Do not blame the Greatest Generation, or the boomers, or any other

[guillaumeb]

generation for ruining the US.

Blame the rich. Blame the greedy 1% for whom nothing is ever enough. Blame the sociopaths who are willing to ruin the climate so they can get even richer. Sociopaths such as the Koch family, and Rex Tillerson, and all those who run the oil companies and all those who fund the various climate denial institutes.

Blame the rich who directed Reagan and the GOP in the near destruction of unions. It was unions that built the middle class, not industry. Unions that created the weekend, and the 40 hour week, and the idea that workers should be paid a living wage and that workers should be able to retire with dignity.

Blame the rich who funded the various right wing lobbying groups disguised as research institutes. The institutes that promote fake news, and fake economics. People are not becoming less intelligent, but as the US corporate news system increasingly pushes a far right ideology, people are increasingly misinformed.

Blame the rich who buy politicians, the politicians who appoint corporate shills like John Roberts to the SCOTUS, and the SCOTUS then redefines what constitutes speech.

Blame the rich who promote the idea of worker against worker, and generation against generation, and man against woman, and white against black.

If you are to point a finger, at least point it in the right direction.

[JI7]

1. Women and black people aren't the ones supporting laws to hurt men and white people

If racist white people and men support things like taking away reproductive rights, making voting more difficult for minorities i blame them regardless of their income.

[guillaumeb]

2. True, but blame those who promote such division,

and make it a competition for jobs and positions. The rich always attempt to divide the non-rich to make it easier to control them.

But each person is responsible for their own personal behavior as well. Blame the rich for promoting the falsehood of voter fraud, when the real fraud is systematic suppression.

[JI7]

3. I blame the bigots. The bigots aren't the victims. In kentucky they benefited from obamacare and

Threw it away because of hatred of gays.

[JI7]

4. Poor native Americans aren't calling for bans and deportations

[guillaumeb]

7. No, it is the rich, and their paid mouthpieces. eom

[JI7]

8. Not really. The bigots who support it are usually not wealthy types

[guillaumeb]

12. But they can be manipulated.

Advertisers know how to sell, and people like Karl Rove and Frank Luntz are master salespeople.

[JI7]

14. They aren't the victims. They are the problem

[Hayduke Bomgarte]

5. I agree almost entirely

I'd argue one pint, however... "People are not becoming less intelligent".

While many people are certainly misinformed or even uninformed,(faux watchers), it seems more and more of them willingly accept what they are fed without any effort of verification. To my mind, that would be a hallmark of becoming less intelligent, or as I prefer to say, more stupid.

When I was in High school, in the 70's, we were told the average IQ was 108. I read a little snippet in the past several months that said the average is now 102. Another marker, for me.

[guillaumeb]

9. Is the IQ test weighted for current knowledge?

I graduated from secondary in 1969. My children know far more about computers than I do.

[DBoon]

6. Attacking a generation is a way to discredit that generation's accomplishments

The Greatest Generation defeated fascism and solidified the gains of the New Deal

Boomers spearheaded modern environmental, feminist, LGBT and anti-war movements

Blaming our current political problems on a "generation" is a trick to discredit these accomplishments and push them out of history

[guillaumeb]

10. Agreed, and it is way to put one geneation against the others.

The ultimate in division, as the rich become ever richer.

[ProudLib72]

11. I understand your sentiment

I do agree that it is the rich who are best able to control the means of production. Duh, otherwise they would not retain hegemony. But in our democracy the rich are still dependent upon about 35% of the population (deplorables) that continuously votes against its own self interests.

I blame the deplorables. tRump was an excuse for them to come out from under their rocks and act like the jerks they are. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, they still believe tRump is wonderful. You contend that the deplorables were brainwashed by fake news. I say they started out being bigots and the fake news just fed their bigotry and stirred up their innate hatred for everyone else.

Look, do you think the rich would still exist and control everything if the deplorables were gone? I don't. I think progressives would introduce social and economic justice very quickly in their absence.

This is a chicken and egg debate. You say the rich came first. I say the deplorables came first. At the end of the day, I don't think the debate will answer which came first.

[guillaumeb]

13. I partly agree. But there have been rich since there have been greedy people.

And rich people need division because, as you noted, they must persuade the non-rich to identify with their goals.

Which is one reason for all of the voter suppression and fraud.

[ProudLib72]

16. Let's be careful not to piss of the good rich people

There are some. They may be few, but we should cultivate their friendship.

You know what really gets me? I've seen some posts by DUers complaining that Tom Steyer should be contributing his money to campaigns instead of running ads. Do you remember in The Jerk when Steve Martin meets with all the crazy people who tell him how to invest his money? Yeah, same concept applies here.

[LittleGirl]

15. Follow the money

That’s what this boomer says. Some of us were never able to cash in.

[OhioBlue]

17. I don't blame the boomers but

I also think we can look at things like past generations have inherited a higher standard of living until GenX. The Boomers aren't leaving economic conditions which give future generations better economic opportunities. It doesn't mean that we blame an entire generation but it is important to study, learn and discuss it. The sheer size of the baby boom generation gave them special status and they were the first generation to be studied for mass marketing. They lived through and affected culture change, experienced the cold war, assassinations, Vietnam, etc. How did television and the advancements in technology affect them? What percentage went from liberal leaning flower children to staunch conservatives and why?

While I agree with much of your post and where the blame lies, we can't ignore the fact that Boomers have been the largest voting bloc since the mid 80's, so it is interesting to know why they voted as they have. I don't think they all intentionally voted for candidates that would lead the US on the path that we have been on economically (I'm talking more about income inequality, depressed union membership, predatory lending and student loans, etc. than the Stock Market) but I do think there are sociological, unique qualities about the generation that contributed to their voting patterns that should be discussed without calling it blame.

As with any group of people, I don't mean to imply that they are all the same. Personally, I think it would be interesting to study how the boomer generation, the sheer size of it combined with being the first to be mass studied for marketing was effected by the Frank Luntz, Lee Atwaters, Rush Limbaughs, Fox News, etc.....

[guillaumeb]

19. I agree with much of your response.

And yes, it would be informative to study the effects of the techniques of advertising being applied to politics.

[appalachiablue]

18. More on generational warfare:

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/43022-diverting-class-warfare-into-generational-warfare