Skip to main content

Anti-Boomerism

Anti-Boomerism is justified, but in their defence they were very low information growing up -- due to the concentration of media, lack of Internet, etc.

No one really hates Boomers though. Some of my best parents are boomers :P
The following applies to #notallboomers - so don't take it personally.

The point of targeting Boomers is to knock them out of their complacency. It is to isolate and criticise their worldview, which many people think is out-dated and unable to deal with the challenges and political paradigms of today*.

The Boomers grew up in a homogeneous, patriotic society when immigration was low and assimilation was valued and worked. They had a real sense of community and benefited greatly from the sacrifice of their parents and grandparents. They had job security. They may have had high interests rates at time, smaller houses shared by several siblings, and less consumer goods growing up, but these complaints are petty: it is next to impossible for a young couple nowadays to support themselves on a single wage, start a family at an early age and pay off a mortgage. The Boomers' quality of life overall was great in terms of social trust and cohesion. They could be proud as a people.

Boomers may say that young people have more consumer luxuries (iPhones, etc.) than they did, but others will rightly point out this 'material' is largely immaterial to quality and meaning in life. Family and community are what really count - opportunities for these have been undermined by the Boomers.

Over time, they accumulated considerable wealth largely through asset inflation - not 'hard work', which has come at massive cost to society. They initiated 'Multiculturalism' which has trashed our social capital, creating ethnic ghettoes, ethnic conflict and identity politics. They let 'Cultural Marxism' run rampant as the Left has marched through the institutions. They opened the floodgates with Mass Immigration to feed the Population Ponzi that has ruined quality of life, particularly in our major cities. They extract tax benefits for themselves which future generations will have to pay for. They boast about selfishly spending their children's inheritances on overseas cruises, etc.

The central complaint is they that were left a great heritage, but will be passing down a much poorer one, which is permanently damaged. This is rightly considered selfish, disgusting and dishonorable.

*Expanding on this, "their worldview, which many people think is out-dated and unable to deal with the challenges and political paradigms of today." : Boomers dislike 'identity politics' and naturally so. Young people hate it too. But in order to not have 'identity politics' you must not have 'Multiculturalism' or 'diversity', rather assimilation and national pride. Unfortunately, we have Multiculturalism now, and it is not going away anytime soon. The Boomer will live in denial of the disunity Multiculturalism has created and loftily eschew and criticise 'identity politics' rather than actually fighting for their identity and heritage, and those of their children, in the new Multicultural world. This is just selfishly and comfortably avoiding the problem, rather than facing the unpleasant reality and dealing with it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Multiculturalism is responsible for every war in history (almost)

people informally segregate all the time. You will find various ethnic enclaves in Melbourne and Sydney. Ethnocentric in-group preference is also seen in choice of friends and communication levels among work colleagues of different ethnic backgrounds. While there may be enough tolerance to allow semi-deracinated individuals to participate in capitalism and consumerism, the reality is that in-group preference is innate and Multiculturalism/diversity should be avoided a much as possible, because it breaks down social cohesion and trust. Diversity is our greatest weakness - an observable, scientific reality (footnote: Robert Putnam). Remember that forced integration has lead to many conflicts in the 20th and 21st century. WWI and Hitler would not have happened if various ethnic groups had sovereignty rather than being under the thumb of oppressive empires. Iraq and Israel/Palestine are two current examples of Multicultural conflicts. There is widespread revolt against forced integrati...

How Liberalism enslaves

Aristotle, the Stoics and other ancient Greco-Roman moralists posit a very different idea of 'freedom' that involves combating the tendencies that divert us from human flourishing and contributing to our community as social animals. It is naturalistic, albeit pre-Darwinist, but it is not dogmatic like Liberalism, Leftism, etc. This ancient teach us what freedom really is, and Stoic practices in particular can inculcate an honest sense of autonomy. Liberalism claims to grant people autonomy but it only gives them a false sense of it. It effectively enslaves people to denial of their biology, hedonistic consumerism, keeping up with the Jones', seeking celebrity, lower quality social and family relations, workplace and other forms of alienation, pursuit of happiness in all the wrong places: career, travel, shiny things, sleeping around, taking drugs, etc. Liberalism won't necessarily lead to all these things, but it makes people vulnerable to their marketing, and being h...

Equality, Liberalism and the Big State

Shelley makes Liberalism sounds as idealistic and Utopian as any religion. I even see some parallels with the Sermon on the Mount. What is the relation between 'equality' and the 'individual'. (I don't think we are equal and my reification of the 'individual' has become weaker lately). Must one have a strong view of equality to have a strong view of the individual and their 'rights'? I think so, although those regimes pushing equality the strongest - the Communists - have ended up being the most hierarchical and totalitarian of all, with the State on top and the plebs below. Equality ends ups sacrificing individual 'rights' for the sake of whatever new set of individual 'rights' are trendy at the time. e.g. we need to pretend that homosexual relationships are equal to heterosexual ones therefore our 'free speech' right is sacrificed so as to protect the new 'freedom from hurt feelings' right of another. New indiv...