Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,104 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The "Millennials are leftists, Zoomers are conersvative" narrative needs to die

I'm sure you've heard it before, this whole bullshit narrative that Millennials, or Gen Y, are a generation of leftists Bernie supporting SJW snowflakes, and that "Zoomers", or Gen Z, are a generation of right-wing Trump bros. ("Zoomer" is an abysmal name for a generation, btw, sounds like something a 3-year old would call a toy car)

Regarding the timespans of each generation, I'm going to use Pews definitions, so 1981-1996 for Y, and 1997-2012 for Z. I don't necessarily agree with these labels, but I'll use them for the sake of argument on this thread.

First problem with this narrative, is that roughly 65% of Gen Z would be in high school or below, meaning they would have very little knowledge in the grand scheme of things regarding political science. I can guarantee you, for the majority of Trump supporters within that 65%, they're only supporting him because it seems like the "cool" and "edgy" thing to do, because Trump seems like such a "cool" and "edgy" person for them to like, and they follow specific echo-chambers on certain social media sites to reaffirm their political beliefs. Keep in mind kids at that age are still easily impressionable, and their opinions regarding politics could potentially change once they're older if they go deep into the field of political science and listen to solid points from all sides of the political spectrum to question their beliefs, rather than listening to points from the same side all the time to reaffirm their beliefs.

Second problem, is this narrative doesn't take race into consideration.

Did you know that Trump actually won white Millennials in 2016? It's true!
According to Edison Exit polling, Trump won white 18-29 year olds by 47%, with 43% going to Clinton, and 10% going to a Third Party Candidate. With white 30-44 year olds, Trump won a majority, not just a plurality, of that demographic, at 54%, with 37% voting for Clinton, and 9% going to a Third Party Candidate, sure most of that 30-44 demographic would consist of Xers, but Millennials still make up a large chunk of that block, especially when you take birthrates in the early-mid '80s into consideration.
Furthermore, the majority of that Third Party vote would be right-wing, as nearly all of the Third Party vote would've gone to Johnson, Stein, McMullin, and Castle, and only one of those candidates, Stein, is left-wing, with the other three being right-wing. When you add Trump's vote with the Johnson, McMullin, and Castle vote, those four candidates win white Millennials by a clear majority. So the majority of white Millennials are conservative, not liberal, just like with whites of previous generations, and white "Zoomers" are just a continuation of this trend.

Furthermore, Gen Z has more racial minorities than Gen Y does, the vast majority of racial minorities within all demographics are more liberal, and racial minorities within Gen Z are most definitely going to continue that trend. If anything, Gen Z may actually swing more left than the Millennials do, because that generation will have a larger amount of racial minorities to push the entire demographic to swing to the left.

So overall, the narrative of Millennials being so leftist and "Zoomers" being so right-wing is just bullshit, and nothing but a wishful talking point that the conspiratorial right-wing media hopes will rally more white first time voters on their side. Just because a bunch of edgy teens think that liking Trump makes them cool and non-conformist, and just because your favorite right-wing talk show host likes to focus specifically on city-dwelling SJWs when talking about Millennials, doesn't mean shit.
If anything, like I said before, Gen Z may actually be more left-wing than the Millennials are, due to the larger number of racial minorities in that generation. Sure, whites in Gen Z may swing more right, so did white Millennials, so what's your point there?

What are your thoughts regarding this piece? Let me know down below.
 

·
Registered
♂️ Xennial - Melancholic/Choleric
Joined
·
3,834 Posts
The generations are an overrated factor here. What matters is that populist politicians like Trump, BoJo, Orban, etc. attract less educated voters than liberal globalists. Urban dwelling educated millennials hate Trump, but so do urban dwelling educated boomers.
 

·
Over 300 Confirmed Kills
Joined
·
10,568 Posts
I suspected most who support Trump or lean alt right were doing so because it's "cool and edgy", as you commented. What else is to be expected when the tables have turned and rebelling against the left is the way to defy your parents these days?

As a generation, still too young to be pigeonholed. Half the time news sources just lump Gen Z with Millennials anyway so at least there is some vague recognition of the differences.

Not sure that l agree with the last point or have any thoughts regarding race, it's not my impression that Gen Y "swung right" ten years ago. We elected Obama, a number of voters who elected him did go on to vote for Trump but when talking about previous Obama voters, they were likely a subset of Bernie supporters.

l voted Hilary in 2016 and Bernie in the last primaries, we're splitting in all directions with a lot of people throwing the election in spite (or planning to do so).

Being a leftist today is the only option you have when you don't want to hate-vote for Trump, a lot of us saw ourselves as more centrist at one point but that term is currently hijacked by lowkey Trump supporters or apathetic types.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,087 Posts
IME, generations don't make that much of a difference in basic political affiliation as much as social-economical class, but regardless I don't think it's true that people vote for Trump (and similar right-wing reactionary types) because it's "cool and edgy". In fact, the 1990s desperately tried to be the coolest and edgiest decade of all time, but someone like Trump wouldn't have stood a chance back then even if his entire campaign was about wearing two leather jackets at once while winking over his sunglasses on a skateboard and giving Hillary the finger as he spray-painted his slogan "SHUT UP, MOM!".

What seems to be going on instead is an increasing disillusionment with the status quo, which is by and large globalist (neo)liberalism. I think that people vote for these nutjobs more as a sort of desperate attempt to shake up the system from within. This also explains Bernie's popularity: I wouldn't exactly describe him as cool or edgy – he's certainly not as vulgar or pompous as Trump – but he's still a comparatively radical alternative.

