Are today's 20-somethings less likely to protest than the Baby Boomers?

http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/laura-harrison-mcbride/36503/are-todays-20-somethings-less-likely-to-protest-than-the-baby-boomers

For several years, and even more markedly since George Bush's 2008 economic Epic Fail, Generations X, Y, Jones and beyond have been trashing the Baby Boomers, saying it is all our fault that the economy is in a bad way and our armies are making nothing but horribly maimed Americans and enemies globally everywhere you look. Bush, it is true, is chronologically a baby boomer. But mentally, he is really of his father's generation, a member of the World War II generation ridiculously venerated by Tom Brokaw as The Greatest. (Note: This past week, no less a boomer than President Bill Clinton commented on the greed of that generation, when he told The Atlantic, "These are much more complex things . We have no idea if the World War II generation would have made the decisions they should make on climate change if they thought doing so would bring an end to their economic prosperity." He also said no one generation was the greatest...but then, he is a smart man.)

Brokaw's sycophantic excesses
Brokaw, sycophant extraordinaire, is a member of the tiny generation born during World War II, and as such, has had no problems in life. Education? Given to him. Good job? Given to him? The perks of modern life? His for the asking. Small generations always do well that way; large generations never do, and the baby boom was the largest generation in the history of the world.

The World War II generation's exploits were wildly overblown even before Brokaw painted them in gold leaf. As it happens, the British saved themselves during the Blitz, three British scientists having already given the world radar in 1935. (No, it was not an American invention.) When US servicemen returned home, a grateful nation gave them the GI Bill, which included housing and even meals at the time, and never again. Current GIs who arrive home whole and want an education have to fight for it.

Bad GI Bill for boomers, even worse now
Boomers got a watered down version of the GI Bill, but not nearly so shredded as what's offered to Bush's heroes. And heroes they are, volunteering for a couple of wars even less popular than Vietnam, and disdained by a greater segment of the population. And sustaining more grievous injuries than ever seen before on the planet.

More at the link --

because they aren't being drafted. The baby boomers were right to march and protest in the sixties. They should be lauded for that. But it was also in their own self-interest to do so. And they were certainly no better than Gen X, Gen Y, or whatever we're calling kids today.

someone was REALLY not paying attention. We were also protesting against not being able to get birth control without a man's consent, abortions or be able to sit anywhere on a bus or drink from any drinking fountain. Did we do that for us? Yep. Funny how it worked out to benefit future generations, that whole Civil Rights thingy, ya know?

Now, find me the equivalent in Gen X and Gen Y. "And they were certainly no better . . . " Uh, yes we were and are. Who the hell do you think is going to save Medicare and SS? Sure as hell not Gen X or Y and whatever comes after -- they're too busy waiting 2 days in line to buy their new I-Shiny Thing.

Now, having said all that, I have no intention of joining the Generation Divide. It's meat thrown out by the PTB to keep us distracted. But I'm also not going to let anyone dismiss the Rights we so desperately fought for, went to jail for and died for.

Admittedly as an infant :)

But, while I admire the good work boomers did in the sixties, I think it's wrong of you to imply your generation is somehow better than mine because of it. Circumstances were totally different. We grew up without the draft, in intergrated schools, listening to our parents (boomers) the majority of whom voted for Reagan.

Under the same cirucmstances you faced in the 60's, I have no doubt that Gen X'ers, or the kids today, would have been in the streets too.

Again, I'm not running down the boomers. I'm disagreeing with the proposition that they are somehow "better" than those who followed.

that they are less likely to protest than baby-boomers, haven't they?

I think that the protest generation of the 60s was one of a kind in that most of them were SO young. I didn't become politically aware until the shenanigans of the Gore-* Election of 2000 - I was 39 years old. But then again, some people never become politically aware.......

that could possibly send you "against" your will to a country where over 50,000 of just our military died..ummmmm tends to get you out in the streets.

Having to fight for people who are being killed and stomped and refused the right to vote... tends to get you out in the streets.

In 1970 after much of this.. in Minnesota women could be sent to mental sanitariums on their husbands whims and had no voice.. tends to get you out in the streets.


If this generation faced exactly the same conditions we did.. they would be in the street quicker than we were.

Social Media has many sides..some of them pretty dark..but if we had had the ability to get information out as we do today..that would have impacted votes quicker also.. and may have even helped us out.

We had to organize face to face.. skin to skin.. now it is done on an individual basis.

But you have to admit.. Wisconsin was a throwback to those days of sit-ins..


Different time, different issues, different strategies.

since I did all the war protests since Bush started this mess, and didn't see many young people.

Our protests have shown we are powerless. We're the dogs standing on the shock plate... knowing we're gonna get it again, but unable to change the situation. We just stand waiting for the next shock.... and the younger people have never known anything else.