Mick Jagger is not a Baby Boomer. Barack Obama is. Complicated, no?
Making generalizations about the Baby Boomers is even more perilous than about most generations. This huge demographic birth wave ran from 1946 to 1964. But it is the most sweeping-statement generation in history, trailed perhaps only by the so-called Greatest Generation, their parents. It caused a USA Today moment last week when the first of 77 million Boomers started to turn 65. The kids are not all right. They never were. They were blamed for every societal ill growing up, exploited with the commercialized youth culture, despised by their elders and younger people as self-centered and pampered. Now they will be cast as slothful takers from the republic as they seek to withdraw what were once considered solemn promises of pensions, 401(k)s and Social Security.
I was born in 1956 and always thought I was dealt the worst hand. Too young to get in on the drugs, sex and rock 'n' roll. Too old to pretend to be a Gen Xer. Too young to have fought for civil rights and against the Vietnam War, or honorably fought in it and been vilified (the spitting incident is a myth). Too old to avoid the disco era and the years of mid-calf skirts. Still, I always hung out with the older ones, including the former combat medics from 'Nam, by then hippified and adamantly anti-war/anti-establishment, who taught me my craft on the ambulance. So, as I age, I feel a certain kinship with the stereotype of My Generation.
This is a generation of 77 million individuals, of course. But some themes adhere. In America, it was a generation that came of age in the most spectacularly affluent society in history. It rode the wave of cheap hydrocarbons and suburbanization. It enjoyed widening opportunity as the American middle class reached its zenith. It was the demographic test car for a series of revolutions that had little to do with burning draft cards or bras: Tectonic shifts in technology, ways of working, social arrangements, politics. My parents' generation (in general!) was much closer in every way to that of their parents. The generation gap that began in the 1960s was new and real. Yeah, yeah, Socrates said (via Plato) "The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise..." But the Boomers inhabited a landscape that has changed at quick-step every year and lately for the worse. On the other hand, those of us paying attention are a bridge to the past that I suspect doesn't exist at all in today's youth. But maybe I'm wrong.
Class and race made a huge difference. Being white and middle class was a huge advantage for many Boomers. College. Money from parents who had become secure in the post-war boom and didn't want their children to suffer Depression-like privations. Daddy given cars. Draft deferments. Then, later, the chance to sell out as the 1980s began the big shift to a money centered society, the destruction of the commons and the rise of white-right domination. So many Boomers gave up on the public schools and moved deeper into suburban apartheid. We elected Ronald Reagan. George W. Bush and Bill Clinton are Boomers. But so are Dennis Kucinich and Bill Gates. I worked full-time from age seventeen-and-a-half on and never received a muscle car or free college from the parents. Seventy-seven million Boomers, 77 million individual stories.
Now John Boehner, a Boomer, is Speaker of the House, we have no national aspirations beyond tax cuts, and I can't help wondering if my generation will look back and and say, "I saw America at its best." That the white-right has regained political power two years after nearly wrecking the nation tells me that it will be a long, long time before Democrats, much less liberals, control the government. The rich will get richer. The rest will be left to deal with a generation of malpractice in nearly every institution of the land, with epic denial about the real and ominous forces bearing down on us whether we wish it or not. They will get an epic shafting from the banksters, the corporate oligarchs, the radio/Fox demagogues and, oh, wait, there's climate change, peak oil and China waiting in the lobby. This will mean generational conflict on a scale to make the 1960s look like beanbag, as a nation sees its living standards crater and not even remember the society that once existed or how it came about.
