American Youths

[JROTCcadet]

As a student, I have to say I'm a little concerned both with how young adults are percieved in America, and with how they earn that reputation. It seems as though (as often happens with war or international conflict) students are beginning to rise from their political slumber that's been occuring since the 'hippie' generation grew up. More and more often I see student demonstrations and protests: which is great on one level. On the one hand, it shows a decline in young political apathy, this is a very good thing. On the other, I'm afraid that my generation may make the same mistake as our parents (not all of them, some were decent protestors ). In short, we risk becoming too arrogant. While wisdom is not assured with age, one does have to experience some degree of this world before they can truly have an impact in it. However, my generation (and know The Who starts playing in my head) seems to quick to jump on the activist bandwagon. What's worse, I don't even feel that we're as justified as the previous generation. I'd just like American youths start voting and writing their senators before they hold a sign and come up with witty chants. It's easy to point fingers guys, I know, but it's better to offer solutions

 

[nycflasher]

I couldn't agree more. I'm 28, and more educated than I was say 8 years ago when politics held less of my interest to begin with.

But I meet younger kids all the time who are amped up about having an opportunity to vent, speak-out, rebel... but aren't exactly sure what they're rebelling against.

It's easy to feed off of the energy of a movement, the next step is educating yourself about the movement and its opposition so you can cogently be an active part of it.

 

[Avatar4321]

I know exactly what im rebelling agianst. liberalism.

 

[Zhukov]

The generation gap between youths and older adults might not be what you’d expect, and on some political issues involving religion and abortion, young people may be the most conservative of all, according to a new survey by University of California, Berkeley,

link doesn't work, I don't know why, too long I guess


Out of Berkeley no less.

 

[Avatar4321]

link didnt work bro.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
link didnt work bro.

Well then here's the whole thing. Second link on a "youth conservative majority" www.google.com search.


<center>Youths more conservative than their elders</center>



Berkeley, CA -- September 24, 2002 -- The generation gap between youths and older adults might not be what you’d expect, and on some political issues involving religion and abortion, young people may be the most conservative of all, according to a new survey by University of California, Berkeley, political scientists.

The report, released today (Tuesday, Sept. 24) by the campus’s Survey Research Center as part of the center’s Public Agendas and Citizen Engagement Survey (PACES), is based on interviews nationwide with Americans ages 15 to 92. It provides a comprehensive assessment of the generation gap in American political opinions.

UC Berkeley political science professors Merrill Shanks and Henry Brady were the lead researchers, along with Indiana University professor Edward Carmines. Douglas Strand of the Survey Research Center was the study’s project director. Topics and results include:

School prayer. Fifty-nine percent of adults ages 27 to 59 want public schools to allow prayer at official school activities, such as commencements. Among teenagers, 69 percent support school prayer.

Federal aid to faith-based charities. Forty percent of adults ages 27 to 59 support such funding. But support reaches 59 percent among the college-aged and 67 percent among younger teens.

Religious conservatives. Young Americans show somewhat more warmth towards religious conservatives than older adults. Individuals ranked their feelings for these groups on a scale from zero for “cold” to 50-100 for varying degrees of “warmth.” Although no age group showed much warmth to Christian fundamentalists, 33 percent of youths ages 15 to 26 gave them a rating over 50; 26 percent of Americans over age 26 gave a similar score.

Abortion. Government restrictions on abortion are supported by 34 percent of adults over 26, while about 44 percent of youths ages 15 to 22 support such restrictions.

“We were surprised by the greater support among young Americans for some aspects of the conservative cultural agenda,” said Shanks. “Young Americans show more conservatism on religious politics and abortion even though youths, as a group, appear to be less likely than their elders to attend religious services regularly or consider religion a guide in their daily life.

“If the youth of today maintain these positions on religious politics and abortion as the years go by, then the American public as a whole could become more conservative on these issues.”

In the case of social security and education, if there is a generation gap in opinions, it is the elderly who stand out, not the youth. Youth are just as supportive as their parents and grandparents when it comes to government spending on health care for seniors. However, older Americans don’t show a corresponding supportiveness for the education programs that benefit youth. While 70 percent of young and middle-aged Americans support more spending on elementary and secondary education, only 52 percent of those over 60 favor increased school funding.

Some traditional political differences between young and older Americans continue to prevail. Youths are more inclined to want the federal government to do more to protect women and racial minorities from job discrimination. They also are more likely to consider job discrimination against gays and lesbians to be a serious problem. And they want more federal programs to assist the poor and protect the environment.

Differences between the young and old are most dramatic when it comes to sex and violence on television. Among Americans ages 27-59, 67 percent think “the amount of sexual content on television” is a serious problem, while just 47 percent of teens and the college-aged feel that way.

