Not sure what I think about his article, still processing parts of it. I was not aware of any "controversy." But then again The Guardian was involved...
Here's the politics of Millennials I have observed, and they come in three main factions. "racist and sexist" defining behavior, the SJW sorts, the hyper liberals, "we need more representation of peoples X Y and Z, you can only be racist if you aren't a minority, etc. The "rational-conservative-libertarian" types. "the wage gap isn't true in the way it is commonly phrased", "Government needs to stay out of our business with regulations that serve corperations". However, "gay rights are good", "we should strive for equality", general support for welfare programs. The "radical-conservative-libertarian" types. Hating all things leftist, all sorts of "racist" while not racist, probably over posting in /r/the_donald. Muslims are terrorists, Mexicans are bad, etc. Gamergate was a clash between the lower two groups and the higher group. The current election, sanders, was the higher two groups vs the lower groups. The current election is the higher group vs the lower group. This will be the new party definitions, with the middle group's support being the deciding factor, I think. Right and left will find new definitions, and the new generation will start fighting one another on all the new issues the nation faces. Global warming, gay rights, and so on are old news and hallmarks of an era that is ending. To look at these issues having been decided and to say "the right is dead" is absurd. The right will never die, it will just shift with the times and find new positions on issues.
I don't have asbestos underwear thick enough to dive in here, but she's wrong to point the finger at those darned whippersnappers; she should be pointing it at 60s Maoists. The New Left didn't survive them.
You need the plugin that turns "Millenials" into "Pesky Whipper-Snappers." This showed up in my feed as: "Will the Left Survive the Pesky Whipper-Snappers?" More substantively, though, I'm finding my thoughts on this moderated by the fact that those who protest the loudest are invariably the most powerless. the campus protesters who turn the campus upside down are widely acknowledged to be the unemployable and endangered as soon as they leave university. Here, look at this: It was the right whose power was on the wane. Conservatives were fighting a trench war to retain the Wally Cleaver '50s and they were losing. Now? Now there's a formerly-Bruce on the cover of Vanity Fair wearing an evening gown. Gays can marry everywhere and you can get into legit legal trouble for denigrating a minority or a woman. The right has lost. Yet those "pesky whipper snappers" are growing up in a world where their standard of living is a pale shadow of their parents'. They've been without freedom since birth, their social landscape is a barren grid of green on a phosphor screen and globalization has effectively leveled off the peaks and valleys of opportunity. They're striking back as hard as they can, where they can, and that generally means a nice game of More Liberal Than You. The thing is, they aren't striking at a world in which black men are shot by cops for reaching for a book. There's exactly fuckall they think they can do about that. They're striking at a world where they're paying $20k a year to hear about the greatness they'll never achieve. It's been nearly two decades since I read a student newspaper but it was shocking even then by the insane warfare over triviality that ruled the roost at my entirely-liberal PAC10 school. What I think about this article is that academia is tearing itself to pieces, and about bloody damn time. Whatever it realigns as it'll probably be a lot more relevant to the world at large.When I was growing up in the ’60s and early ’70s, conservatives were the enforcers of conformity. It was the right that was suspicious, sniffing out Communists and scrutinizing public figures for signs of sedition.
I don't know if it is that I see this shit everywhere now, or if I just notice it more. But to me it appears that anything bad happens? Fucking Millennials. There are now serious new stories about how Hillary won't be president because Millenials. Global warming? Millennials are not doing their fair share. The auto market sucks, yup, Millennials. And why aren't all you 25 year old Millennials buying houses to prop up the housing market! Man, the sooner we are done with the Boomers, the better things will be. I just hope our generation does not turn out to be a shitstain like our parents are.
Millennials get a triple threat. (1) Their parents are Boomers, who grew up sheltered and overprivileged. Any millennial failing reflects their failures or, more accurately, the failures of their peers... and boomers are all about slagging their peers. (2) GenXers watched millennials grow up with the attention and privilege that they themselves lacked so their sympathies are minimal at best. Intellectually, a GenXer can observe that millennials came of age during a recession and have fewer opportunities than any recent cohort before them. Emotionally, they're the entitled little shits that got participation trophies while the Y was closing to make room for another fucking build-a-bear workshop so fuck them. (3) Any job that might have been available to a GenXer when a boomer retired stayed with the boomer when his retirement was wiped out by the recession. So the boomer is in the GenXer's job, the GenXer is in the millenial's job, and the millennial is not only fucked, he's depreciating the workplace my "disintermediating" someone else's career. It's a pretty simple calculus - there are three generations walking the workforce right now. One of them didn't grab the hot potato. The dynamics behind this are complex and nuanced but nobody does complexity and nuance in a listicle or Vox video. So the spoonfed answer must, necessarily, be "those darn kids."
