Desicritics Comments on The Angry American Generation

Comment by Temple Stark

Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:59:14 EDT

I don't know, there are a lot of, apparently "uncommon" people in the big cities and in such horrible states as California and New York. That's a side point. The book sounds amazing and a worthwhile insight into the bravery of the overwhelming majority of men and women of the military. A nice, easily read review as well. Thumbs up! Temple

Comment by Guido

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:24:54 EDT

Damn good info in this thread. Hat-tip to everyone for civility, insight, and clarity. Refreshing! Ciao, Guid

Comment by Ruvy

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 13:11:51 EDT

I think Americans are at a cross-roads and are confused. Morris, Don't judge what Americans feel by polls of leading politicians. This is as misleading as judging what Indians or Pakistanis feel by polls taken on the sub-continent, or judging what we in Israel feel by polls here. I suspect that many Americans are very confused, but this confusion goes far beyond which candidate to choose in an election. American politicians do not have the power many seem to think they have, and many Americans are aware of that fact. The problem that Americans face is that they are stuck in Iraq, cannot afford to cut and run, which is probably what they ought to do - and they cannot afford to stay there either. One way to refocus eyes from the horns of a dilemma is to focus them on another "crisis" - like Iran, for example. It isn't that Iran isn't a threat; it is. But the ruling elite in the States is as interested as eliminating that threat as they are in lowering the price of oil. However, it appears that the United States is undergoing a recession of some kind, its dollar is falling, and its debts are in the hands of the Communist Chinese. If you tie the two problems together, you see a cause and effect, but most folks do not want to see that. Those in the power elites in America definitely do not want that view becoming commonplace. So, lots of Paxil is being handed out to cover up for that fact. But bd is right. The anger is definitely there, just under the surface....

Comment by bd

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 02:07:39 EDT

thanks for the comments guys, I do not have much to add to your points. Unfortunately, SS, could well be, this is an opinion, and as you can see from Ruvy, based upon the same set of information, he has a different view. WHich is as logical and correct as mine :), again, I think that the combination of 9/11, Afghanistan, Iraq and the war of terror is defining a new generation. I think it is "angry". Does that one word encapsulate everything that America will do over the next 30 years? No way, so it could well be a combination of many other words...

Comment by Morris

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 21:52:02 EDT

ss #8 Who knows people's sentment. We have no way to ascertain it. Even now McCain is only slightly behind Obama or Clinton in the opinion poll. It sounds like he wants to continue with the same policy about almost every thing. I think Americans are at a cross road and are confused. Morris

Comment by Ruvy

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:32:31 EDT

Sorry about the multiple posting. I hit reload twice after when the computer indicated problems connecting with the site.... sigh....

Comment by Ruvy

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:29:34 EDT

bd, I would suggest to you that the "loss of innocence" didn't take place on my fiftieth birthday when jets were used to knock down the Twin Towers. The loss of innocence took place in Vietnam when stories of soldiers fragging officers were common, when soldiers who had laid their lives on the line for their country, often against their own will, came back to America only to be spit at by self righteous college kids calling them baby-killers. Even though I thought America's involvement in Indochina was a waste of lives and money, I never spit at returning troops. A lot of them were my friends. Two of my friends came back from Nam bearing drug habits, another came back with bullets and shrapnel in his intestines from an American chopper that fired on him. In addition to tossing the rectitude of the previous generation, and wandering without real moral guideposts, my generation has been bitter and cynical (I'm not just talking about me). We've seen the loss of life - for nothing. We fought a war - either with an enemy or with ourselves - for nothing. I'd call that "loss of innocence". I note that Guido was a Marine. While I was (and remain) very critical of American governmental policy, nothing I've said has been meant to cast aspersions on anything he has done. The truest patriots are those who serve with the least appreciation. May G-d guard his son and keep him safe. I had not understood what you had meant by an angry generation. Given your expanded explanation, I'm afraid you are right. Angry people shot at helicopters which were sent to New Orleans in the wake of Katrina. I fear what the anger lurking just under the surface in America will work.