I was always an outlier. When I was five years old, I wanted to be 30 (and my thirties did not disappoint). When I was 17, I wanted to wear well-tailored suits, not bell bottoms. Now that the entire culture has been infantalized, I feel even more alienated. Dressing like a 14-year-old, putting off adulthood indefinitely and wearing a barbarian costume of "body art" have no appeal. I have early-onset old-guy syndrome, prematurely landing in that foreign country of the old. I read books — on paper (why the hell would I want a Kindle when I sit in front of a computer screen all day for work?). My idea of a "man cave" would be a book-lined study. I explore history and am ever more mindful of Harry Truman's un-Boomerish axiom ("The only thing new in this world is the history you don't know."). The average American watches 34 hours of network or cable television a week. I might watch four, in a good week. I am still deeply moved, in the right circumstances, by seeing the flag and hearing the Star Spangled Banner, even as I see what we've become as a nation, knowing that if I were 30 years old I would move to northern Europe. Am I even part of an American generation?
So now these rich and connected Boomers are in charge and there's no going back. Never has this nation faced such a moment of peril led by such a feckless and corrupt group. For once, my g-g-generation, or at least a part of it, can be blamed without the perils of generalization.
Outstanding post. Mine will be much, much shorter.
America is a complicated country/culture.
In a nutshell, this great nation was destroyed by the continuous, devastating effect of television on our culture. It has made the country lazy, dumb and gullible.
A nation of sheep.
For wolves, like us on this blog, our fate will be a bounty on our heads for scaring the flock.
Posted by: azrebel | January 05, 2011 at 10:29 PM
"For wolves, like us on this blog," - azrebel
...this skin of wool itches terribly.
Posted by: The Big, Bad Wolf | January 06, 2011 at 04:27 AM
The generation concept is ill-defined, grossly misused and irresistible. I want to jump into a vat of hot oil every time I hear the phrase "boomer narcissism" And when we bow before The Greatest Generation, who are we really venerating? The smug Rotarians who remade this nation as a craptacular shopping frenzy and drive-til-you-die road to nowhere?
I'm sorry Mom and Dad had to live through the Great Depression and WWII. That said, it's time to get another story.
I got this guilt trip as a kid, that I wasn't worthy of everything given to me because I didn't have to struggle for it. Is it any wonder boomers were the fist generation to indulge in wholesale recreational drug use? We knew on some level how crazy-making consumer civilization was. We were never quite good enough and on some level inadequate to life itself. Unless we bought something.
We've seemingly ironed out the Generation Gap unpleasantness. Parents and children alike consume without much guilt or awareness. We have virtually infinite choice when it comes to TV viewing. Computer games have altered the very structure of our brains. And we agree it's entirely appropriate to medicate the pain away.
The boomers are chastened and wiser now. We didn't change the world or love away the meanness. We were just caught up in an alternative vision of life that, on second thought, was probably just a daydream. It's odd how unlived dreams come back to haunt us. And they will.
Posted by: soleri | January 06, 2011 at 08:35 AM
The more i think about all the accomplishments of your generation, the TRUE 'greatest generation'; the boomers- the more i wonder why there is no statue commemorating your triumphs?
Think of it; a statue of a hippie and his "old lady" (that's what the boomers called their girl-friends back then), love beads around their necks, flowers in their long hair that's held by leather head bands, granny glasses on both, paisley shirt for him- tie-dye for her, fringed leather jackets for both, bare feet below super-wide bell-bottoms and both giving the 'peace' sign! The statue would be 69 feet high (of course), face San Francisco and the inscription would read simply: "GROOVY"
The Capitol Mall in Washington, D.C. is a fitting place.
Not that my generation really NEEDS a statue like that- humankind will never forget your words and deeds which so irrevocably changed the world, deeds like inventing sex, drugs and rock 'n roll; Feminism, Civil Rights and GLBTQ liberation; words like "Tune in, turn on, drop out" and "never trust anyone over thirty".
Not content to rest on their laurels the boomers even now are expanding the boundaries of creamed corn, adult diapers and Viagra!
It's to our boomer fore-bearers we owe our present civilization and culture, to which i say:
Thank you
Thank you
Thank you
Posted by: krazy bill | January 06, 2011 at 09:43 AM
Krazy, why do I get the sense that your idea of civilization is an all-you-can-eat buffet and a sixpack of Bud Lite?
