

A time span lasting from 1946 to 1964 is far too long for a single "generation". For example:

The year is 1967. What does 21 year old John, a combat infantryman in Vietnam, have in common with 3 year old Timmy, two years out of toilet traning?

In 2010, how will John and Timmy remember "The Sixties"?

You have it exactly right. I was born in 1950 and people born in 1960 do not have my shared experiences of the late '60s at all. They were just little kids then.

[ansel12]

10 years would still be way short for a “generation”, besides, in 1945 the war was still in full force and the men were overseas.

[okie01]

But too many of the young people understood nothing of what had gone before. They wanted freedom. They wanted to escape any sense of responsibility.

They wanted freedom. And they wanted to escape any sense of responsibility.

But they never really understood that these propositions are mutually exclusive.

[Smokin' Joe]

I just watched some of them again, and trust me, your memory does not do it justice, it was hardcore leftism delivered by corporate establishment and millionaire business people.

My memory does, it's just nice to know I was not the only one to notice.

With subsequent decades to study the effectiveness of imagery and phraseology--measured by polls, calculated in communications arts departments at Universities, the indoctrination and manipulation of the masses via the medium of television (as well as pop music--especially videos--where images impart meaning not necessarily found in the words), by mass media has never enjoyed such power.

Even the imagery at Invesco Field, the stage setting was reminiscent of Leni Reifenstahl's (sp?) Triumph of the Will, a seminal piece of propaganda, and no doubt an inspiration for the Leftists.

All since then refines basic principles and the use thereof, the basics were pretty well known by the Nazis and the Soviets.

It's more subtle now, but that is done to reduce the reaction, the backlash, and resistance to the implantation of concepts as desired by the propagandist. (You can trip over a step, but most will just shuffle up the ramp).

Alinsky tactics, are outgrowths of the agitprop industry, and the more blatant some of the rhetoric is, the more palatable the subtle lies--one plays against the other. (Something the Republican Party just doesn't seem to get, as it tosses it's "radicals" under the bus with ridiculous regularity instead of using them to at least shift the axis of debate back toward their own side.)

When serious competition rolls in, it is villified as 'extreme' ("Talk Radio") so people won't listen to it and begin critical analysis of the viewpoints on the issue.

It's new, improved, extra freshening, lemon scented, concentrated, fat and sodium free, in the new (smaller) economy size, but it's the same soap they were selling then, just in a slicker package.

But the 'buzzwords' are wearing out, as people realize they aren't "radicals", "racist" or "homophobes", they just are tired of being told a sh*t sundae is ice cream with cherries and whipped cream on top.

Hopefully, the whole "recovery" thing will point out to the masses that the lies do not change their own reality, and the internet has permitted that word to get out as never before.

While the web can be used for propaganda, too, it's counter propaganda potential is even greater if it remains a free medium.

[norton]

Depression in the 1930's, and WWII were horrific times. Afterwords, the older people were very happy to settle down into dullness and some meager level of material enjoyment. And who could blame them?

I know the risk in making this statement, but today's mess is the doing of much of the boomer generation, but it is the making of the very "greatest generation" that everyone misses so much.

So the generation that arose in depression and fought WW2 wanted to settle back in have something to enjoy..."and who could blame them?"
OK, but what's missing is that they also insisted that none of that would ever happen to their own kids..."and who could blame them?"

I'm just old enough to remember mixing some lard like substance with red dye to make butter substitute (margarine). I remember letters from uncles who'd gone for a soldier, and from their comrades and officers. I also remember how toys suddenly became available after the war (originally MIJ), and then just kept on getting more and more available after that.

There was Doctor Spock, housing booms, production capacity and manpower eager to be kept busy and, following the GI Bill, a college education became a perceived necessity...and the UN was going to make war obsolete. There was new stuff to buy, money suddenly available to buy that stuff, and years of added adolescence in which to enjoy it.

"Baby boomers" arose from the perfectly justified desire of their parents that they would have access and opportunities that mommy and daddy had not had.

It's not too surprising that those kids (alternatively "the 60's generation") accepted it and failed to see any down side...at least no down side until about 2008 or so.

