How conservative are Homelanders really?

[Tim Randal Walker]

I cringe when I hear that people overseas base their view of America on television shows.

[Eric the Green]

(04-17-2020, 08:06 AM)Isoko Wrote: Blazkovitz,

P. 1 To be honest, I am sceptic that we will see mass space exploration anytime soon. I would say the low hanging fruits have already been picked. It will happen eventually with its art but it'll take a few centuries.

I'd say the art and cultural themes for the next 2T are going to be more of a conservative family friendly nature rather then trying to defy all odds by culturally shocks the left was successful at doing in the past.

There's not too much to explore within the range of current physics. There's not a lot of land to settle. If we are being visited by ETs, we will have to learn their techniques in order to explore further.

The arts you describe will be the trend from this turning through the first turning of the 2030s, at least to some extent. In the 2T, art will not be so conservative and family friendly, because Awakenings are not of that nature. Free-wheeling sensuality will revive in the next Awakening. But Nature will be a key theme, as the Left rallies the nation and the world to meet the continuing threat of global warming by changing society root deep, and the great society will be expanded worldwide. Cities will be redesigned and education made more community-based and practical. Organic styles that emphasize sensibility will bring back the art nouveau styles of the 1890s Social Gospel Awakening era in the mid 2040s, so I expect the arts will rhyme with that earlier 2T era known for post-impressionism (Gaugain, Van Gogh, Cezanne), and will put modern art more firmly on this basic foundation from which it developed. So I expect it would be less "shocking" in that respect, at least at first, than the pop arts of the 1940s and 50s. Strong cyber-based styles, and a vast literature revival based in the new media networks, will be a keynote of the 2050s. This will be a fairly exuberant era with lots of new ideas and an obsession with novelty, so although more pleasant than "shocking," it will be a futuristic and avant-garde style.

[Isoko]

Blazkovitz,

I think you are rather optimistic in your assumption that the next 2T is going to be about global citizenship and more world government. I'll be rather Frank here but the people who buy into this idea are usually white westerners. The rest of the world simply does not care that much.

When I was teaching English last year, I got into some interesting conversations about the future with my students. A group of businessmen, some of them Russian millennials, were quite brutally honest with me. They thought that globalisation would be here to stay but that world government was not a desirable choice.

Their message was quite simple. "We will cooperate but we don't want to be governed by one body. We don't want to pay for other countries. Why should we use our money to say improve the lives of Indians when we need it for ourselves?"

I think therefore this whole "we are the world" mindset is a Western Anglo based phenomenon and already it is receiving a ride awakening. Westerners are starting to slowly realise that the rest of the world does not care about multicultural globalisation and are more concerned with affairs in their back yard. When the West finally does bow out, they are going to realise the rest of the world simply does not care.

When I did used to describe the problems the West was facing, I actually used to encounter bemused Russians. There was no global solidarity but merely "great, now the West will start minding its own business and leave us alone." There was some sympathy of course but overall, if the West is being stupid, it's their fault.

Now that is just the Russians. Imagine what the Chinese, the Indians, the Iranians, even the Japanese, what they are thinking. I think for some of these countries, global brotherhood isn't even on the agenda, just new ways to get more profit.

So for the next 2T, I think Westerners are going to be more national focused and not as messanic in their beliefs that the world is going to become one. It is a bitter pill to be swallowed for sure.

Eric,

No offence but a lot of this sounds like it has come from the realms of fantasy and not reality. The left is going to pull the nation and the world together to fight climate change? 

Wanna hear the truth?

The Russians are laughing at people like Greta Thunberg. They are laughing at the Western liberals. Even the Russian liberals are laughing at you. They view Greta Thunberg as some spoilt rich kid who is telling them they cannot have the quality of life she has had in order to fight climate change. Once again this is just the Russians. 

But this myopic leftism is what is killing the West. Will there be cooperation? Yes, but at your expense. All of this talk reminds me of the good Samaritan. You are here, being good Samaritans and the rest of the world is laughing at you, planning to only serve their own interests.

It is a myopic fantastical delusion and I see it here with members on this forum. It will be the West's undoing and one they realise that the emperor has no clothes.