Posted by: soleri | January 06, 2011 at 10:07 AM
Jon: I have long believed that we have seen America at its best, even though seers like Tom Friedman tend to sugarcoat our decline in context with "the rise of the rest". And I'm not a great believer in generational stereotypes because so many trends (ex: "entitlement") seem to span multiple generations.
I've got about 20 more candles on my cake than you do, but I also don't feel that I've ever fit within MY generation, which is increasingly polluted by the "I've got mine" mentality.
Perhaps those of us who are not tribal by nature are always destined to be misfits?
Posted by: Jim Hamblin | January 06, 2011 at 10:25 AM
Don't trust anybody over sixty...
Jon I keep thinking about your "308,745,538" post and your reference to "The suburban apologist Joel Kotkin". I went to his website thereafter and nosed around. Interesting. He thinks American will be young and revitalized in 2050. But the real key for him is that America will be truly multicultural.
In other words: his optimism is based on the death of the Teabag generation. I am of course talking about the graying whitey-righty population base that elected John McCain to yet another term. This is the true miserable and miserly generation: Those born from 1930-47 (Russell Pearce, 1947), who didn't learn any lessons from the Depression and who were too young to fight in WW11 and missed Korea too. The white bread generation: Because grocery stores back then didn't carry brown bread or brown rice; and because: Fair, fat, and forty was all it took to get ahead...
In particular...
The generation that benefited most from "The Great Compression," but didn't learn their history as to why that was so. Really, is there anything uglier than old people, who having been giving so much, instead of growing wise and understanding, have turned that cultural gift into a voting block that emphasizes selfishness and racist bile?
I'm not worried about late baby boomers at all. Anybody that was young in the 60s-80s has a sense of social rightness built into them. Those were fecund decades: Buckminster Fuller, Save the Whales, The Whole Earth Catalog, Carl Sagan. For a long while I've been ruminating about the 70s as point source for some of our culture's most incisive thinking. There was a lot of smart people writing smart stuff back then...
No, I am not worried about your age group Jon. What worries me, is how long these old selfish bastards will live. The sooner they are gone, the sooner American will get on with its future and lose its past. Because today's old people, for the most part, really suck.
(Side note: I'd love to see a graph showing global warming denial as a function of age. Birtherism as a function of age. Social empathy as a function of age. etc.)
Posted by: koreyel | January 06, 2011 at 10:41 AM
"No, I am not worried about your age group Jon. What worries me, is how long these old selfish bastards will live. The sooner they are gone, the sooner American will get on with its future and lose its past. Because today's old people, for the most part, really suck."
Oh, I'm so sad-- and sorry too, about your suffering. That you have to endure on a daily basis the existence of my generation. And I'm sure that when we're gone life for you will be like sailing on a sea of smooth buttocks.
Posted by: john | January 06, 2011 at 11:18 AM
"...like sailing on a sea of smooth buttocks." Great visualization! Unfortunately I'm too old to remember who's it is!
Posted by: eclecticdog | January 06, 2011 at 02:53 PM
I have a number for you:
6,866,000,000
This subject may apply more in the last post and I apologize for that. I hope I am not breaking a blog rule.
However, at dinner tonight, my wife asked me what the world population is. I hadn't looked in a while and I answered that it was around 6.3 billion.
After dinner I went and checked. Oh My, when did those additional 600,000,000 people show up?
Overpopulation is going to trump EVERYTHING we care about and discuss on this blog.
Our concerns pale in comparison to the fact that in no time at all we will have extra billions at the dinner table waiting to eat.
