21-Mar-11 News -- March 15 reconciliation movement vs Hamas

[John]

21-Mar-11 News -- March 15 reconciliation movement triggers Hamas attacks on Israel

Arab League support for attack on Libya is fraying


** 21-Mar-11 News -- March 15 reconciliation movement triggers Hamas attacks on Israel
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... 21#e110321

Contents:
"March 15 reconciliation movement triggers Hamas attacks on Israel"
"Arab League support for attack on Libya is fraying"
"Yemen's ambassador to United Nations resigns over violence"
"Syria protesters torch buildings"

[xakzen]

John,

I'd like to take issue with your characterization that the GOP represents the Silent/Boomer generational views while the Democrats are the Gen-Xers. Maybe you have been watching CNN too much which continually tries to paint the Tea Party movement with an older backward looking generation. The facts do not support this view. If it was a Boomer/Silent generational characteristic to reduce the size of gov and bring budgets into balance, they would have done it when they were in charge over the last 20 years. The true is that the both Dems & GOPs of this generation (Boomer) presided over the explosion of deficits & gov growth. Also looking at the ages of the leadership are also instuctive:
Democratic Leadership
Pelosi, Nancy 1940 Silent
Hoyer, Steny 1939 Silent
Clyburn, Jim 1940 Silent

Republican Leadership
Boehner, John 1949 Boomer
Cantor, Eric 1963 Gen-X
Blunt, Roy 1950 Boomer

Tea Party Leadership
Sarah Palin 1964 Gen-X
Walker, Scott 1967 Gen-X
Christie, Chris 1962 Gen-X

At least in the House the Dems are lead by Silents, the GOP by Boomers and the Tea Party freshman are Gen-Xers (I don't know any of the freshman, but I believe they resemble these Governors). That's why there is a rift in the GOP House between the leadership which refuses to act on their mandate to bring the situation back from the fiscal brink and the freshman who like Chris Christie only came to Washington to fix this mess and leave. (They don't care about being re-elected).

[John]

> I'd like to take issue with your characterization that the GOP
> represents the Silent/Boomer generational views while the
> Democrats are the Gen-Xers. Maybe you have been watching CNN too
> much which continually tries to paint the Tea Party movement with
> an older backward looking generation. The facts do not support
> this view. If it was a Boomer/Silent generational characteristic
> to reduce the size of gov and bring budgets into balance, they
> would have done it when they were in charge over the last 20
> years. The true is that the both Dems & GOPs of this generation
> (Boomer) presided over the explosion of deficits & gov
> growth. Also looking at the ages of the leadership are also
> instuctive:

> Democratic Leadership Pelosi, Nancy 1940 Silent Hoyer, Steny 1939
> Silent Clyburn, Jim 1940 Silent

> Republican Leadership Boehner, John 1949 Boomer Cantor, Eric 1963
> Gen-X Blunt, Roy 1950 Boomer

> Tea Party Leadership Sarah Palin 1964 Gen-X Walker, Scott 1967
> Gen-X Christie, Chris 1962 Gen-X

> At least in the House the Dems are lead by Silents, the GOP by
> Boomers and the Tea Party freshman are Gen-Xers (I don't know any
> of the freshman, but I believe they resemble these
> Governors). That's why there is a rift in the GOP House between
> the leadership which refuses to act on their mandate to bring the
> situation back from the fiscal brink and the freshman who like
> Chris Christie only came to Washington to fix this mess and
> leave. (They don't care about being re-elected).

There is, I believe, a distinct difference in world view between
Boomers and Gen-Xers. That is, after all, a basic principle of
generational theory. And it's not surprising that a difference
in generational world view morphs into a political fault line.

However, a Boomer may hold the Gen-X world view, and vice-versa,
depending on the attitudes of their parents, and other environmental
factors. That's also true of politicians, so it's not surprising that
some Democratic leaders are Boomers, and some Republican leaders are
Gen-Xers. However, I believe that the predominant majority of each
party follows the respective generational world view.

When you refer to "an older backward looking generation," I'm not
even sure what that means. Every political party and generation
draws lessons from history -- though they draw different lessons.
However, I believe that it is true (though I haven't seen any
polls on this subject recently) that Tea Partiers tend to be
older Americans.

As for the subject of national debt, I've said dozens of times that
Boomers and Gen-Xers are equally guilty. Greedy, nihilistic Gen-Xers
created the fraudulent securities, while their greedy, incompetent
Boomer bosses approved the fraud and participated.