[Eric the Green]

(04-15-2020, 06:42 AM)Isoko Wrote: Eric,

First of all, the establishment in the West IS left wing in terms of culture. They favour LGBTQ culture (the NSA happily had a rainbow flag on their building to celebrate gay rights), open borders, obviously green politics, the liberal soft culture and other leftist extremes coated in a global form of capitalism. It is very left wing. Donald Trump is an out of place nail in the coffin that cannot get anything done due to the established culture that has been embedded in the West since the 60s. If you want left wing, the West is it and the average Joe is getting fed up of the propaganda, hence why there is growing support for right wing parties.

Now Russia on the other hand has an established right wing culture. Education in schools is centred around remembering the war and loving the motherland. Gay marriage is forbidden. The borders are closed and immigration is restricted to mainly guest workers and people who can actually benefit the country. If you want right wing, Russia is it.

Now as for Greta Thunberg, she is unfortunately an elitist puppet. Not many in Sweden actually like her as she is the child of very wealthy parents with important connections. She is a celebrity of the elite puppet masters who are using the global warming problem for their own political agendas.

As for ethnic diversity, where did I say I oppose it? I merely stated in the other chat that if you let in millions of low IQ people regardless of what race or colour they are, you are going to have huge problems. How is that being in opposition to ethnic diversity?

I will tell you what the problem is. You see anyone who criticises mass immigration as some sort of white nationalist when in reality to oppose mass immigration is actually a sensible thing to do. It actually economically makes sense and does not impose upon people's quality of life.

Would you please stop accusing me? Or are we all crazy racists that want to join the KKK because we dare say what is clearly the obvious?

I mean why are you obsessed with racial diversity? Are you a racist? It is often said that people who keep talking about something excessively really are denying their true selves...

How can we be sure, Eric? Just how can we be sure?

I think you have a point about established culture, since the Left has won some victories since the 2T to favor gay rights. But I don't regard that as "the Establishment" because it does not set the policy under which we live. That is based in the neo-liberalism of Ronald Reagan. I noticed today reading the Almanac again that Reagan is rated #10 among presidents by historians, and that can only be because current opinion accepts neo-liberalism which he established as some kind of dominant paradigm, when in fact it has led to a stagnant, unequal economy in which young and diverse people have little hope for advancement, and in which green politics is severely suppressed and rendered largely impotent when what we need is very-rapid change away from the old industrial fossil-fuel-based economy. Trump is a purely-establishment figure because he supports this inequality and these out-of-date approaches and brings its closet racism out in the open for political effect. Neo-liberalism is what is killing The West. It must go.

As for growing support for right-wing politics, that has been the trend for 40 years or more in the backward USA and Trumpism just continues it, with the racism he has stoked bringing it out of the closet and causing a needless regression back before the civil rights movement.

Greta is a great hero, and that is why she gets attention. She has no relationship with any elite. She attracted attention with her courageous stand, and she is an award-winning gray champion of our times. Global warming must be the #1 agenda of our politics if we hope for civilization to survive. Climate science denial is the tool of neo-liberal opposition to government regulation and taxes, and thus is purely politically and ideologically-based. No nation is so backward and regressive as the USA, which is shown by the fact that thanks to the Idiot in Chief, the USA is the only nation to reject the Paris Agreement, which itself is inadequate. The coronavirus crisis is further proof of how backward and ineffective USA politics and government have become under neo-liberalism.

If you hold that immigrants or people who live in Latin America of Southern Africa have low IQs, that is racist. Immigration was not a problem under Obama. It has increased recently partly because of USA failures in the Middle East (failures of commission and omission both), as well as USA failure to continue JFK's alliance for progress with our neighbors to the south. Opposing immigration is totally senseless; the USA is a nation of immigrants, and to oppose it depresses the economy, to which immigrants are an important stimulus. Immigration can improve the quality of life if managed properly and in accordance with our asylum laws and basic human rights. Instead Trump puts children in cages and separates families. These people are suffering, and Trump merely increases their suffering and that's all that he accomplishes.

I don't oppose prudent regulation and border controls, but there was a sensible bipartisan immigration reform proposal which Reagan and Bush and Rubio supported, but which the fanatical, right-wing-extremist tea-party Republican congress rejected unfairly. No, what is obvious is that the anti-immigration nonsense was merely a campaign slogan Trump cooked up on his escalator to appeal to the latent racial fears of white middle America. His racist appeal we all know; it went like this: "they're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime; they're rapists; and some, I assume, are good people." If immigration has gotten to be more of a problem recently in The West, that's because of the failure of the Arab Spring and the other conditions I mentioned above. Which I clearly predicted long ago, by the way. I have been amazed at how thoroughly the predictions I made about this for this era have been fulfilled.