Probably because Hillary is bullshit, cars are bullshit, and houses are bullshit. Identity politics are confusing as hell to me though, because I see them as too mired in detail to make substantive change. That said, it feels like this is the kind of thing that works on a longer time frame.
I linked to Brian Leiter giving a pretty concise statement of the problem just today, but I guess linking to a philosophy blog without providing context wasn't a good idea. When the left has been effective it has been by helping everyone look behind the curtain, encouraging everyone to instead see the role they're playing as central and ignore everything else makes it abundantly clear which roles suck, but doesn't help with making them suck less, because if you're not one of the powerful you need overwhelming numbers to make any change and carving the powerless up into ever smaller blocs defined by ever more subtle identities means no one has the numbers to matter.
I'm pretty sure it works for flagamuffin but yeah - for me, at least, I need to be encouraged to give a shit. Philosophy in general makes me go cross-eyed because it seems like a self-inclusive jargonfest wherein mundane ideas are masqueraded as ground-breaking through semantic sleight-of-hand and obscure reference.
In defense of philosophy: if you bring me a problem that requires category theory to solve, I can safely assume you know your modern algebra, topology, calculus if not analysis and formal logic, because if you didn't know those things you would not be able to state, and probably not even see, a problem that required category theory to solve. Everyone learns as much math as they need. Philosophy tries to tackle everyday problems that are just as subtle, but having an everyday problem doesn't necessarily mean you know any philosophy. Academic incentives being what they are, philosophers are more or less obliged to assume you do anyway.
Here's the crux of the problem: I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT YOUR WORDS SAY. Not to denigrate the knowledge, not to argue that the language is unnecessarily florid, not to demean the study... but if we're tackling everyday problems, shouldn't the tools and methods be parseable by everyday humans?Philosophy tries to tackle everyday problems that are just as subtle, but having an everyday problem doesn't necessarily mean you know any philosophy.
Not even vaguely helpful or illuminative. Hillary is bullshit why. Cars are bullshit why. Houses are bullshit why. See - the prevailing sentiment by everyone non-millennial is that millenials are entitled, overprivileged reactionary little shits. So stinking up the place like an entitled, overprivileged reactionary little shit not only does nothing to advance the conversation, it calcifies the battle lines. Because here you are, drinking your hatorade, and deciding I'm the problem for pointing out how salty you are. You're better than this.
I won't opine on Hillary, but I agree with his sentiment. Cars are bullshit because because they are clunky and high maintenance and driving through city traffic sucks. Can't afford anything other than a clunker as the only jobs available are at McColesworth. Taking the bus is often just as fast, unless you live in the suburbs in which case, during rush hour, taking the train is faster. Houses are bullshit because they can cost upwards of a million dollars unless you want to live far away from the city centre. Except that then you'll have to spend hours commuting to the center where all the jobs are or buy a car and still spend a significant amount of time going through motorways that run as slow as molasses. Rent is increased in accordance with the house prices so good luck saving enough to afford a house in the future.
I don't think I can comment too much on cars, because I will admit I'm very biased in the subject. I will say that I've discovered, talking with people from across the country online, that someone's attitude towards cars depends a lot on where they live. People who live in big cities who are stuck in traffic all the time tend to not like cars as much, and because things in cities tend to be slightly more convenient, it's easier to not depend on them. People in more rural areas aren't stuck in traffic, so they find driving and car ownership to be a lot more pleasant. Additionally, because the nearest stores, hospitals, and other places aren't within walking distance, cars are seen as an accepted necessity. In a lot of ways, houses make sense, it just sucks cause they're so expensive. With apartments you tend to have two options, an affordable place in a not so good neighborhood, or a place in a good neighborhood that costs more than a reasonable mortgage. I've noticed that there's not much in between the two options where we live. For houses though, the neighborhoods we have to choose from are much more diverse, so there's a sliding scale for us to work with. When it comes to home ownership or renting an apartment, there's pros and cons to both financially that I'm sure others are better qualified to address than I am. For us though, home ownership seems like the right move and a goal worth working towards.
The sentiment is understood and obvious. The argument is elementary - absolutely everyone understands at some level that millennials can't afford to contribute to the economy with their McJobs and that they love living at home just as little as their parents do. But this whole "fuck you it's bullshit" mentality is so much less useful than "fuck you pay me." Nobody can do anything about "it's bullshit." "pay me" is an economic argument with numbers and shit.
