U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-28-2019, 10:09 AM
 
12,031 posts, read 20,576,777 times
Reputation: 19610

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by katharsis View Post
Yes, in many cases -- but the question I was asking is whether more people are more upset about the changes today than they were 50 years ago.
No. It’s just now we have the internet where people can complain about everything, and media that’s fractured into segments so people can only get news that fits their world view so no one has to think. Add to that now we have political enemies creating havoc with impressively real fake news stories to manipulate people to get the results they want.

All the mess we went through to get the ACA approved is very similar to what we went through to get Medicare approved. People, generally, think change is bad and scary. And I can cite examples like the revolutionary war and the Civil War. Both were fought over people wanting change and people fearing change; it’s as old as the hills.

My hypothesis will be very evident as we go into the holiday season (I hope it’s not a sin to say that during August), with people piping up left and right Christmas is changed, it’s not like it was when I was a child, it’s all greed and materialism. And I always reply: Robert Benchley wrote about this in 1922 as an older man. He felt Christmas had changed, and it was all materialistic and greed. Clearly it’s a case of everything old is new again.
__________________
Solly says Be nice!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-28-2019, 10:24 AM
 
8,152 posts, read 5,170,414 times
Reputation: 13911
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyb01 View Post
In 1960 the voting public elected a guy who was 43 and his wife was 31. I was 10 years old. Their youth was exciting to lots of people because Eisenhower was a part of the older generation at 70 years old.

Today there seems to be some resistance wrt a generational shift in the coming presidential election. ...
Without turning this into a political discussion, it does appear that the American system moves in generational shifts. One such shift occurred with Kennedy's election. This was the entry into political life by people who were then young veterans of WW2. Another shift was in 1992, by which time those veterans - then in advanced age - were replaced by persons who were born right around the war's conclusion. That cohort has been more or less dominant through the present (three of the four most-recent presidents were born in 1946).

It's not unreasonable to suppose that another shift is impending... whether in 2020 or 2024. These things seem to occur in 30-32 (or so) year cycles.

The question becomes, do shifts in prevailing societal values (such as the subject of this thread) correlate with generational shifts in political leadership? Is there a causal relationship too? Or is it just a jumble of related dates?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2019, 01:40 PM
 
2,214 posts, read 939,581 times
Reputation: 5434
Back in 1969 I was on my way to class in downtown San Francisco, with my railroad stripe bell bottoms and longish hair and school books when an old man stepped up to me onthe sidewalk and spit in my face. I was too shocked to do anything except wipe off the spit as he walked away.

I think that generational anger no longer exists as it did 50 years ago. Cops don't beat young white educated protestors the way they did 50 years ago. The shifts in behaviour were much greater then, than they are today. There were real issues then, not the nonsense that passes for 90% of the news cycle today.

The difference is that today we have the anoninimty of social media, where rants and anger and hatred can be expressed without subjecting the poster to anything more violent than angry on line responses. And the anger is all manufactured by the media presentation of politics and culture. In person, people of vastly different viewpoints on religion, politics, culture, mostly agree to disagree in a civil manner. Online it's all my team vs. your team.

Last edited by bobspez; 08-28-2019 at 02:28 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2019, 06:11 PM
 
8,252 posts, read 8,759,857 times
Reputation: 9327
Quote:
Originally Posted by katharsis View Post
Yes, the Watts rioters came within a few blocks of our home and I remember being scared, and this was in 1965, but I don't remember any kind of permanent backlash as a result. Also,to clarify, I did encounter plenty of racists growing up, but it seems to me that no one groused about 'minorities' in "our" neighborhoods, and my dad had no problem at all getting along with blacks. In fact, if I were going to summarize the attitude as I saw it (or at least how I remember it), it was more of a "live and let live" kind of thing. ("If they don't bother me, what do I care?")

[Actually, my parents had much more of a problem with the Mexicans than they did with blacks, and the number of Mexicans greatly exceeded the number of blacks in our neighborhood, but that was due to some very bad personal experiences instead of some kind of prejudice, meaning that I honestly don't think they had any opinion of Mexicans, bad or good, until after those experiences (which I won't discuss here).]
In general, it seems that white Californians did have more animosity with Mexicans than with Blacks in those days. There were so many more Mexicans than Blacks. In other parts of the US, it was different. I can remember the Blacks having fights with the Puerto Ricans as they fought over their turfs that seemed to overlap. I do know that some negative personal experiences lead to people generalizing about an entire ethnic group. Before the negative experience, many people had no opinion, as long as their lives were not directly impacted. This is one of the reasons that busing and forced school integration failed in the 70s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2019, 06:52 PM
 
Location: Idaho
1,470 posts, read 1,178,689 times
Reputation: 5676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lieneke View Post
I agree that our parents' generation did develop a "to each his/her own" or "live and let live" attitude about how people look/dress, homosexuality, pot and other personal preferences with the condition that people keep it to themselves. No one cares what people do in the bedroom or with their spare time, it's their business.
Statistics show that our parents' generation are less tolerant than current generation:

https://www.clearerthinking.org/sing...ere-in-the-70s

Quote:
Americans are also more tolerant today than they were in the past. During the '72-to-'12 interval, the percentage of Americans who felt that homosexuality is "always wrong" fell from 72% to 46%. The percentage of Americans who approve of interracial marriage between blacks and whites rose from roughly 25% in '72 to 86% in 2012. And the percentages of Americans who have abandoned the attitude that women who work outside the home damage their families have risen from roughly 30% to 70% over the same period
I do not know what state or city that your parents live but do not think that the attitude of "live and let live" or "nobody cares what people do in the bedroom or with their spare time" were wide spread 50 years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy..._United_States

Quote:
Prior to 1962, sodomy was a felony in every state, punished by a lengthy term of imprisonment and/or hard labor.
IMO, I think sometimes the "live and let live" attitude could mean being indifferent to injustices or turning a blind eye to offenses like racial discrimination and sexual harassment.