Globalization doesn't need to be popular or on anyone's agenda to be the fact of our time. Eventually world government will be improved simply because of the need.

I'm fine with your contributions to the forum, and having a conservative to debate with gives me a platform and stimulus to express my ideas. We don't usually learn too much from each other, but at least this forum is not an echo chamber, and we get to, possibly, understand other views a bit better here and hone our arguments with our opponents in a reasonably civil and intelligent way.

Quote:As for music tastes - let's just be honest here. The mainstream of any generation listens to the trash because everyone else is listening to it. It's herd mentality. So in that essence, compared to previous generations and sub cultures, the Zoomers are pretty conformist in that regard.

Hey, we agree on something

[Eric the Green]

(04-15-2020, 04:49 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(04-15-2020, 11:32 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote:

(04-14-2020, 02:26 PM)Isoko Wrote: My own opinion is that the Zoomers are more than likely going to be a centrist generation. They won't be left wing as that is the established culture and the kids obviously are going to rebel. But they won't be full on alt right either. However expect with coming problems, this generation might be slightly tinted towards something alt rightish. So I'm guessing a sort of centre right leaning for the majority with a hey, your gay, that's cool, just don't shove your culture at me bra type of mindset.

The alt-right is mostly a gen X thing. You overestimate the influence of certain online contrarians. See some of comments by Camz.

Artists are not supposed to rebel until they have a midlife crisis  

What worries me more is the growing abandonment of civilized values in favour of barbarism, both on the right and the left. Identity politics replaces individual responsibility. Futurist aims are considered unfashionable and nostalgia is growing.

I think it seems more like a Gen X and older Millennial thing.

The only Gen Zers I could think of that are alt-right are Nick Fuentes, Thomas Rousseau, Jaden McNeil (one of Fuentes' groupies), Naomi Seibt (probably), and some of those mass shooters from last year like John Earnest.

I'm not including those from the r/GenZ brigade from last year and those from r/zoomerright because I am not really sure what their ages are.

I agree with your last paragraph for sure.

The alt right was largely originally a boomer-silent thing. Hannity and the other Fox News idiots, Drudge, the founders of Breitbart, Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Jared Taylor, Roger Ailes, are older than Gen X. Gen X members have stoked the movement further led by Richard Spencer who apparently coined the term. I think to call it a phenomenon of video games trivializes the movement and its danger.

[Warren Dew]

(04-17-2020, 08:53 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: Space missions that I have seen proposed:

You missed the colonization of Mars pushed by Elon Musk.  Unfortunately it's too expensive even for him to fund privately.

[gabrielle]

(04-18-2020, 01:52 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-15-2020, 04:49 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(04-15-2020, 11:32 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: The alt-right is mostly a gen X thing. You overestimate the influence of certain online contrarians. See some of comments by Camz.

Artists are not supposed to rebel until they have a midlife crisis  

What worries me more is the growing abandonment of civilized values in favour of barbarism, both on the right and the left. Identity politics replaces individual responsibility. Futurist aims are considered unfashionable and nostalgia is growing.

I think it seems more like a Gen X and older Millennial thing.

The only Gen Zers I could think of that are alt-right are Nick Fuentes, Thomas Rousseau, Jaden McNeil (one of Fuentes' groupies), Naomi Seibt (probably), and some of those mass shooters from last year like John Earnest.

I'm not including those from the r/GenZ brigade from last year and those from r/zoomerright because I am not really sure what their ages are.

I agree with your last paragraph for sure.

The alt right was largely originally a boomer-silent thing. Hannity and the other Fox News idiots, Drudge, the founders of Breitbart, Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Jared Taylor, Roger Ailes, are older than Gen X. Gen X members have stoked the movement further led by Richard Spencer who apparently coined the term. I think to call it a phenomenon of video games trivializes the movement and its danger.

Why stop with Boomers and Silents?  Right wing extremism has been around in America for a very long time.  The alt-right is a late Gen X/early Millennial form of it.  The term "alt-right" is Gen X in style, borrowing as it does from terms like "alternative rock" and "alt-country" (I suppose Spencer was trying to cast his message of hate as some kind of heroic fight against the mainstream.)

Gen X is also responsible for antifa, which rose in response to the neo-Nazi skinheads of the 80s.