I wish my wife wouldn't ask me these questions. ( : - (
Posted by: azrebel | January 06, 2011 at 08:14 PM
Azrebel, think of that 600,000,000 as a generation, then it begins to rhyme. Here's a piece by one of Arizona's great reporters (along with Talton and John Dougherty), Charles Bowden. It concerns Mexico, the drug and human trafficking trade, and a culprit he identifies as overpopulation. Malthusians don't get much respect but it's clear there's no clean or just way to even distribute Earth's bounty. We are living next door to to an unfolding tragedy.
http://www.hcn.org/issues/42.4/the-war-next-door/article_view?b_start:int=0&-C=
Posted by: soleri | January 06, 2011 at 08:42 PM
I've actually read that the world can support a few billion more people with little problem with one use asterisk; that we humans must live "cleanly" and give up much of our greed and self interests. Actually in was an article in National Geographic (Jan 2011).
For instance, the issue of water was brought up: I think that the Colorado river is an example that can be used as what it would mean to give up some American self-interest. If we can learn to be efficient water users and even to resupply some of the Colorado's flow with say, desalinated ocean water. I think it would benefit the U.S. and Mexico to share this technology even if it means that we supply most of the financing.
I've had this discussion with others and interestingly, the generational differences of opinions are astonishing. Those in my age group, 30 and younger, don't see an issue with this but older generations think that somehow it is un-American and European Union like (socialist); a slippery slope if will.
Funny thing is I don't really see evil in the EU and those countries have not lost a sense of patriotism or awareness of their identities. Older Americans fear such unity internationally even if you point out the fact that Spaniards still speak Spanish, Frenchmen still speak French, and Germans...
I'm not really praising the EU either. I've been to many countries and have friends from these lands and can tell you that not all is as it seems. I've read many times on this blog that readers would choose to live in N. Europe given the option years ago; however, I would not. One shocking fact I've witness about Europeans and the EU (aside from some financial collapses) is racism. Open racism, especially towards blacks and more recently those that are or look Arab, Muslim, etc.
And while I am fully aware that this same racism exists in the U.S., I mean more open racism in Europe. 1950's type American racism. Where great athletes in European football leagues are called racist slurs. Germany even had to plead with their citizenry to withhold such open displays during the World Cup in 2006...
Also violence in Europe that is escalating. They may not have gun issues but a knife fight and attack is just as frightening and deadly. The youthful mobs in many European countries turning to the "gangsta" life seems almost Philadelphian on steroids.
It is interesting and America is not alone with her issues. Beautiful and human scaled European cities are facing huge challenges. It also can be argued that the younger generation of white Europeans are becoming more conservative, racist, and divided without the help of Evangelical devices and characters (Fox News, Pearce).
A few European cities that seem like they may actually be most successful in terms of little violence and actually true social inclusion and diversity are (IMO): Berlin, Madrid, and Oslo...
Posted by: phxSUNSfan | January 06, 2011 at 09:03 PM
I too have heard about the "we can handle a few billion more" on this planet theory.
If a person really thinks that, I would invite that person to walk into a Walmart, stand in that big area by the registers. Look really, really, really close at the evolution of the human species surrounding you, then come and convince me that two billion more of those creatures would be good for this planet.
Gives me the creeps just thinking about it.
Posted by: azrebel | January 06, 2011 at 09:17 PM
rebel, I think that is where the huge asterisk comes into play...
And admittedly, it has been a while since I've been to a Wal-Mart.
Posted by: phxSUNSfan | January 06, 2011 at 09:27 PM
"and even to resupply some of the Colorado's flow with say, desalinated ocean water." - phxSUNSfan
The energy to do so would be prohibitive. Said simply: water is heavy. Moving agua is one of the greatest bounties of nature. Beyond the redirection of flows, schemes to move water in quantity, are little more than another spin of The Great Exercise Wheel. If such schemes to shuttle water were economical, we would be using much more pumped storage on our electrical grids.
Massive desalinization is another layer of delusion.
Posted by: Rate Crimes | January 07, 2011 at 05:55 AM
"I've actually read that the world can support a few billion more people" - phxSUNSfan
Footprint analysis shows that if every human being enjoyed the lifestyle of the average professional sports fan, then for the current population to be sustainable, another five or six Earth's would be required.
Who knows, maybe we'll find a few more
Earths by the time Haiti gets its first NBA franchise.