There are no questions that some people especially young college kids (i.e. the snowflakes) can be very vocal with their intolerance or being militant about being politically correct. I think their so-called 'social influences' is exaggerated by the media. IMO, they are just a very loud, attention getting minority and do not represent the current young generation.

Of course, there are also many angry and cranky old folks on social media. Like other posters have pointed out, many of them are likely to be much nicer in real life. I also think that one can not judge the attitude of the average American people based on what they hear on the news or read on the internet!

Statistics aside, my personal experience is that I have encountered much fewer bigoted or prejudiced people now than 50 years ago. However, I have no doubt that the current political climate have whipped up frenzies in both the extreme right and left wings. The 24/7 news coverage also make these extreme activities seem more wide spread or prevalent than in 'real' life.

Last edited by BellaDL; 08-28-2019 at 07:02 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2019, 07:56 PM
 
Location: too far from the sea
20,207 posts, read 19,208,410 times
Reputation: 34448
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobspez View Post
Back in 1969 I was on my way to class in downtown San Francisco, with my railroad stripe bell bottoms and longish hair and school books when an old man stepped up to me onthe sidewalk and spit in my face. I was too shocked to do anything except wipe off the spit as he walked away.

I think that generational anger no longer exists as it did 50 years ago. Cops don't beat young white educated protestors the way they did 50 years ago. The shifts in behaviour were much greater then, than they are today. There were real issues then, not the nonsense that passes for 90% of the news cycle today.

The difference is that today we have the anoninimty of social media, where rants and anger and hatred can be expressed without subjecting the poster to anything more violent than angry on line responses. And the anger is all manufactured by the media presentation of politics and culture. In person, people of vastly different viewpoints on religion, politics, culture, mostly agree to disagree in a civil manner. Online it's all my team vs. your team.
This makes sense. Back in the late 60s the older generation hated the younger generation. There was a Generation Gap. We wanted to end the Viet Nam War, we wanted less materialism and greed, we wanted peace and love, etc. Our parents, the WWII generation, thought the country was great the way it was. After all, they had fought WWII for it and they came home and bought houses with government loans to GIs. What could be better? Why would we ungrateful kids want to change anything?

But now there's hatred all over the place and for no reason. Republicans think Democrats want open borders, Democrats think Republicans are racist---not really though. Things don't divide neatly along party lines. We just have a great big chaotic mess for no reason at all. Some people on both sides seem to enjoy hating the people on the other side, as if they have nothing better to do than hate. Everybody wants their own way like spoiled little kids and people don't want to compromise. Well, actually, the people probably would compromise. It's the politicians. On both sides. And too much media exposure for all of them. Don't you wish they would just shut up!
__________________
my posts as moderator will be in red. Moderator: Health&Wellness~Genealogy. The Rules--read here>>> TOS. If someone attacks you, do not reply. Hit REPORT.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2019, 09:18 PM
 
8,152 posts, read 5,170,414 times
Reputation: 13911
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland View Post
But now there's hatred all over the place and for no reason. Republicans think Democrats want open borders, Democrats think Republicans are racist---not really though. Things don't divide neatly along party lines. We just have a great big chaotic mess for no reason at all. Some people on both sides seem to enjoy hating the people on the other side, as if they have nothing better to do than hate. Everybody wants their own way like spoiled little kids and people don't want to compromise. Well, actually, the people probably would compromise. It's the politicians. On both sides. And too much media exposure for all of them. Don't you wish they would just shut up!
We seem to be witnessing a watershed realignment. Traditional camps and tribes no longer map to their former party-identity. "Conservative" used to mean pro-business, free-trade, and internationally-engaged. Now it almost means the opposite.

These changes are confusing, but I don't think that they compare with the fundamental questions of morality, gender-roles and definition of family, which were first broached some 50-60 years ago. Perhaps we are so exasperated and shrill today, precisely because we are debating relatively unimportant things.

Over on the Economics forum, the big dilemma is what's to happen with artificial intelligence and automation. Would that throw millions out of work? Would they be able to be retrained? This, perhaps, would be as big of a transformation as the mass-entry of women into the workforce, or desegregation, or (in an earlier generation) the advent of unionization and the 40-hour work-week.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2019, 10:22 PM
 
Location: Rust'n in Tustin
2,427 posts, read 2,510,116 times
Reputation: 4609
I lament the changes in the Democratic party. John Kennedy said, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.

If any Democratic candidate for President said that today, they'd be kicked out of the party so fast their head would spin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2019, 10:31 PM
 
Location: Rust'n in Tustin
2,427 posts, read 2,510,116 times
Reputation: 4609
Growing up Jewish my father told me, we're different and it's ok to be different. These days nobody's different, and everybody's a winner.

I don't mind being different, and every time I've lost at something it's made me try harder next time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2019, 12:43 AM
 
5,566 posts, read 2,995,485 times
Reputation: 24898
Quote:
Originally Posted by katharsis View Post

So, in short, do you think that people were more accepting of change 50 years ago than they are today -- or less accepting?
The same--there will always be the grouchy people that want nothing to change. There will always be those that go with the flow and accept change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top