[AspieMillennial]

(04-16-2020, 06:11 PM)Camz Wrote:

(04-09-2020, 04:24 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: Also, what are Homelanders' views on spreading democracy and the War on Terror?

Zoomers seem very democratic and would probably dislike Bush for the War on Terror. As for Homelanders... well, the ones I know pretty much agree to whatever Zoomer-cusp Millennials say... Homelanders here are probably taught to dislike the War on Terror.

After reading Strauss and Howe's works it actually makes a lot of sense why we do this. Artists have always been followers rather than rulers for the most part. If you look at the G.I. and older Silent relationship in the 50s, aside from exceptions like rebels, they seem to get along like friendly pleasant neighbors. At least that's how it looks like to me, I may be super wrong.

Things definitely changed in the Awakening, when Silents chose sides; conservative G.I.s or liberal Boomers. So in the 20...50s(?), a lot of us Homelanders will finally stop listening to everything our great older siblings say. I'm probably gonna be one of them because screw sameness and conformism. But for now, I'll continue clinging to them and giving them all my support, because they deserve it for now. So yeah, I agree with:

Quote:Artists are not supposed to rebel until they have a midlife crisis  

I don't see the point in siding with people just because of age range. Why do I owe anyone my loyalty just because they were born in the same year span? I don't believe in pure democracy because pure democracy leads to worse things. As for rebelling why do I need to wait to be some part of a movement to do what I want? Why do I need to side with people who would probably generalize me with their stupid parents in order to do what I want? I don't have time for all that nonsense. I will side with no generation because neither side has my interests in mind. As an outlier all I can do is side with me and be my own best friend.

[Ghost]

(04-18-2020, 04:44 PM)gabrielle Wrote:

(04-18-2020, 01:52 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-15-2020, 04:49 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(04-15-2020, 11:32 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: The alt-right is mostly a gen X thing. You overestimate the influence of certain online contrarians. See some of comments by Camz.

Artists are not supposed to rebel until they have a midlife crisis  

What worries me more is the growing abandonment of civilized values in favour of barbarism, both on the right and the left. Identity politics replaces individual responsibility. Futurist aims are considered unfashionable and nostalgia is growing.

I think it seems more like a Gen X and older Millennial thing.

The only Gen Zers I could think of that are alt-right are Nick Fuentes, Thomas Rousseau, Jaden McNeil (one of Fuentes' groupies), Naomi Seibt (probably), and some of those mass shooters from last year like John Earnest.

I'm not including those from the r/GenZ brigade from last year and those from r/zoomerright because I am not really sure what their ages are.

I agree with your last paragraph for sure.

The alt right was largely originally a boomer-silent thing. Hannity and the other Fox News idiots, Drudge, the founders of Breitbart, Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Jared Taylor, Roger Ailes, are older than Gen X. Gen X members have stoked the movement further led by Richard Spencer who apparently coined the term. I think to call it a phenomenon of video games trivializes the movement and its danger.

Why stop with Boomers and Silents?  Right wing extremism has been around in America for a very long time.  The alt-right is a late Gen X/early Millennial form of it.  The term "alt-right" is Gen X in style, borrowing as it does from terms like "alternative rock" and "alt-country" (I suppose Spencer was trying to cast his message of hate as some kind of heroic fight against the mainstream.)

Gen X is also responsible for antifa, which rose in response to the neo-Nazi skinheads of the 80s.

The ringmasters of the alt-right and Antifa were both born in 1978 (Richard Spencer and Lacy MacAuley). There are also some Xennials (1980-1982) in the movement, like Mark Collett (b. 1980) and Ludovic van Alst (b. 1982).

The only Zillennial (1995-1997) I can think of that is in the alt-right is James Allsup (b. 1995).

Many alt-righters are middle Gen X, as well, like Varg Vikernes (b. 1973) and Billy Roper (b. 1972).

How is Gen X responsible for the rise of Nazi skinheads in the 80's when the oldest were about 17 (and the youngest, about 1) when Skrewdriver became a Nazi band?

[Blazkovitz]

(04-18-2020, 01:26 PM)Isoko Wrote: Blazkovitz,

I think you are rather optimistic in your assumption that the next 2T is going to be about global citizenship and more world government. I'll be rather Frank here but the people who buy into this idea are usually white westerners. The rest of the world simply does not care that much.

