Generation Z = / = Homelander?

[Kinser79]

(11-13-2019, 10:11 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: There were three decades of Stalin, but also a decade of Kruschev and two of Brezhnev.  The ruthlessness wasn't what was holding the Soviet Union together after Stalin.

Khrushchev regularly purged the Party as Stalin did before him. It should be noted that purging the Party or other entity need not necessarily mean those purged were shot or even shipped off to a gulag somewhere (though that was pretty much Stalin's MO); rather to чистка (chistka) or "clean" the Party or other entity it could be simply done by firing or expelling employees or members. Firings and expulsions were more of Khrushchev's MO. Brezhnev didn't chistka very much so a great deal of cruft ended up laying about.

Lacking the internal motivator of profit (which can be defined however one wishes--either money or social or other types of advancement) that capitalism has, socialism must use external motivators. Between Brezhnev and Gorbachev were the short rules of very very elderly Party bosses.

Quote:Lack of a real threat, sure.  That's exactly what Reagan and his boomers provided, though, with the 1980s military buildup and advancements.  He also showed the Soviets that there was an alternative and superior economic model.  Without the external threat and the idea that they could do better, they could have kept limping along forever.

I wouldn't exactly call Reagan's military buildup a real threat. The Soviets really weren't concerned with how many tanks or divisions the US stationed in Germany because the Euros wouldn't ever want to go to war with the USSR. Something about fools getting involved in land wars in Eurasia or some such. Nukes weren't much of a threat either. Knowing how distructive they are neither the US or USSR would use those on the other because the result was always going to be Mutually Assured Destruction.

The so-called Star Wars program however rattled the CPSU even though it was never a real threat. Rather it was the threat that the US would get an edge over on them in the M.A.D. game.

Also nothing goes on forever. There were cracks already showing in Eastern Europe in the 1960s let alone the 1970s well before SDI or Reagan became issues. The biggest crack is that capitalism, with its inequalities and other host of issues actually manages to distribute wealth the most evenly of all economic systems thus far created by mankind. Also the Eastern Bloc was subject to constant bleed over in radio and television communications.

Quote:If I don't sound like a boomer, all the better:  the underlying point is that Woodstock and Kent State were formative experiences for me, in a way they weren't for people born a few years later.

Indeed. Such should be expected of a Jones Cusp Cohort. However it seems to me like you took Woodstock and Kent State less of "Hey man this is awesome" like a boomer would and more along the lines of "dear god, the adults have all gone crazy" like an Xer would. Or I could be completely be misinterpreting something here.

Quote:The whole forum has certainly gotten a lot more repetitive.

Well it seems these days PBR, and Eric the Ignoramus carry the vast majority of the posts created. So we really shouldn't be surprised. PBR probably last had an original thought in his head sometimes in the late 1960s, and even then he managed to work Hitler and Jews into that one somehow. As for Eric, I'm pretty sure he burned up all the thinking brain cells he had smoking LDS or something in his hippy days. I don't really read any of the drivel Eric posts; I lost interest in anything he had to say after he tried to deny the existence of the physical world.

[Warren Dew]

(11-13-2019, 07:21 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Indeed.  Such should be expected of a Jones Cusp Cohort.  However it seems to me like you took Woodstock and Kent State less of "Hey man this is awesome" like a boomer would and more along the lines of "dear god, the adults have all gone crazy" like an Xer would.  Or I could be completely be misinterpreting something here.

Is that what Gen X thinks?  Not that it isn't justified.  I'm about half way in between; I thought other boomers were being stupid, but not necessarily crazy.  The police were just doing their jobs (at Kent state).

A big rock concert didn't appeal because I'd been brought up with classical music.  I don't think that was really a birth year thing, though I could be wrong.

[Hintergrund]

The Woodstock hippies also acted very un-thoughtful of other people. Starting with the fact that they threw their glass bottles on the ground, after which their fellow hippies cut their feet.

[Kinser79]

(11-13-2019, 09:58 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(11-13-2019, 07:21 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Indeed.  Such should be expected of a Jones Cusp Cohort.  However it seems to me like you took Woodstock and Kent State less of "Hey man this is awesome" like a boomer would and more along the lines of "dear god, the adults have all gone crazy" like an Xer would.  Or I could be completely be misinterpreting something here.

Is that what Gen X thinks?  Not that it isn't justified.  I'm about half way in between; I thought other boomers were being stupid, but not necessarily crazy.  The police were just doing their jobs (at Kent state).

A big rock concert didn't appeal because I'd been brought up with classical music.  I don't think that was really a birth year thing, though I could be wrong.

I don't think that Gen X actually has a solidified opinion on the awakening.  Not really the point of a Nomad generation.  I've come across three types of Xers in relation to their views of the last 2T.  A small minority think it was great and everything about it was great.  Not unsurprisingly these also tend to be younger Xers who have idealistic and civic traits in spades.  Then there is a small minority that thinks that the awakening was absolutely terrible and everything about it was terrible and the whole mess should be undone.  The Majority are somewhere between those two extremes.

For example from the majority of X, pot would be okay as would be civil rights for gays and others.  But bra burning and attempting to set up an agricultural commune type thing is probably just dumb.

I wouldn't have been interested in Woodstock mostly because I don't tend to enjoy crowds.  I think that has to do with me being almost anti-social rather than being my birth year.  Introversion seems to have been common among my ancestors...great uncles and etc.

[Hintergrund]

Sometimes X-ers and Boomers do the same thing, but it's still not the same because the mindset is different.

Boomers "dropped out" because they didn't see any plans worth doing and besides, capitalism is evil, maaan. And they smoked pot to get "higher consciousness". With no useful results yet.

X-ers slack because the "silver" generation (Silents) own everything and Boomers run the stuff. i.e. the good jobs are already taken. (Read "13th generation".) And they smoke pot because life is shitty for them if they aren't high.

You might even say the same thing about their attitude towards (non-procreational) sex.