So you knew it was poorly written and yet you posted it anyway? How clever you are, pretending to be an idiot. Also, how predictable and - yes - dishonest.
And yes, I knew your little footnote referred to that. Doesn’t make it any less true, though.
Yes, we get that. Many of us are similarly contemptuous of the notion that your perceptions are infallible.
Nah…just rushing to get out the door.
Missed the edit window. It actually referred to ‘Chow.’
And now, I really am out of here.
No, really.
Maybe you are the one who is misrepresenting what everyone else is saying. Maybe everyone is saying, “We get that you criticize liberals for the crassness of modern culture, but don’t forget that it was liberals who achieved civil rights for minorities, and conservatives who opposed them. So it is unfair to criticize what liberals have done to society (assuming that you are even right about that) without acknowledging the good they have done,; nor is it fair for you to praise conservatives while ignoring conservatism’s ugly history.” That seems like a reasonable response to what you are saying.
Doesn’t this say all you need to know about trying to “argue” with SA? Along with his other quote about how facts don’t matter, we now know what this person is made of. Why waste more time attempting to have a rational, fact-based discussion? All the evidence and logic in the world will never trump what he has conjured and cobbled together in his head.
Even that summary gives too much credence to the original premise. I think a more appropriate response is “Not only are you painting with a ridiculously broad brush, you’re painting the wrong barn.”
Societal change is immensely complicated and has a staggering number of interlinked causes (some large, some small). It is ludicrous to say that it’s is X’s fault that the world is the way it is today, as if there was some vast cabal running things.
Let’s look at one particular potential line of causation. The generation that grew up during the Depression and went to war came back (those that did) to a country on the economic ascendent. Soon millions of people who had known only hardship could own their own homes, cars, washing machines, televisions, refrigerators, etc - consumer goods and comfort out the wazoo. And these people, because they had known hardship, said to themselves “I want my children to have all the things I never had when I was growing up.” And so the new generation, the Baby Boomers, grew up in an era of plenty, and thus were spoiled. And they grew up with a sense of entitlement - everywhere they looked, there were advertisements telling them that they could have whatever they wanted.
And so they came to believe, and so they and their offspring forever after believed that the world revolved around them, and that they had a *right *to whatever they wanted. And they were encouraged in this worldview by the media and the manufacturers and the stores - “Just buy this product and you’ll be rich and sexy and happy!” And they weren’t, and so they went on to the next product and the next, and they went into debt, which made them less happy and more insular and more resentful of others who they saw as having what they wanted. And thus a once-courteous society descended into sullen self-obsession.
Is any of that true? Sort of. Is that a comprehensive assessment of the modern world’s woes? Hardly. Am I blaming The Greatest Generation for spoiling their children? No (okay, maybe a little - but understandably so). But it’s not the liberals’ fault any more than it is the conservatives’ fault.
If anything, we’re victims of our own success - cultures with an excess of wealth become decadent (see also: the Roman Empire, 15th century Spain, etc). Not only were we awash with consumer goods but we also had enough money to move around - which meant moving away from the traditional extended family group and neighbourhoods, which used to provide much of the social etiquette structure. Poor countries maintain their traditions and values because they can’t afford to move or change.
It is what it is. You may as well blame the liberals for the wind and the tides.
Thank you for that link. I’ve often wondered what it is about certain people’s outlook on life which irritates me so. I think I can gain some insight here, of myself and of other folks.
Fine. However, I lived through the exact same period and my memory is in direct conflict with yours on several points that are key to your beliefs. To resolve that conflict, it is helpful to look at actual events that took place in the order in which they took place. You, however, appear to be more interested in basing your current opinions on your self-created memories. That is unfortunate, but it weakens your persistent cries about the evils of “liberals” because it indicates that you are willing to make up history to suit your feelings rather than examining your feelings in the light of actual history.
::: shrug :::+
And my generation grew up with the incessant message that ‘the world is going to end before you can make a life for yourself.’ Social security. Nuclear war. Pollution. Economic decay.
That’s the inheritance of the 60s.
Barack Obama, not to drag politics too much into this, is the other face of this generation. One is the slacker who no longer cares. The other is… not hope, no. Rather, refusal to submit. The world may be screwed, but by Henry, we will go down fighting the good fight.
Not the old fight, not the old wars, but a new one.
I think I’ll quote that old liberal now, when asked, “What are you rebelling against?” “Whadda got?”
Yeah. Things were more civil back then. As long as you stuffed your eyes and ears and mouth with cotton.
I hear stories back at the gun club. Talking about construction. Talking about how, when they were building the interstate, men would line up for work, still in their fatigues and boots from WWII, ten years later.
Talking about how they just shot the mexicans in the old days, or hit them with the car, because they were cops and how it’s a shame they got to go through paperwork now.
You want the 50s, buddy, you better remember all of it. If you want me to, I’ll remember it for you.
Ten million men who had survived a war, coming home, changing the country in ways it would never imagine. A thousand factories switching from guns to butter. A culture that was changed from stresses that were put on it in ways it would never imagine.
And for this, you blame the mop-topped Liverpudlians? Hah.
If so, then I apologize to Gyrate. My understanding of the “Quoted For Truth” tag is for when you agree with someone.
No one’s forcing you to post here in the Pit, you know.
And reading further through the thread I see that I do, in fact, owe you an apology. So, I would like to publicly apologize for my remarks to you earlier in the thread. I misinterpreted your comment.
I would still like an answer to my question from yesterday: what more can society do to end street gangs? SA seems to want to ban them, but I am unclear on how he would go about doing that, seeing as the right to assemble is protected in the Constitution. More details, please.
I don’t mean to badger, but you’ve suggested you might answer the questions or posts of some people in here, including me, at a time when you had more, er, time.
It is forgotten.
<waves hand>
Optimist.
The old liberal you quote is a motorcycle-gang leader named Johnny, played by Marlon Brando, in Stanley Kramer’s THE WILD ONE. Just thought you’d like to know.
Gyrate and Bambo:
Knock it off with the goddam fucking conservative civility! We’re watching you two, with your goat-felching facist politesse! When we finally take over, pissy little goody two-shoes like you go straight to The Wall!
This goes on your Permanent Record, assholes!
Shhh! You’re going to give poor Starving Artist the vapors!