Ethnocentrism is also a Civic value, it's now very prominent because of the 4T. Russia also had its utopian dreamers and will have them again, you are now in the nadir of cynicism and ethnocentrism but this nadir won't last forever. Whoever rebels during the next 2T, will rebel against people like you and not against the faded memory of 1990s attempts at liberalism.

Quote:When I was teaching English last year, I got into some interesting conversations about the future with my students. A group of businessmen, some of them Russian millennials, were quite brutally honest with me. They thought that globalisation would be here to stay but that world government was not a desirable choice.

Their message was quite simple. "We will cooperate but we don't want to be governed by one body. We don't want to pay for other countries. Why should we use our money to say improve the lives of Indians when we need it for ourselves?"

I think it depends on the quality of life. If there is steady economic growth, then expect more individualism,more global citizenship, more interest in outer space and transhumanism. If there is poverty, expect ethnocentrism and clinging to traditions.

[Isoko]

Blazkovitz,

P. 1 Russia does have its utopian thinkers to be sure but the mindset is different. Where as the West dreams of global liberalism, Russia dreams more of a strong Russia. I think that there will be a new great culture born in Russia at some point but it will be based on more spiritual thinking and more focus to the community and less the individual, as is the Russian way. Russia usually prefers and operates of group and not the individual.

As for rebelling against me. Eh why? I'm not espousing ethnocentrism, just offering an honest opinion. But to be fair, I think that the views you have won't be returning to the mainstream anytime soon. The lessons of liberalism will have been learned and no one will follow this path. The world due to resource shortages and a growing population is going to get poorer and opening the doors a thing of the past.

I don't think there will be rebellion in the next 2T to be honest, just a new rush of energy for doing things differently, that's all. Liberalism is the past. Centre Right is the future.

P. 2 Which is possible but due to current planetary pressures, won't be coming back for a long time now.

[Blazkovitz]

(04-19-2020, 04:13 AM)Isoko Wrote: Russia does have its utopian thinkers to be sure but the mindset is different. Where as the West dreams of global liberalism, Russia dreams more of a strong Russia.

The early Bolsheviks dreamed of global communism without ethnic distinctions. And in Britain we also have ethnocentric "dreamers" who want Britain to rule the waves again. All nations have all sorts of attitudes, just in different proportions.

Quote:I think that there will be a new great culture born in Russia at some point but it will be based on more spiritual thinking and more focus to the community and less the individual, as is the Russian way. Russia usually prefers and operates of group and not the individual.

It seems Russia is the Civic wing of the Greeko-Roman-Christian civilization, and the Anglosphere is the Prophetic wing. So both should learn from each other, because balance between these archetypes is the key. Olaf Stapledon talked about "personality within community". I really like his social philosophy, the essay "Personality and liberty" explores the topic in further detail:
https://web.archive.org/web/200907200726...berty.html

Quote:I don't think there will be rebellion in the next 2T to be honest, just a new rush of energy for doing things differently, that's all.

I agree, the current 4T probably won't complete its mission, the remainder of the 21st century will be focused on Civic issues. But this means a strong Romantic revival in the 22nd century, as these attitudes cannot be buried forever.

Quote:Liberalism is the past. Centre Right is the future.

I support centre-right for the culture, centre-left for the economics. But centre-right doesn't have to be tribal, e.g. Pythagoreanism was culturally conservative but opposed ethnocentrism. While the left can be tribal as well, e.g. 1960 national liberation movements like Baathism or the Shining Path.

[Isoko]

Blazkovitz,

P. 1 The early Bolsheviks were an interesting bunch. They did split between the world wide revolution crowd led by Trotsky and the socialism in one country movement led by Stalin. I would hesitantly say that the Russian mindset has always been and even to this day is more closer to the essence of Stalinism rather then Trotskyism.

P. 2 Actually I have been doing some research into this and I was reading an interesting guy called John Michael Greer. He said that fundamentally speaking Russia and America would create the next two great cultures. Europe is classed as the Faustian culture, based off Oswald Spengler, and that culture is in decline. 

America is just getting started but needs a few more centuries to truly mature into their own great culture, which is going to be based more off a more reformed spiritual version of individualism.

Russia on the other hand would found a great culture starting later this century or into the next called Sobornost which is basically a collectivistic spiritual culture centred around the need for individuals to come together for the betterment of Humanity. 

I think what he described pretty much nails it. He did say that Sobornost would more than likely heavily influence Europe in the nearby future. I would say in essence that only Britain will not take part but the rest of Europe does lean more closely to Russia and will be interested in the idea.