And while an overwhelming majority of the adults ages 27 to 59--74 percent--thinks TV violence is a serious problem, the majority of teens and young adults--55 percent--disagree.

On many other issues, however, there was no generation gap. The study found no dramatic differences between younger and older Americans on such issues as military defense, gun control, tax policy, criminal punishment, and government support for health care in general.

“The next step for us and other scholars is to solve the puzzles in our overall picture of the generation gaps in political opinions,” said Strand. “We need to explore why youths seem to be more conservative than their elders when it comes to religious politics and abortion politics, but not other issues.”

Strand speculated that messages criticizing abortion and supporting school prayer and government aid to religious charities may have been more prominent in the media while the youngest generation was developing political views. He noted that older generations developed their basic positions on these issues before religious conservatives began mobilizing politically in the late 1970s.

The study is based on telephone interviews completed during the latter half of 2001, and most occurred between late April and September 10. About 1,250 people were interviewed, a standard sample for academic survey research.

The executive summary of the report, containing additional details about it, is available on the Web at www.pewtrusts.com/pdf/pp_paces.pdf.

The project was funded by a grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts, which support nonprofit activities in the areas of culture, education, the environment, health and human services, public policy and religion.© 2002

 

[Avatar4321]

Beautiful, but what do you expect. We are the Reagan Generation. We have seen Reagans defeat of the Soviets, the triumph of America. We have been tutored by Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck. We have see evil in the world on 911. We have realized our liberties can be taken easily and must be defended.

Most important we are more religious. We have a deeper faith in God that has grown strong because of the Cultural friction between the standards of God and the world. And because we have a mission to prepare for the Second Coming of the Lord, whether in our lifetimes or in the lives of our children or grandchildren the time is coming. We live in a marvelous age.

Onto abortion specifically is it really that surprising that more young people are conservative on this issue? its the conservatives not having the abortions and hence passing their values on. As long as the pro abortionists continue to murder their offspring, the movement will die out.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by Avatar4321

Onto abortion specifically is it really that surprising that more young people are conservative on this issue? its the conservatives not having the abortions and hence passing their values on. As long as the pro abortionists continue to murder their offspring, the movement will die out.

Natural selection at its finest. The unfit die.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by Zhukov
Natural selection at its finest. The unfit die.

Exactly. its a wonder they havent realized their problem yet.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Exactly. its a wonder they havent realized their problem yet.

Well, they're communists. Ever heard of Lysenkoism?

Can you blame them? Capitalism and natural selection go hand in hand.

 

[Semper Fi]

I am a kid of this generation. I've noticed that the 'children' I come in contact with are split in two ways.

One is the group that rebels against anything and everything. They dont like Bush, Kerry, liberals, conservatives, ect. They are against abortion, the War, everything (except drugs ).

The other is the more serious type, who realizes the differance between political parties and whats wrong and right. These people either like or dislike President Bush for a reason. Reason is really what seperates the two groups.

Usually, you see the first type of people in the streets with their "tyt sk8t3r y0 geer", so it may give off the impression that they are the majority of America's youth. I dont hang out in the streets with the "yo's". Maybe other kids dont either.

Most teens are liberals, to my knowledge, because they have inconsistant views and beliefs. Most young teens that is, anyway. Older teens I am not so certain, but from what I have seen, they are generally more conservative.

This is what I've noticed in my days in school. School is out for the summer, thank goodness.

 

[rangers ride]

thank you semper fi, I have been noticing an explosion of liberalisim in younger teens, but let us not forget, that even though young adults may rebel against there parents, they still are a gigantic influence. since the children see their parents as a stepping stone for there lives.



Also, the "yo's" have really been against bush just because they think hes pushing iraq and afganistan to far... look at 911 and you can prove them wrong.

josh

 

[Semper Fi]

Not only that, but when Bush announced they harbored WMDs we they havent recovered them yet, that really ticked off the youth. Even though we still removed a world threat, ended a reign of tyranny, are establishing a better Iraq.

Once I asked my dad why people only see the bad in things, and he replied, "because they expect everything to be exactly what it is promised, and handed to them on a silver platter...we call them democrats."

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
I know exactly what im rebelling agianst. liberalism.

resistance is futile. You WILL be assimilated. :

 

[JohnGalt]

I just turned 16
And I think my generation is screwed. Kids that actually think about their opinions don't exists (ok, maybe a few, but the VAST majority is dumb). I hate the majority of the kids in my school because they are consumed by TRL and what color someone's shoes are. But don't hesitate to talk about Bush or the war (negatively) to the extent that everyone soon realizes how dumb the speeker is.
Most other teens are liberals, and I die everytime I get in an arguement because they are simply too dumb to accept facts. They simply reply, "that's bullshit kracka!" Yes, that is how they respond to facts. We are fucked.
And profanity is everywhere, I don't mind because my favorite music is gansta-rap. But I do admit that it is a problem. My vocabulary is extensive enough that I don't have to be profane, but it just sounds like I am more convicted when I cuss...(probably dumb too)
Bullying is another matter, all kinds of kids have enemies. Seriously, the goths, preps, jocks, hell even the nihilists each have enemies. The day someone doesn't get a referral for fighting is the day I eat my left nut.

