I know it's a waste of time, bandwidth, and effort on my part, but once more into the breach: the boomers, the hated boomers, were not adults when the Civil 'Rights' Revolution happened.
The 'boomers' that so many love to hate were young schoolchildren when 'Brown v. Board of Education' came down. They were children in grade school when the schools in the South were forcibly integrated. They were still schoolchildren when the sainted MLK was marching in various places, and even further back, when the 'freedom riders' were crisscrossing the South in buses.
Friends, the boomers are generally those who were born during the Post-War baby boom, when the GIs came back home after the end of WWII (and for those whose history is weak, that was in 1945), hence they were born beginning around 1946. The 'boom' is generally considered to have gone on through the 1950s, and according to some, into the early 1960s, as the 'greatest generation' (now fallen from grace with a cynical, scapegoating public) raised their families.
Do the math, folks; the boomers did not come of age until circa 1967. Many of the young men were fighting (and dying) in VietNam around that age. They were not all 'hippies' and campus leftists, not by a long shot.
''In general, baby boomers are associated with a rejection or redefinition of traditional values; however, many commentators have disputed the extent of that rejection, noting the widespread continuity of values with older and younger generations.''
As far as their influence in destroying this society, remember that people could not vote until age 21 in those days, hence boomers did not vote until 1968 and later. Do I need to tell you that the die was already cast then, the rot already well-advanced?
I myself first voted in 1972. Now, considering that many boomers were voters by 1972, and considering their reputation for being crazed leftists, why didn't George McGovern win by a landslide? Instead, he lost by a landslide, by a very wide margin.The boomers were touted as being a very large demographic, remember. The 'greatest generation' had large families by today's standards.
So why did the boomers, once reaching voting age, not elect McGovern rather than Nixon? How did the popularity of George Wallace fit into the scenario of the leftist Baby Boomers?
Remember too that most people in high elected office and in positions of power in business and the military back in the 60s and 70s, and into the 80s for that matter, were of the 'greatest generation' or the 'silent generation', not boomers. Recall, too, that the first President of the United States who was of the Baby Boom generation was (sadly) Bill Clinton -- and that was in 1992, folks. So before the first boomer president, somebody else was busy destroying our society. Bush the Elder and Reagan were 'Greatest Generation' guys, as were Nixon and Ford. Eisenhower, who was president when the Civil Rights Revolution really kicked off, was of an even earlier generation, born around the turn of the 20th century at the latest.
I've said before and will say again: the post-boomers who loathe and detest their 'boomer' elders, have been even more liberal in their politics and social lives than their hated elders have been. Why, given the seeming resentment and loathing of 'boomers', have people continued to emulate the worst excesses of 'boomers'? The hatred becomes hypocritical when we see how very liberal or radical most of the post-boomers are, even as they condemn boomers for being dissolute hippies and communists.
The post-boomer generations continue the worst excesses associated with some 'boomers.' Why do they emulate what they profess to hate?
In a past post, I cited the demographics of the last presidential election, and noted how the boomers were the least likely to have voted for the current regime, while the millennials and the younger groups were the most likely. Yet this fact goes ignored, while these critics condemn their boomer parents and elders.
Some of the younger members of the 'movement' who write and speak are vitriolic in condemning the older generations; there is something wrong and misguided about this. This kind of feeling, the idea that each generation sees itself as the source and origin of wisdom, ends in Jacobinism, and I fear that kind of sentiment on the 'right' as much as on the left. There is a kind of hubris and arrogance of many on the 'right'. As Job said of his comforters, 'No doubt but ye are the people, and wisdom will die with you.' Some among the younger generation believe that wisdom will die with them, because they believe wisdom was in fact born with them. Nobody but they can see the truth, and they think they have nothing to learn from their elders.
Rather than this attitude of casting off the past and disdaining it as all bad, we need a movement to restore that which was good in the past; trying to raze everything and build from scratch will end in grief; we may go from the frying pan into the fire.
I see an increasing hatred of elders which will probably enable the social engineers on the left to carry out euthanasia on the oldest generations, who have been criticized for being more 'racist' and 'too conservative' for the 'progressives' and their agenda. The left recognizes that there are in fact more people among the older generations who resist the multicult, and this is because these groups are the only surviving people who actually lived in the old America, the pre-madness, pre-PC America. The rest know it only through biased history books and popular misconceptions. Even the more 'right-wing' younger people believe much of the leftist propaganda, and are more likely to have a cynical attitude about the past, based on what they learned in corrupt government schools (and corrupted 'Christian' schools, even, where political correctness also holds sway).
I don't delude myself that the elder-haters will change their minds after having read what I have to say; my past efforts have been in vain and there are those who need a scapegoat, as I said. Old people, (which includes anybody over 45 for the younger ones) are considered unattractive and useless in a youth-and-beauty obsessed culture, so why not make the old a scapegoat?
One thing I do know; younger generations always think that they know more than their "stupid" elders, and they foolishly believe that had they themselves lived in the past, they would have made better choices and created an ideal society, based on their greater enlightenment. This is absurd. Nobody can say for certain that if he lived in some past era, he would not have followed the spirit of the age as most people did. Young people who preen themselves, saying that if they had been born 50 or 100 years ago, they wouldn't have been 'racist, sexist, and homophobic' don't know what they are talking about. They would have conformed to the majority, just as they are doing in their own age. Left or right, our age worships novelty, youth, 'fitness', wealth, beauty, and 'success.' Left or right, many younger and middle-aged people dislike the old, and see no value or worth in them.
And the most absurd idea abroad today is that old people somehow rule the world; that they have enormous political clout and power. I talked to a doctor a year or so ago who scoffed at my concerns about government health care being established. He said, 'the senior citizens have the most political clout of any group; they won't let the health care system be changed.' Well, he should be eating his words, because the all-powerful old folks were not able to stop the government health care bill, though they have the most to lose by it.
Boomers or the last few 'greatest generation' members are mostly oldsters in the declining years of their lives, and are dying off daily. They are also the Whitest demographic, and probably the least politically correct, definitely the most knowledgeable about the pre-PC era, having actually lived their early lives in that long-gone country. Those who hate the oldsters may dance on their graves when the last one passes, but their passing will be cold comfort, as the White population will be in the minority by then, and having rejected any wisdom their elders might have offered, will be on their own, as they avidly wished.
How well will these younger generations who have ''all wisdom and all knowledge', unlike their very human elders, fare then?
Excuse me for not having high hopes in this future governed by people who have never known anything other than the multicult dystopia that is growing around us.