Overall what you say is pretty much related to this idea and I agree with it. The Anglosphere will always be the liberal prophetic wing and Russia, the more strongman, steady on the ground, faction.

P. 3 I think that the current system of focusing on civic issues will continue until another major war breaks out which looking at history and it's trajectory, I would pinpoint out around the 22nd century too. After the war, there will be another never again moment and I predict world peace will last longer. But eventually problems arise, paranoia grows and things go crazy again. I never like to say anything is permanent.

P. 4 yeah I dont think that centre right will ever be ethnocentric in the Anglo sphere. But there will be a desire to shut the borders due to economic concerns primarily, nothing to do with ethnic interests.

I would say however the Russian and Eastern European consensus is more catered towards a form of ethnocentrism. It's not the alt right mindset of "oh noes! The white race is dying out!" but more the contentment how we shall of a more traditional demographic remaining a majority with slow assimilation of other people over the centuries.

I think, if I am to make a prediction, is that the Anglosphere will, to the horror of the alt right, be comfortable will a multicultural and multiracial society. 

The East on the other hand will focus on growing it's its population more naturally and favouring to develop their economies around this concept.

[gabrielle]

(04-18-2020, 09:22 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(04-18-2020, 04:44 PM)gabrielle Wrote:

(04-18-2020, 01:52 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-15-2020, 04:49 PM)Ghost Wrote:

(04-15-2020, 11:32 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: The alt-right is mostly a gen X thing. You overestimate the influence of certain online contrarians. See some of comments by Camz.

Artists are not supposed to rebel until they have a midlife crisis  

What worries me more is the growing abandonment of civilized values in favour of barbarism, both on the right and the left. Identity politics replaces individual responsibility. Futurist aims are considered unfashionable and nostalgia is growing.

I think it seems more like a Gen X and older Millennial thing.

The only Gen Zers I could think of that are alt-right are Nick Fuentes, Thomas Rousseau, Jaden McNeil (one of Fuentes' groupies), Naomi Seibt (probably), and some of those mass shooters from last year like John Earnest.

I'm not including those from the r/GenZ brigade from last year and those from r/zoomerright because I am not really sure what their ages are.

I agree with your last paragraph for sure.

The alt right was largely originally a boomer-silent thing. Hannity and the other Fox News idiots, Drudge, the founders of Breitbart, Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Jared Taylor, Roger Ailes, are older than Gen X. Gen X members have stoked the movement further led by Richard Spencer who apparently coined the term. I think to call it a phenomenon of video games trivializes the movement and its danger.

Why stop with Boomers and Silents?  Right wing extremism has been around in America for a very long time.  The alt-right is a late Gen X/early Millennial form of it.  The term "alt-right" is Gen X in style, borrowing as it does from terms like "alternative rock" and "alt-country" (I suppose Spencer was trying to cast his message of hate as some kind of heroic fight against the mainstream.)

Gen X is also responsible for antifa, which rose in response to the neo-Nazi skinheads of the 80s.

The ringmasters of the alt-right and Antifa were both born in 1978 (Richard Spencer and Lacy MacAuley). There are also some Xennials (1980-1982) in the movement, like Mark Collett (b. 1980) and Ludovic van Alst (b. 1982).

The only Zillennial (1995-1997) I can think of that is in the alt-right is James Allsup (b. 1995).

Many alt-righters are middle Gen X, as well, like Varg Vikernes (b. 1973) and Billy Roper (b. 1972).

How is Gen X responsible for the rise of Nazi skinheads in the 80's when the oldest were about 17 (and the youngest, about 1) when Skrewdriver became a Nazi band?

I did not say the original skinhead bands were Gen Xers. But Gen Xers were the main recruits in the 80s and 90s, which was when the white power skinhead movement was at its peak, at least in America.

Antifa as we know it today—decentralized networks of anti-fascists confronting rascism, sometimes violently, where ever they find it—can be traced to leftist and anarchist punks in Europe (on both sides of the wall) and in America.  'No Fascist USA!': how hardcore punk fuels the Antifa movement : "The term “Antifa” was adopted by German antifascists in the 80s, accompanied by the twin-flag logo, which then spread around Europe, and finally pitched up in the US after being adopted by an anarchist collective in Portland, Oregon."