What might make a difference in this regard is that younger people perhaps aren't as ingrained in the system to the same extent. I don't know if that's true, but I certainly have friends and family who consistently vote for dusty old parties that keep playing the neoliberal game, seemingly out of habit. I don't really blame them either... almost any alternative is either right wing populism or a tiny party that won't stand a chance of making any significant impact. Personally, I'd rather vote for that latter because I feel more confortable voting for something I believe in, but I kind of get why people vote for these idiots even if I think it's a bad idea.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,687 Posts
I remember seeing that idea a few years ago, but I haven't heard it as much since Gen Z started voting, and turned out to be extremely liberal. If anything, I think they're to our left.

It reminds me of 2009-2010, when conservative writers assumed that because there were a lot of vocal Ron Paul supporters online, Millennials were going to be overwhelmingly right-libertarian. Whoops.

The generations are an overrated factor here. What matters is that populist politicians like Trump, BoJo, Orban, etc. attract less educated voters than liberal globalists. Urban dwelling educated millennials hate Trump, but so do urban dwelling educated boomers.
I think of it as people who are more assimilated into our global information society vs. people who aren't, either by choice, or because they've been left behind economically. I have some sympathy for the latter because they really are between a rock and a hard place, but they're lashing out at the wrong people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,340 Posts
Riddle me this. If it's purely a matter of socioeconomic class, then why are there so many rich (or even ultra-rich) socialists and also so many working-class nationalists? Also, if it's purely a matter of socioeconomic class, then what about issues like gun control and abortion? Those are social issues, but not economic. Only predators and parasites are anti-gun and/or anti-life.

attract less educated voters than liberal globalists.
Only a knuckle-dragging, degenerate, sycophantish, and blatantly anti-intellectual imbecile would support any move toward an oppressive global police state. Nationalism is Resistance!
 

·
Registered
♂️ Xennial - Melancholic/Choleric
Joined
·
3,834 Posts
Riddle me this. If it's purely a matter of socioeconomic class, then why are there so many rich (or even ultra-rich) socialists and also so many working-class nationalists? Also, if it's purely a matter of socioeconomic class, then what about issues like gun control and abortion? Those are social issues, but not economic. Only predators and parasites are anti-gun and/or anti-life.
Socioeconomic class is not the only factor, personality is always a factor in all human affairs. But support for Trump is more correlated with level of education than with age.

Only a knuckle-dragging, degenerate, sycophantish, and blatantly anti-intellectual imbecile would support any move toward an oppressive global police state. Nationalism is Resistance
What about something like Star Trek's Federation?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,340 Posts
Socioeconomic class is not the only factor, personality is always a factor in all human affairs.
Fact.

But support for Trump is more correlated with level of education than with age.
I'm GLaD he did what he did to expose the dastardly deeds of the deep state, but I still don't regard him as a true nationalist. He lacks the personal character of a true nationalist. And just so you know (and you probably know this already, but I still feel the need to mention it), we who defined ourselves as nationalists don't expect "perfection." All we want is "understanding." By that, I mean that the individual should learn to comprehend how their actions or inaction affect others and the world around them. In other words, we seek to promote conscientiousness. Conscientiousness doesn't mean "conformity." It has more to do with respect between persons. It can't exist in a collectivist system because collectivism tears everyone down instead of building them up.

What about something like Star Trek's Federation?
Still too oppressive by my standards. Rottenberry was a socialist. I identity more with Princess Leia's revolutionary nationalist Populist faction. Nationalism is Resistance!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,340 Posts
Young people tend to be more liberal, old people tend to be more conservative. That's how it has always been and will always be.
Then how do you explain hardline Soviet remnants like Bernie (now defunct, but that's beside the point)? How do you explain young upstarts like Hunter Avalone? Or how about me for that matter? I was a major dittohead as a teenager in the '90s. Since the status quo was liberal and internationalist, conservatism and nationalism became expressions of rebellion. Later, in 2008, I became one of Rush Limbaugh's CHAOS agents during Operation CHAOS.

"I can do anything!"

What freedoms would you miss in the Federation?
I forget exactly when it occurred. I think it was in First Contact. But Picard makes a statement that was blatantly socialist and hypocritical since they were fighting the Borg who represent all forms of collectivism all rolled into one. He mentions something about how people in the future work but don't get paid money. I forget the verbatim quote, but I always knew it revealed the hypocrisy of socialism. Shouldn't socialists be pro-Borg since the goal of socialism is communism?
 

·
Registered
♂️ Xennial - Melancholic/Choleric
Joined
·
3,834 Posts
He mentions something about how people in the future work but don't get paid money. I forget the verbatim quote, but I always knew it revealed the hypocrisy of socialism.
Looks as if Rottenberry never heard of post-scarcity. People in the future don't have to work, robots work for them.

Shouldn't socialists be pro-Borg since the goal of socialism is communism?
The Nazis and the Soviets fought each other despite both being socialists.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,340 Posts
The Nazis and the Soviets fought each other despite both being socialists.
Fact. Even various sub-factions of socialism and communism fight against each other to prove whose form of oppression is more better (case in point: the Khmer Rouge). The Nazis opposed communism because they thought it was too oppressive even by their standards.

Collectivism is order and order is oppression.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,905 Posts
Most people don't care about politics at this age. There are people who are complaining about SJW-ism or general sentiments of having a Homer Simpson president, but that doesn't really get into the policy issues that nobody cares about.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top