Posted by: Rate Crimes | January 07, 2011 at 06:00 AM
To refer to people born between 1946 and 1964 as a single generation is foolish. The most obvious example is a person born in 1946 who at the age of 18 has a child. According to the conventional Boomer definition, the child and parent are in the same generation.
One way to segment this overly broad definition of a generation is by who was personally effected by the Vietnam draft. That cutoff would be those born in 1954 or earlier.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was not implemented effectively until the 1970's. The older half of the 1946 to 1964 age group did not personally experience affirmative action during their formative years in the workplace. Sexism against women was also accepted behavior well into the seventies.
Being born after 1955, I don't appreciate being grouped with George W. Bush, the Clintons or other notorious individuals of that age group. Closer to my age group's values and outlook would be Bill Gates, Tom Hanks and Steve Jobs.
Posted by: JMAV | January 07, 2011 at 09:05 AM
I appreciate JMAV's post about the fallacy of generational stereotypes because the present Golden Agers (my slot) are actually pretty diverse, as first described many years ago by the likes of Faith Popcorn. She may have coined the term "psychographics". That said, too many of the Golden Agers are selfish and clannish and prejudiced, but those qualities are by no means confined to their generation, my opinion.
Posted by: Jim Hamblin | January 07, 2011 at 10:06 AM
JMAV, I think there may be some value to the generation concept when it comes to economics, demography and other professions, but it's useless as a generalization when it comes to individuals.
I am probably very close to a walking parody of the notional "boomer". That is, I did all the evil things hippies are famous for: dropped out, dropped acid, got lost in countercultural ideas and styles - everything. And I can tell you that I am in a very small minority where my generational cohort is concerned. Most of them were never very liberal in the first place and today they're watching Fox News.
I'm glad younger people are a bit more open-minded although I suspect that will change with age. It's fun to romanticize one's youth when it seemed possible to change the world by simply being. Now that we're older, we burrow into the most comfortable and familiar niches and defend that with righteous indignation. "I've got mine" is the battle cry of conservatives and the elderly.
The real question is why we look at the catastrophe of modern life and think that it's somebody else's fault. False constructs didn't create this suburbanized wreckage we call America. Ideas had less to do with this than simple physical realities. And there's no more seductive idea than that of a collectively sentient group of contemporaries screwing it all up.
Posted by: soleri | January 07, 2011 at 10:08 AM
That's it! The readers of this blog have solved the crisis!
To solve the water problem, we just have to pump water from the Pacific to the Colorado- preferably somewhere above the Grand Canyon.
To do that we just build a series of human-powered pumps and a pipeline. We can employ enough people (around the clock) to completely solve the unemployment problem AND they will be low-paying menial jobs with few benefits and, of course, no unions or pensions.
Think of all the construction jobs to build it! And we'll need new communities along the route to house the pump workers- the Housing market is back!
America will be back on top by cornering the market in human-powered pumping technology! We'll be back in manufacturing to make pumps and seals- and shoes!!! And it's GREEN.
With all those people doing physical labor on the pumps, the obesity epidemic will be over (on average). They'll be so healthy they won't need health care and the existing system can then be devoted to caring for the rich, as it is so well-designed to do.
We're Number One again! (in small irrelevant highly-selective ways only visible to those with blinders)
Now, I just need to find a corporate sponsor or a Republican who wants to take the credit or a show on Fox and I'll be set for life!
Posted by: Buford | January 07, 2011 at 10:33 AM
Rate Crimes: "Footprint analysis shows that if every human being enjoyed the lifestyle of the average professional sports fan, then for the current population to be sustainable, another five or six Earth's would be required."
I'd love to read that "analysis" if you can provide it. I'm not sure I believe that but I do see issues with the average fan in nearly every American city. Mostly, transportation to the venue. Seattle and L.A. are amongst the worst offenders in those terms but I still don't think this analysis is applicable in the real world: Not everyone likes sports.