Comment by Ruvy

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:29:16 EDT

Comment by Ruvy

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:29:05 EDT

Comment by smallsquirrel

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 20:06:41 EDT

morris you have confused government policy with the sentiments of the people, which is never a good thing to do.... (nor an accurate one)

Comment by Morris

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 19:57:25 EDT

bd, it is a good article. But who knows? I think Guido is right. Angry generation? I think not. I think it is a lost generation. Lost about how they arrived at this conclusion about WMD. Lost about why they are fighting. Lost about how to get out. Lost about what to do now. Lost about environment. Lost about energy. They do not seem to have any clear policy on anything. My fear is that having no clear thinking on anything they are more likely to elect John McCain coming next November. And chances are that, that would keep them lost for at least four more years. Morris

Comment by smallsquirrel

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:42:55 EDT

I will have to really noodle this one over. I think why you are saying might be partially true, but maybe not wholly for the reasons you are saying. I want to really give it thought before I respond. Nice food for thought!

Comment by bd

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 17:56:39 EDT

Ruvy and Guido this was a difficult essay for me to write because the the concept was rather woolly (which you liked, Guido, thank you for that) but not so easy for a quant like me. Second, the prediction was also very wild and woolly and again, for a quant like me, it was tough. But that said, let me try to address your points. Before that, I thank God that your son is safe, Guido, may God keep him that way. I should have been clearer. The angry generation is not just the marines. It is also the chap who is working in the garage in Podunk USA, the fellow who is driving a combine in Iowa, the chap who is answering the phone in NYT, the firemen, the policemen, the teachers, the the then. So while the number of soldiers is low compared to the WW2, Korean and Vietnam Wars, here's something for you to think about. When the soldiers come home, what kind of a welcome do they get? Both democrats and republicans support the troops. That is because America supports them. They might be sent for wrongful purposes for some americans, but the fact that the soldiers are supported. My point is more to do with the loss of innocence that America went through. It is that anger that I mean. It is the slow burn of an entire country. 9/11 was the seed and well, for worse, the Bush Administrations joyful trajectory just bedded it in. I am again, as you said, an outsider, but I have seen much more introspection in Americans, I have seen much more "sod off". While Bush went too far in the unilateralism, I think the ratio of multilateralism to unilateralism (if that can be put) is irretrievably reduced compared to the 80's and 90's. That anger is there, Guido. Can I prove it? no. Pearl Harbour could be roughly compared to 9/11, but I think participation in WW2 was more moral than just fight against the Japanese, otherwise so many American lives would not be sprinkling the plains of Europe. Was there anger? Yes there was anger but not so much. I think there is much more anger now. Yes, it may well be that this is the new greatest generation as O'Donnell, but I would posit, once we are looking back at 2008 when we are in 2040, that we could potentially ascribe USA's trajectory to the primary emotion of anger. I dont know if this is making sense, but hey, its 11PM on a monday night, apologies for the blather.

