Quote:
|
Originally Posted by demonrail666
That was a great article. Yes, there's an evident connection between the boomers and GX although, obviously, generations themselves are always too broad to be truly definable. Fugazi and Butthole Surfers were both GX bands, just as Zappa and Phil Ochs were both Boomers.
Equally 'millennials' is, on reflection, too broad a term to be that useful. I talk to millennials at work, I read their comments on 4chan, I interact with them here, I meet them at a football match and I see huge irreconcilable differences, but they all qualify as millennials. [...]
|
all this true, no generation is monolithic, but where it gets meaningful is that certain currents become more dominant within each generation even if they don’t represent the whole of it.
take for example the hippies and counterculture of the 60s, a time of great upheaval: they were never more than 25% of all young people. the other 75% of them were squares.
the 80s were marked by yuppie culture, but how many people were
actually yuppies?
there was medieval stuff still done in the renaissance, there was renaissance stuff being done in the baroque, the renaissance returns in the neoclassical, the baroque comes back as rococo, etc.
i see these as forces/currents that take turns taking over rather than definitive periods or generations. vico was right.
all you really need to define a [whatever] is:
1) a generation large enough to make waves (tiny gen-xers were sandwiched between mass boomers and millennials never had the chance to set the agenda)
2) a portion of that big generation large enough to determine the kinds of waves made by said generation
gen-xers are torn between the generational pull that preceded them and the one that succeeded them. they didn’t have enough weight on their own.
recently read a piece in the economist (hi h8kurdt!) that hypothesized that a new tianamen square could not happen today in china because the large generation that rebelled in the late 80s/early 90s is now older and more conservative; and the generation that succeeded them, while restless, simply lacks the numbers to make a difference.
we’re all just a bunch of math problems, haaa haaa haaa
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by demonrail666
[...] No doubt the SJW types dominate at universities but I wouldn't want to say about other areas. And even there, I'd say, the woke thing (which I use synonymously with SJW) seems far more dominant among academics than students. Those students who do fit that stereotype are just far more vocal than the majority, and get near unanimous support from academics.
|
i wouldn’t even say they dominate universities: they only dominate liberal arts colleges and humanities departments. people in physics or engineering or business or (i’ll go there) petroleum science (lol) are gonna say very different things than the more strident cultural studies types.
so you’ll get these sort of shenanigans at oberlin but not at mit for example.
again a matter of enough numbers.
...
ok i dont know where peterson went so i guess we’ll skip that