Don't overlook the fact that a large segment of the boomer generation IS going to be hit hard by today's economic cause and effect...and they never saw it coming.

Disclaimer: I'm too old to be a boomer and thought I was too old to be drafted for Vietnam (wrong!) so think that I can speak as a fair witness to those times.

[ClearCase_guy]

Well said. I can't really disagree with any of that.

The only thing I would add is that the Baby Boomers really should have seen these bad times coming. They were warned. Reagan told them, both Bushes told them. Many others. But the vocal, radical Boomers spewed hatred at anyone stupid enough to question their grand vision of a Utopian future. There is an undeniable aspect of arrogance among certain elements of the Baby Boomer generation.

I my opinion, the current rampant partisanship in American politics comes largely from this arrogance. It's not the root cause of all our problems, but it has made it harder for us to find solutions to the problems we have all inherited.

[Polybius]

If you want to start making up names and divisions then “boomer” needs to disappear from language altogether.

First of all "I" did not make up anything. Sociologists who study generational cohorts did.

"Boomer" has it's place. It's original place that starts at the end of World War II and accurately groups a generational cohort for the next 10 years that grew up, for example, listening to Buddy Holly while in Junior High.

Those of us in high school when "American Pie" came out in 1971 had no idea who the hell Buddy Holly was. The Boomers, our younger high school teachers who we considered "grown ups", had to explain the song to us. We did not know Buddy Holly from Fatty Arbuckle.

We also need to erase decades of data, and shaped public opinion that had all been based on the official definition of boomer.

Please explain how "data" that assumes that John, who earned his Combat Infantryman's Badge at age 19 in 1965 in Vietnam, is culturally interchangeable with Timmy, who earned his "I Was Potty Trained Today" Certificate from Mommy in 1965, has any sociological worth whatsoever.

In regards to predicting cultural behavior, such "data" is GIGO: Garbage In - Garbage Out.

Those that are traditionally though of as "Boomers" are the cohort that became politically active by supporting JFK in large numbers. We in Generation Jones became politically active by supporting Ronald Reagan in large numbers.

Any research firm that advises a client to treat the Ronald Reagan Generation Jones cohort as if they were the J.F.K. Boomer cohort will get it dead wrong.

When the GAO for instance does a study like this they use the official government definition for boomers..... “United States Government Accountability Office GAO Report to Congressional Committees”.... “Why GAO Did This Study.... The first wave of baby boomers(born between 1946 and 1964) will become eligible for Social Securityearly retirement benefits in 2008. Inaddition to concerns about how the boomers’ retirement will strain the nation’s retirement and healthsystems, concerns also have been raised about the possibility

You are confusing behavioral analysis studies with carrying capacity studies. The two issues are apples and oranges.

In the study you cite, you are dealing with how numbers affect an outcome, not how cultural behavior affects an outcome.

You might as well be counting the numbers of herbivours weighing over 300 pound at the City Zoo and determining how the numbers will affect your feeding costs. Such a study is meaningless when trying to study how a zebra will behave differently from a hipopotamus.

The article in this thread deals with behavior, not sheer tonnage of biomass.

In regards to analysing a specific behaviorral cohort, the author has it correct and you do not.

[ansel12]

See post 87, in 1990 the boomers ranged in age from 26 to 44, they hadn’t been running much before then, 30 something is not really the age of a nation’s leaders.

When you read post 87, it reminds you of just how hard at work the pre boomers were during the most destructive period in American history, 1930 to 1975. In 1975, a 55 year old Senator would have been born in 1920.

[Joan Kerrey]

Everyone born before Obama’s path to POTUS are evil, selfish, bigoted scoundrels. Ask him or any of his friends.

[abigail2]

LOL, you don’t have to tell me...I was there. I was liberal then. I actually knew and worked with Students for a democratic society 9when I was a social worker in New York. 1969-70 Bernadette dorn, Mark Rudd etc.used me to get drivers licenses when they went under ground.(although I didn’t know who they were at the time...I had come back to california and someone must have given them my address.)