 

[JROTCcadet]

Again, I find the biggest problem with forums is the excessive generalizations that take place. One cannot call all liberals communists anymore than one can call all conservatives fascist, it just happens that the nation is undergoing a swing toward conservatism (maybe it will continue, maybe not) as a reaction to a surge in the 'youthful liberalism' of this and previous young generations. The important thing, and that which must be maintained is the balance in American politics. The young (typically more idealistic and less realistic) serve as a reminder to society. They keep us young, so to speak. The older generations then check the younger ones, maintaining the necessary order in society. It is much the same way with liberals and conservatives. Let's put ourselves above name calling and go back to the roots of these words. Quite simply, liberalism is a desire for or acceptance of change, and conservatism is a desire for or acceptance of maintaining the status quo. In essence, liberals institute new policies and conservatives keep the 'good ones' going. These balances are what make a republic, and we cannot exist without them. It's easy to put one's self in either a 'left' or 'right' camp and point a finger at the other side, but when it's all said and done both sides need each other, and each side serves an important function.

 

[freeandfun1]

The problem is, those idealistic kids ---- well, they aren't growing up and now they are becoming idealistic 30, 40, 50 and 60 something idealists!

 

[Semper Fi]

Originally posted by JohnGalt
I just turned 16
And I think my generation is screwed. Kids that actually think about their opinions don't exists (ok, maybe a few, but the VAST majority is dumb). I hate the majority of the kids in my school because they are consumed by TRL and what color someone's shoes are. But don't hesitate to talk about Bush or the war (negatively) to the extent that everyone soon realizes how dumb the speeker is.
Most other teens are liberals, and I die everytime I get in an arguement because they are simply too dumb to accept facts. They simply reply, "that's bullshit kracka!" Yes, that is how they respond to facts. We are fucked.
And profanity is everywhere, I don't mind because my favorite music is gansta-rap. But I do admit that it is a problem. My vocabulary is extensive enough that I don't have to be profane, but it just sounds like I am more convicted when I cuss...(probably dumb too)
Bullying is another matter, all kinds of kids have enemies. Seriously, the goths, preps, jocks, hell even the nihilists each have enemies. The day someone doesn't get a referral for fighting is the day I eat my left nut.

I should sue you for theft, cause you stole the words from my mouth . Yeah, one time I asked a peer who he thought really cared about America, Bush or Kerry. He replied with "We have no proof that Iraq bombed us." Seriously, no exaggeration. I stopped talking to kids my age, for the most part. That blew it, its like trying to communicate with a Furby or something.

 

[Annie]

Not all kids are liberals, but it's amazing that more aren't when you look at what they are being taught in schools. Here is an excellent incident of some that are able to think for themselves:

Doctorow's Malpractice
Hofstra students use boos responsibly.

Tuesday, May 25, 2004 12:01 a.m.

Did you hear about the college commencement speaker who was almost booed off the stage Sunday because his commencement address was an anti-Bush rant? The speaker was E.L. Doctorow. The college, God bless it forever, was Hofstra University on New York's Long Island.
Newsday reported that Mr. Doctorow--or, as Newsday put it in the first paragraph, "E.L. Doctorow, one of the most celebrated writers in America"--gave a 20-minute address "lambasting President George W. Bush and effectively calling him a liar." It didn't go over too well. Mr. Doctorow announced to the crowd that he himself is a storyteller. But the president too, he said in a flight of dazzling cleverness, is a storyteller. The president's stories are not so good thought "because they are not true."

This is where the booing began.

"One story he told was that the country of Iraq had nuclear and biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction and was intending shortly to use them on us," Mr. Doctorow continued. "That was an exciting story all right, it was designed to send shivers up our spines. But it was not true." Mr. Bush told stories about Saddam Hussein, that he "was in league with the terrorists of al Qaeda. And that turned out to be not true. But anyway we went off to war on the basis of these stories."

This is where the crowd began to boo most lustily. Mr. Doctorow stopped his speech. There is the suggestion he was surprised. (By the way if he were a conservative, Newsday would have described him as "conservative writer Ed Doctorow, who had a bestseller in 'Ragtime' in 1974," not "one of the most celebrated writers in America.")