I think Seattle could encourage more ridership on their light rail/transit lines if they did what the Suns do with ticket sales; include a small surcharge in the price of every ticket sold that includes fare for that game day...it is a small step but when an area sits only tens of thousands then it actually has a big impact.
Posted by: phxSUNSfan | January 07, 2011 at 12:49 PM
Buford,
They will write songs about you and there will be statues all along the pipeline. "The Man Who Turned The Southwest Into A Tropical Oasis".
You are a genius.
I was going to go with a bucket brigade from Rocky Point to Lake Powell.
What was I thinking????
Posted by: azrebel | January 07, 2011 at 12:50 PM
Ooops: "when an AREA sits..."
Replace with: "when an ARENA sits..."
Posted by: phxSUNSfan | January 07, 2011 at 12:50 PM
As for desalination, I think you have what was written mistaken for mass desalination that would provide enough drinking water for L.A., Phoenix, and Vegas.
On the contrary as this would be about modest but substantial replacement of water; especially for the Colorado River Delta. Meaning more water for Mexican farms and farms in the U.S. close to the river and near the border. Aside from environmental replenishment, we'd provide Mexico's devastated farming industry a chance to regain its footing (revisiting NAFTA might help as well).
Another huge water issue, more than desalination, would be urban water usage. This is an issue of greed at its worst and primarily in Las Vegas with its garish resort casino fountains, pools, and golf greens that take most of its water from the Colorado. Do we really need Vegas as it currently exists today? No...We also would need to curtail suburban expansion in the West. These are all part of the huge asterisk mentioned before.
"Mass desalination" is already occurring in other regions, including the Middle East and foreign companies are leading the way in innovation (of course) into this foray. Siemens being a world leader (a German firm). It would be wise to proceed with caution since mass desalination could have a devastating impact on sea life if over used and concentrated.
Posted by: phxSUNSfan | January 07, 2011 at 01:07 PM
To clarify: every ticket sold for a U.S. Airways Center event (game, concert, exhibition, WNBA, hockey, arena football) is a valid ticket/fare for light rail 4 hours before the scheduled event until the last train in operation for that day (meaning midnight Sunday-Thursday and 2:30am on the weekends).
Posted by: phxSUNSfan | January 07, 2011 at 01:33 PM
I should probably proofread before I post or email Rogue to fix some of my errors and confusing lines.
I meant to say that "an arena seats" and not "sits."
Also, I think this might confuse people: "modest but substantial replacement of water..."
I mean that it would be a more modest project then supplying huge populations plenty of drinking water but substantial for ecological reasons and some farming needs. How I worded this phrase earlier appears contradictory.
As others have apologized before me, I don't want to seem pedantic or verbose rather clearly communicative.
Posted by: phxSUNSfan | January 07, 2011 at 06:01 PM
I just returned home to hear the news about Gabrielle Giffords.
Disgusting.
Posted by: Rate Crimes | January 08, 2011 at 12:37 PM
"The one thing that I can imagine really happening is that the millenials will be so steamed by what we've done that they will simply deny us any elder care. 'Forget about having operations and having a comfortable hospital bed when you're 80 years old, Mr. Boomer. We're just gonna put you out on the curb like an old broken television and forget about you.'"
James Howard Kunstler, lifted from KunstlerCast #126
Maybe not as bad as that, but I see an increasing struggle for resources between generations. Whether it's a semi-deluded comfortable boomer centrism or semi-deluded utopian tea party activism, the elder tribes will not let go of the spoils they 'deserve'. They will still vote for manna from heaven while subconsciously noticing that something is just not right.
And what will my generation do? If we don't engage there is still the motto "During loss of cabin pressure put your own oxygen mask on first."
Posted by: AWinter | January 08, 2011 at 02:13 PM
Boomers are chastened and wiser now. We will not change the world or the love of mischief. We were only taken in an alternative vision of life that, after all, was probably only a dream.
Posted by: Fountain Pumps | January 18, 2011 at 02:00 PM