[Blazkovitz]

(04-19-2020, 10:33 AM)Isoko Wrote: Russia on the other hand would found a great culture starting later this century or into the next called Sobornost which is basically a collectivistic spiritual culture centred around the need for individuals to come together for the betterment of Humanity. 

I think what he described pretty much nails it. He did say that Sobornost would more than likely heavily influence Europe in the nearby future. I would say in essence that only Britain will not take part but the rest of Europe does lean more closely to Russia and will be interested in the idea.

Sobornost' - "the combination of freedom and unity of many persons on the basis of their common love for the same absolute values". "Vladimir Solovyov developed the idea of vseedinstvo, unity-of-all"

I think this describes Stapledon's philosophy quite well. Did you read the essay? He was a Brit So it's not impossible for Britain to be influenced by sobornost'. Doing sobornost' (or communitarianism, as I like to call it) on a global scale is also possible, though I agree it'll take lot of time.

[David Horn]

(04-18-2020, 04:44 PM)gabrielle Wrote: Why stop with Boomers and Silents?  Right wing extremism has been around in America for a very long time.  The alt-right is a late Gen X/early Millennial form of it.  The term "alt-right" is Gen X in style, borrowing as it does from terms like "alternative rock" and "alt-country" (I suppose Spencer was trying to cast his message of hate as some kind of heroic fight against the mainstream.)

Gen X is also responsible for antifa, which rose in response to the neo-Nazi skinheads of the 80s.

Just as a benchmark: the John Birch Society originated in the 1950s and the original RW Minutemen originated in the 1960s. RW conspiracy theorists have been around even longer than that. There's nothing like paranoia to stoke the flames of intolerance.

[Camz]

This thread has gone in a completely different direction. It's got me thinking, though...

To be honest, while I'm excited for what amazing culture and change comes in the 2T, I'm also pretty terrified of becoming a neglecting parent. When I read what T4T says about Gen X I feel really depressed for them. Their parents just letting them roam free sounds lonely and empty, almost like they didn't care about them at all. On top of that is divorce, which I can't imagine going through as a kid. On top of that, the media portrayed them as terrible kids. It almost sounds like society hated young X'ers. Massive respect for you guys for surviving a childhood like that. And to think I might raise kids with that same childhood...

Of course, I say this as a Homelander/Quarantiner who feels like helicopter parenting perfectly fine and normal. I'm sure you guys wish to turn back time and fight the neighbors' kids with sticks or whatever. Was your childhood actually like this? Have advice for raising the Neo-Nomads? What will the 2T be like for us anyway?

I'm worried about what older people say about new kids being bad parents in the future because we're phone-addicts is true.

[Warren Dew]

(04-21-2020, 08:56 AM)Camz Wrote: To be honest, while I'm excited for what amazing culture and change comes in the 2T, I'm also pretty terrified of becoming a neglecting parent. When I read what T4T says about Gen X I feel really depressed for them. Their parents just letting them roam free sounds lonely and empty, almost like they didn't care about them at all. On top of that is divorce, which I can't imagine going through as a kid. On top of that, the media portrayed them as terrible kids. It almost sounds like society hated young X'ers. Massive respect for you guys for surviving a childhood like that. And to think I might raise kids with that same childhood...

Your kids won't be Reactives unless you wait to have kids until you are over 40 at least.  Most likely your kids will be Idealists.

Quote:Of course, I say this as a Homelander/Quarantiner who feels like helicopter parenting perfectly fine and normal. I'm sure you guys wish to turn back time and fight the neighbors' kids with sticks or whatever. Was your childhood actually like this? Have advice for raising the Neo-Nomads? What will the 2T be like for us anyway?

I did not view fighting other kids as a plus, though I did get in some fights, a decade before latchkey kids.  I think that was just viewed as acceptable and normal for kids by the GI generation that was in WWII and figured the kids would grow up to be fighting with guns.

I think we should keep in mind that the generational cycle is less repetition than rhyming.  What will be viewed as normal childhood play for your kids will depend on what form the imminent crisis war takes.

[Camz]

(04-21-2020, 04:57 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(04-21-2020, 08:56 AM)Camz Wrote: To be honest, while I'm excited for what amazing culture and change comes in the 2T, I'm also pretty terrified of becoming a neglecting parent. When I read what T4T says about Gen X I feel really depressed for them. Their parents just letting them roam free sounds lonely and empty, almost like they didn't care about them at all. On top of that is divorce, which I can't imagine going through as a kid. On top of that, the media portrayed them as terrible kids. It almost sounds like society hated young X'ers. Massive respect for you guys for surviving a childhood like that. And to think I might raise kids with that same childhood...