Finally, the Boomers and Silents did try to reduce the debt in the
1980s. In the 1980s, the Republicans and the Democrats cooperated
with each other to change the Social Security system to make it a
sounder system. After that, they cooperated again to specify new
rules to control the budget deficit. Compromise was still possible in
1996, when Democratic President Bill Clinton, saying that "the era of
big government is over," cooperated with the Republican congress to
eliminate the welfare entitlement.

It's only when the Silents disappeared almost completely that the tech
bubble occurred, the real estate bubble occurred, and the debt bubble
occurred.

John

[xakzen]

...
However, a Boomer may hold the Gen-X world view, and vice-versa,
depending on the attitudes of their parents, and other environmental
factors. That's also true of politicians, so it's not surprising that
some Democratic leaders are Boomers, and some Republican leaders are
Gen-Xers. However, I believe that the predominant majority of each
party follows the respective generational world view.

Clearly that is evident in that all the Dems in the House leadership are from the Silent generation and yet they hold to the 60's era illogical utopian world view that facts never get in the way of their plans. I have seen this in Gen-Xers as well who simply shut their brains off when you attempt to bring facts like there isn't enough money to pay for all that "free" health care, etc.

As far as the demographics of the Tea Party go, here is a gallop survey from last year:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/127181/Tea-P ... phics.aspx

That shows that supporters of the movement are fairly evenly distributed across the generations. This is in line with the original Strauss & Howe descriptions that generational types evolve (granted differently by architype) as the era takes hold. And although I agree with your assessment that Gen-X as a whole is completely duplicitous in the Crisis making, it is also this Nomad generation that will ultimately make the standard of living sacrifices that Hemingway's Lost generation did in the 30's. Out of necessacity for our kids' future, we will vote away our own priviledges infavor of youth inititives just as my grandfather did in the Great Depression. It is this Nomad characteristic that I believe we are seeing evolving in the Tea Party movement.

It is required to bring budgets and gov spending into decline because the opposite is impossible. This inconvienent fact makes the Keynesian/Monetarilist view the reactionary one and not fiscal conservativism.

[Mashall Kane]

"At least in the House the Dems are lead by Silents, the GOP by Boomers and the Tea Party freshman are Gen-Xers."

As John likes to point out, according to generational theory, our leaders don't dictate the country's direction so much as react to generational trends reflected by the collective views of millions. Nancy Pelosi, for example, may be a leftist ideologue, but she is also a politician (and a pretty shrewd one at that). To maintain influence she has to remain in step with the mood of her party, regardless of her own generational grouping.

When we look back to previous crisis era's we consistently see the new hero generation lead by members of the older generations. In my own observation, it appears that the Heroes "select" individuals with the unique talents and characteristics unique to their cause. After all, the hero generation doesn't have an inborn disdain for their elders. They are actually open to the idea of looking up to adults who show themselves worthy of respect. Perhaps because they are so used to adults acting like jackasses its easy to be drawn to those with a fresh perspective. In fact, its seems these older leaders are often odd balls who have fallen out of favor with their rigid, bickering peers. Look at how misfits like Grant, Sherman, Patton, MacArthur, Churchill became beloved figures of the hero generation troops they lead? Going back farther, the founders who inspired the Revolutionary generation were certainly a forward thinking batch of eggs - none more so then Ben Franklin, who was 70 years old when he served as a wise mentor to the 30-40-ish revolutionaries, who in turn inspired their hero generation to fight through unimaginable conditions.

You can also observe this at other points in the cycle. Note that most of the popular artists and musicians who set the tone of the 1960s awakening era - Bob Dylan (1939), The Beatles (1940-43), Andy Warhol (1928), Allen Ginsberg (1926), etc. - they were actually Silents who were a bit out of step with their own generation. From what I can tell, it was young boomers who discovered the "groundbreaking" artists of the artist generation. But unlike Heros, who looked to learn from their elders, Boomers were were drawn to unconventional silent voices who resonated with their own attitudes (I consider my Dad (1939) a typical Silent - and he has very, very little in common with Bob Dylan or Andy Warhol). Its worth noting how possessive Boomers were (and still are!) of "THEIR" cultural heroes. Bob Dylan has written about how obnoxious his fans could be. I once had a surreal argument with my leftist boomer uncle (a 60-something grown man) who is still OUTRAGED that 40 years ago Bob Dylan "sold out" the left when he stopped writing the protest songs his fans wanted to hear (as opposed to the songs he felt like writing). Yes, if only Bob would have continued writing leftwing songs Vietnam, Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Iraq, etc. would have never happened!