What's the functional difference between fuck you it's bullshit and fuck you pay me? Yeah, it's an economic argument, but if individuals aren't faring that much better than they were since the recession, and with your above point on the three generations in the workforce, how is "fuck you, pay me" even supposed to work?
"Fuck you it's bullshit" - I have no specific arguments about the problem, only rage. "Fuck you pay me" - I have a very specific argument about the problem related directly to my lack of compensation for labor. The first argument is a denial of argument. The second is an appeal to economics.
Ill bite... ButterflyEffect. Hillary is bullshit - because she is the "Not Trump" candidate. 4 More years of failed BHO policies except with more wars. Hope? Change? Nah fuck you more of the same. Also she so right of democrats politically that I don't see a liberal legacy here. Shes totally detached from the "Basket of Delorables" that are struggling to make ends meet in this country and has no interest in helping them. Shes such a bad candidate that Trump who is basically the "Fuck me?... Well fuck you, I'll vote this guy in and we will all suffer together candidate" actually has a decent chance of winning. Cars and Houses are bullshit... because ZIRP and "Post Growth" have created and environment where common folks are just renters. Good luck owning anything as an "Average" millennial. 300/month car payment, 1500 for that 1 BR apt, 600 for that student loan not much left after that for "Savings". Even those that save are getting hit by asset price inflation. That poor millennial that's saving up for a a house needs to save an extra 8K for every year just to keep up with the increasing amount of money he would need to put down as a down-payment on a 400k house (10% of a 80k down payment). Oh and cars well auto manufacturers and digital copyright laws are making it easy to lock out any repairs on cars unless done by a dealer. So you are going to be renting that car soon regardless of if you technically own it or not. The ability for class mobility is quickly disappearing and it sucks if you grew up thinking that it was possible to become wealthy only to realize that all the money you make is being transferred to someone else. To be fair Europeans have been in this situation for a good part of 20 years and its finally hit us here in there states.
Yikes. Those dollar figures are scarily close to mine. Rent is high, but I don't live in Seattle because fuck that percentage of income I'd have to pay to live there. Nothing feels promising because of what you've described above.
I might be senior here, except for thenewgreen's grandfather who used to grace us with his lurking. As for curmudgeonlyness, kb, you'll have to take that honour. I have been curmudgeonly, it's true, but only about hyphen usage, and I might be on the verge of becoming a writing reconstructionist. As for this statement, kb: Were boomers sheltered and overprivileged? I think you mean the gen y'ers. Boomers, you may recall, ran away from home en masse; burned their draft cards; went to San Francisco or somewhere and started communes, recycling, and the counter culture; benefited from the combination of antibiotics for STDs and the pill which led to free sex, before AIDS fucked that up. Then they got straight jobs and did all the bad things that their parents did when they got affluent. I don't know what I'm talking about. I shouldn't generalize about generalizations. Over and out. btw, I'm a boomer and was not sheltered NEARLY E-FUCKING-NUFF. Edit: I will read the article too, when I get a chance.(1) Their parents are Boomers, who grew up sheltered and overprivileged.
Dude. I'm drunk and have had some of the worst 72 hours of my life this week. Let me have this one thing, because I'm not in a mood or willing to elaborate on why. If that makes me "entitled" so fucking be it, but that's a total fucking slap in the face to what I've gone through in this life. And yeah, if this is me being salty fuck it. I don't careeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee. Edit: also, don't think I have any participation trophies laying around. Darn.
Your mental state does not equate to a rhetorical advantage. Shitposting drunk and being mad is about the most entitled shit someone can do, second possibly to arguing that your point should stand because of your personal state. The argument is put forth is that millennials suffer undue profiling as reactionary, entitled little shits. Your move is to act like a reactionary, entitled little shit and then when called on it, DOUBLE DOWN. I'm sorry you had a shit week. I'm sorry you feel oppressed. I'm sorry you're salty. I'm not sorry for slapping you in the face. Make a point about THE PROBLEM not your feelz.
My point about the problem is there's nothing I can do about it as an individual so what's the point.
such a bullshit argument, dude. Millennials have all the economic cards. The "gig economy" exists because of millennials. By framing the argument as one of "sour grapes" rather than "economics" you are directly harming your own ability to fix your problems. "Fuck this bullshit, there's nothing I can do" is the argument of someone who has given up. "Fuck this bullshit, I deserve a raise" is the argument of a person likely to get a raise.By 2014, 36 percent of the U.S. workforce will be comprised of this generation and by 2020, nearly half (46 percent) of all U.S. workers will be Pesky Whipper-Snappers (Lynch, 2008). By comparison, the generation before them, Generation X (or Gen Xers), represent only 16 percent of today's workforce.