Comment by Guido

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 17:20:53 EDT

BD Well written synopsis from an outside stellar view. This subject is personal for me on many levels. I grew up in Florida during the "bewilderment" age. I spent two years in the Marines (74-76) and experienced the bond you mention...albeit not the kind forged under the extreme duress of ground combat. Let's say the cake ingredients were mixed, but never baked for me personally. Combat came in a different form about 20 years later with the USAF in the skies over the Balkans. But my involvement in the spectrum of war is even broader. My oldest son, now 30, is a former Marine and combat veteran of OIF, with the 2nd battalion, 8th Marine Regiment...or just 2/8 Marines, part of Task Force Tarawa. His experience is rooted in An Nasiriyah. There's a good book in print covering events there called, "Marines in the Garden of Eden". He came home mentally and physically intact...thank god. According to your essay, he's part of the "angry" generation. Now that you know some of my credentials (biases), I'll make some observations from there. When you describe the "greatest generation", two sentences standout for me: "...I slowly understood what the term "Greatest Generation" meant. It is difficult to explain, perhaps more of a term to be felt." And "War, in this case, brought the country together and gave rise to the Greatest Generation." The former is profound and I believe accurate. It says more about your own insight than your article does concerning the subject. Someone once said that you can study that sweet bee product "honey" for years. You can break it into its most minute particles. You can heat it, freeze it, and research it...even do a doctoral dissertation on it. But until you taste honey, you will not really "know" honey. Of course the same can be said for horse manure. The latter statement best describes the catalyst that helped form this generation of citizen soldiers. Not only did WWII provide group homogony and a cause greater than self, but the Great Depression was another influencing factor that they all had in common...almost to the man. To get a better understanding of these incredible individuals, I recommend a very short read with a long title by Stephen E. Ambrose called, "Comrades : Brothers, Fathers, Heroes, Sons, Pals". The next generation "bewilderment" seems true enough. I can honestly say that no one was more confused or bewildered than I was in the 70s and 80s. I would add that during this time there was a shift of perception from "us" to "me". There was also a reformation in politics on the left side of the spectrum. Liberalism and independent thinking seemed to take root in the young and higher learning institutions. That was of course until the Regan era. But the "me" generation persisted and still does to some degree today. I believe you lost the bubble on your final analysis of the "angry generation". To use Sen. Obama's controversial quote to make a point, detracts for the intended meaning. "These people, to paraphrase his words, "cling to guns and religion" as a result of economic uncertainty. The people that Alexis de Tocqueville believed were the bedrock of democracy in America." I can assure you and all who read this, that the overwhelming majority of responsible gun owners do not "cling" to their weapons for economic purposes. That is utter nonsense; and the good senator is trying hard to find a way out of that false statement. Furthermore the same holds true with religion. Your article would have been better served without the quote. I agree with O'Donnell that these Marines (soldiers, sailors, airman, et al) are the next greatest generation...not the angry generation. The reason they join and fight is varied. In fact a study indicates that there are basically 10 reasons why people join the military. Anger is not among the list: http://www.diversityworking.com/career/Military/Alabama_jobs/story/101.html Once they find themselves in combat, they fight for each other...anger is not even mentioned: http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/army/a/soldiersfight.htm As the father of a former Marine of this generation, I know for a fact that my son does not harbor anger...even for his sworn enemies. In the heat of battle of course it's a normal emotion, but it is not the reason he and others enter the Marines, nor why many continue to voluntarily return. Most actually believe in what they're doing. The anger I've encountered has to do with the youth of the ultra-left wing. But that has more to do with different perspectives than anything else. If you want to find the really hateful and angry youth in America, look here: http://www.dailykos.com/. These are unfortunately the sons and daughters with hate in their hearts and the anger that you and the world will have to deal with if they get power. This young warrior generation is no more "angry" than there great-grand fathers were in 1945. They are the new great generation. Pray there are enough of them. Ciao, Guido

Comment by Ruvy

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:31:39 EDT

A very nice article, bd. I lived through the era of Vietnam in the States, and saw my country torn apart by it. But there was a lot more to the changes in the early '70's than just Vietnam. There was also a conviction by many of those my age that the moral rectitude of the generation previous, the one that had fought in World War II and in Korea, was old-fashioned and irrelevant. Therefore, this moral rectitude was tossed out the window by many in favor of unbounded personal liberty. This tossing out of moral values was led by kids in the boring 'burbs in America, who saw the attempts of their parents to provide homes and security as empty materialism. Questions that plague Americans yet, issues like abortion or what rights homosexuals should have in American society, are indicative of the remnants of the moral rectitude of the generations previous re-asserting itself. The question, bd, is how many of these kids who have fought in Iraq will actually make it home. I do not know if you've noticed, but the American government keeps extending tours of duty for the grunts. The American military is stretched very thin, and the question of a draft has begun to loom in some policy circles. If they make it home, they may have the influence on American society that you specify. But I would also remind you that generational cohorts in the States are smaller. Baby boomers like me, because of the size of our generation, have had an out-sized influence of the society, one that is far beyond what other generations have had in America. When we die off, the balance of generational cohorts will be more even, and it will be harder to associate one generation with influence and power. This is, of course, assuming that events do not take what for most will be an unexpected turn entirely....

Comment by bd

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:14:57 EDT

meenakshi, well, that's what I am seeing as well, while there is hope (youth always does that), there is anxiety and anger definitely. But in terms of actually changing public policy and making those generational changes, I would say that it would be people like the marines who would have a bigger impact on USA compared to the obama supporters. Take the example of the protestors from the vietnam era. Did the foreign policy or even domestic change to that much extent as the protestors wanted? not much...., same here...

Comment by blokesablogin

Mon, 21 Apr 2008 03:31:15 EDT

I am seeing a more anxious american being born out of this economic slow-down than an angry one. Obama is adored and the youth are his support- that generation is not angry- it is hopeful. they are teaching their parents abut recycling and saving earth's resources. they want to be vegetarians when their parents force meat down their throats- I call them activists. The marines are a different ilk- I am "guess-timating" majority of americans to be as above! Lovely post. thanks, bidi!