The president of the university called for calm. "We value open discussion and debate," he said. "For the sake of your graduates, please let him finish." The response to this was telling. Most of the faculty--the faculty, not the students--responded with a standing ovation. Mr. Doctorow finished his speech, attacking Mr. Bush on taxes and terrorism, and accusing him of wanting to subpoena libraries "to see what books you've been taking out."

Newsday said many parents and relatives of the more than 1,300 undergraduates were "livid" over the address. Frank Mallafre, who had traveled from Miami for his granddaughter's graduation, said, "If this would have happened in Florida, we would have taken him out" of the stadium. Bill Schmidt, 51, of North Bellmore, N.Y., shared the outrage. "To ruin my daughter's graduation with politics is pathetic," the retired New York police captain told the paper.

On Sunday night a Hofstra official said that while Mr. Doctorow had the right to his views, he violated the unwritten code that college commencement speeches should inspire and unite a student body. But a Hofstra faculty member came to the fore, defending Mr. Doctorow. "I thought this was a totally appropriate place to talk about politics because that's the world our students are entering," sociology professor Cynthia Bogard told Newsday. "I only wish their parents had provided them a better role model."

Wow. Think of what a role model Prof. Bogard is. What a fool. What a snob.





I want to explain to Ed Doctorow why he was booed. It was not, as he no doubt creamily recounted in a storytelling session over drinks that night in Sag Harbor, that those barbarians in Long Island's lesser ZIP codes don't want to hear the truth. It is not that they oppose free speech. It is not that the poor boobs of Long Island have an unaccountable affection for George W. Bush.
It is that they have class.

The poor stupid people of Long Island are courteous, and have respect for the views and feelings of others, and would not dream of imposing their particular views on a captive audience that has gathered to celebrate--to be happy about, to officially mark with their presence--the rather remarkable fact that one of their family studied and worked for four years, completed his courses, met all demands, and became a graduate of an American university.

This indeed is something to be proud of.

Did Eddy Doctorow know that? Did he care? I don't think so. Did he understand that what the students needed from him--after all, he has lasted a long time, has been a member of a profession, has won the favor of the elite media for lo these many years, and manages to produce many books nobody reads in the computer age while still using a quill--was perhaps a sense of . . .

All right, I give up. I don't know what they needed from him. America hasn't been the same since the dream of socialism so rudely ended? What will we do for a sense of communitarian ideals now that Marx is gone? "God may not exist but we need to tell stories about him nonetheless?

Fast Eddy Doctorow told a story at the commencement all right, and it is a story about the boorishness of the aging liberal. An old '60s radical who feels he is entitled to impose his views on this audience on this day because he's so gifted, so smart, so insightful, so very above the normal rules, agreements and traditions. And for this he will get to call himself besieged and heroic--a hero about whom stories are told!--when in fact all he did was guarantee positive personal press in the elite media, at the cost of the long suffering patience of normal people who wanted to move the tassel and throw the hat in the air.

I am a conservative. I have spoken at three college commencements. Each time I spoke I talked about the students, and the life ahead of them, and the nature of their achievement. I spoke to them about them. I didn't tell them Jimmy Carter is a retard or Bill Clinton is a pig. It would have been wrong to do that. It would have been boorish. It would have deserved boos.

I'm glad that's what Eddy Doctorow got this Sunday from what appear to be his intellectual and moral superiors on Long Island. Go Hofstra.

Ms. Noonan is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal and author of "A Heart, a Cross, and a Flag" (Wall Street Journal Books/Simon & Schuster), a collection of post-Sept. 11 columns, which you can buy from the OpinionJournal bookstore.


Copyright © 2004 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by JROTCcadet
Again, I find the biggest problem with forums is the excessive generalizations that take place.

Generalizations are important if they lead to clarity, and helpful if they lead to wisdom. Do not be afraid to generalize.

In essence, liberals institute new policies and conservatives keep the 'good ones' going. These balances are what make a republic, and we cannot exist without them. It's easy to put one's self in either a 'left' or 'right' camp and point a finger at the other side, but when it's all said and done both sides need each other, and each side serves an important function.

Liberalism was once defined as forward change. But it no longer means that. The liberals of today are not united by a single over-arching ideology. By today's standards, John F Kennedy would be a Republican.

Democrats are a coalition party. It is comprised of poor people who want a progressive tax to implement income redistribution, minorities who want hand-outs, immigrants who want lax immigration policies, homosexuals with their agenda, anti-christians with their agenda, communists/socialists, abortionists, unionists, trial lawyers, bureaucrats, elitists, people who hate the President, et cetera.

In some instances, today's liberals refuse to acknowledge the wishes of the majority, but instead circumvent the will of the people with judicial activism.

But you are right, both sides need each other. This country deperately needs a rational liberal party again.