Is that actually how that works? I'd be interested in wage raises within a company versus jumping companies, that seems to be where getting paid your worth really occurs. Which, of course, typically involves relocation and a reintegration into a corporate structure you may or may not agree with.
"I want more" is a clear business proposition. So is "I don't want this." "I want more encourages further engagement with the existing structure, often with modification of the relationship. "I don't want this" discourages further engagement with the existing structure and risks being disenfranchised when someone shows up wanting more. Try it. Approach work from an "I want more of this" attitude. You will end up with more. Or, you know, approach it from an "I want nothing of this" attitude. See how long you last.
Got to say, since getting dragged kicking and screaming into the land of suits and Human Resources departments and shareholders, the more clear I am that I want nothing of this the more they pay me to stick around anyway, despite my also being clear that I'm only sticking around because I don't have any options that don't have suits and Human Resources departments and shareholders. Embracing it might make you happier, but for the last year and a half open contempt has paid off pretty well for me.
Nah. I love programming, I love everyone who got dragged kicking and screaming from the nonprofit to the corporate world along with me, and I love my users. I just hate the people signing the checks and the humiliating corporate bullshit that comes with them. If they'd just slurp up whatever was left after we'd covered our expenses and paid ourself and otherwise left us the fuck alone I'd be perfectly content.
Do you have an option to work for yourself ? I know a programmer who does that. He charges something like $250 an hour, works from home mostly and gets government contracts because the government can't get anything done on time on account of not just letting people get to work.
You're illustrating my point: you want fucking nothing to do with it, you're telling them you want fucking nothing to do with it, and you're willfully encouraging those around you not to advance you. Embracing it would bring you deeper into the fold, which is quite clearly the last thing you want.
I've definitely seen this attitude working out for me. Two examples: Firstly, in my current job, I was initially on a temporary contract. At the end of that contract they asked to go permanent as well as take on some more hours. I said yes but I want £2,000 p.a. more than I'm getting now. I got it, plus another raise a few months later at the end of the business year. In my freelancing, basically all of my work has been with one company. However, I have been raising my prices gradually with each new bit of work. For the last piece I completed I got the same amount for one normal day's worth of work as I did for an entire 2/3 day's worth when I started out. And those 2/3 days were on a weekend too.
My roommate on the debate team went to a conference at Cornell this weekend. He texted us last night: "Guys, I just got points deducted for addressing my opponents as 'you guys.' The judge stopped me and yelled at me for assuming their gender." My buddy responded, "Wtf? Did you win at least?" "No. I was disqualified for using the adjective 'insane,' which the judge reminded me was offensive to the mentally insane." Then again he doesn't fully believe that climate change is a thing so I guess we're all fucked :-)
It must be all Millennials fault for this change then yea? While my argument on the whole over-sensitivity deal is muddled between the exhaustion of being Puerto Rican, and rabidly defending people's ability to say what they please. What was the most recent issue of freedom of speech? It was that football player who sat during the National Anthem, and some older people threw a big fit over it being Un-American? While I do see the sensitivity focused around college campuses, I honestly think the Left will survive just fine...
I thought we all still supported Nazi's right to parade. Did I miss something? It's getting more difficult to make sense of distinctions that were once so much more informative, and yet there's no common enemy of humanity, so being part of the humanity tribe brings little comfort. IMO it's stressing people out.
Definitely not supporting Nazis right to parade, I'm not sure if you are even allowed to say the word nazi out loud without a trigger warning in fear of making someone fell unsafe. I'm certainly NOT selling a Mexican mocha, mulling weather I should call it a spicy mocha or if I can get edgy and call it a south western mocha. I'm right near a college, shit could get ugly fast.
Fuck it Ill say it I'm never running for office anyway. I support the right for Nazis, Clan members, and Trump Supporters to parade the same way I support the right for Gays, Transgenders, and Furies to do the same. Because once you start dictating what is and isn't OK for speech end up suppressing good ideas just as much as you do the bad ones. Its important to remeber that only 70 years ago the roles were reversed and Nazis and Clan members were good and Gays were bad.
Oh man this reminds me of this taco place that opened up at my school right before I graduated. It was an authentic taco joint that named itself criminals and tacos. It caught the greatest ass-whooping I'd seen at my time in college. People were up in arms over the connection to Mexicans and criminality. This was even during the time of Trump's rise to popularity too. I was surprised to hear they survived through that shit storm.