Your kids won't be Reactives unless you wait to have kids until you are over 40 at least.  Most likely your kids will be Idealists.

Quote:Of course, I say this as a Homelander/Quarantiner who feels like helicopter parenting perfectly fine and normal. I'm sure you guys wish to turn back time and fight the neighbors' kids with sticks or whatever. Was your childhood actually like this? Have advice for raising the Neo-Nomads? What will the 2T be like for us anyway?

I did not view fighting other kids as a plus, though I did get in some fights, a decade before latchkey kids.  I think that was just viewed as acceptable and normal for kids by the GI generation that was in WWII and figured the kids would grow up to be fighting with guns.

I think we should keep in mind that the generational cycle is less repetition than rhyming.  What will be viewed as normal childhood play for your kids will depend on what form the imminent crisis war takes.

I do plan on having Idealist children, but I also plan on having least one Reactive. Maybe the new Reactives will have it better than Xers, but the emptiness, danger, and lack of closeness with parents may stay the same. I wonder what other things would rhyme.

[Eric the Green]

(04-21-2020, 08:56 AM)Camz Wrote: This thread has gone in a completely different direction. It's got me thinking, though...

To be honest, while I'm excited for what amazing culture and change comes in the 2T, I'm also pretty terrified of becoming a neglecting parent. When I read what T4T says about Gen X I feel really depressed for them. Their parents just letting them roam free sounds lonely and empty, almost like they didn't care about them at all. On top of that is divorce, which I can't imagine going through as a kid. On top of that, the media portrayed them as terrible kids. It almost sounds like society hated young X'ers. Massive respect for you guys for surviving a childhood like that. And to think I might raise kids with that same childhood...

Of course, I say this as a Homelander/Quarantiner who feels like helicopter parenting perfectly fine and normal. I'm sure you guys wish to turn back time and fight the neighbors' kids with sticks or whatever. Was your childhood actually like this? Have advice for raising the Neo-Nomads? What will the 2T be like for us anyway?

I'm worried about what older people say about new kids being bad parents in the future because we're phone-addicts is true.

My experience of my neighbor and school fellow-boomer kids was horrid. Bullying and teasing was practically expected of anyone hip, and nerds and geeks were attacked. Silent Generation era clicks continued. Boomers changed during the 2T in a revolutionary way in circa 1966-69 and became all peace and love and really cool and hip guys and gals. Some experienced a consciousness awakening. Then the 3T hit, and they (we) went back to being self-righteous and bossy pricks and have stayed that way. Of course, not everyone fits the same molds. Many boomers today are well-balanced and thoughtful in their opinions, if still rather dogmatic; not the impulsive youth that they were in the sixties. Boomers can be hypocritical in the way they are so hedonistic themselves but so critical of "lazy and entitled" millennials.

As I observed Gen X kids, maybe they felt neglected, and certainly later on they complained loudly about boomers and their cultures on forums like this, but they were brave and did amazing stunts I would never dream of doing (well, I might dream of doing this, but that's as far as it goes). They had outlandish and radical styles, liked lousy noisy music, and created cool psychedelic raves. They are practical and skilled, and often have a cynical, hard-bitten and sometimes-feisty style compared to smooth, flowing, looser and self-satisfied and "narcissistic" boomers. If anything they were politically more conservative than core boomers in youth. Now boomers as a whole are slightly more conservative, but core boomers are still more liberal than Xers.

Millennials seem to me competent, attractive and good at networking and tech, and are science-oriented with some also open to new age spirituality. Some of them are self-satisfied meanies with unstable and mercurial personalities. There's dregs in any generation. Most are well-informed and well-balanced folks doing what they can with all they have inherited. Mostly their cultural tastes remain poor but more positive and happy than cynical Xer tastes, but some of them appreciate the best pop culture of our time, which came from the Awakening. Experiencing the lack of opportunity as no generation has before them, including Xers who benefited from lower population and less competition compared to 20-30-something boomers, some millennials are active in political movements. I include especially the younger Gen Z Millennials and "homelanders" in that. Millennials are slowly learning to be civics, but it has taken them a long time to learn the ropes of citizenship, and are still slow. Millennials in spite of everything are optimistic and confident, given generally good upbringing and moral support from boomer and early Gen X parents.

YMMV