The weakest generation in history?

[Argus]

I most certainly don't want to make light of trajedy, and am not referencing any single incident. But I'm kind of troubled about the narcisism and victim mentality of so much of today's youth. In fact, I think you could start with the sixties generation to track a gradual downward slide in the level of mental toughness and maturity of the people in the western world. While life has never been better, suicides have never been more common among the young. When one considers the trauma and dangers and hardship faced by young people in years gone by and compares it to what is faced today it's almost laughable how today's youth can feel so tormented and tortured by little things.

I think it's because we do not instill in our youth just who and what they are any more, and can't tell them what their purpose in life is. Once, it was simple. Fathers brought their sons hunting, taught them how to do everything they did. They met girls, girls who had spent all their time with their mothers, learning their roles in life. Then they formed couples and the next generation carried on. No one expected to be given anything. No one expected life to be easy. Hunger, danger and deprivation were common.

As life became more comfortable, as we build farms, then formed villages, towns, and even cities, a different kind of toughnness was required. You didn't hunt animals any more, but you still were in a fight for survival, for the food necessary to feed yourself and your family. Everyone knew what was important then, and not to get upset over trivilaities. Life was harsh and you needed to be tough.

Well, life isn't harsh any more, and you can get by without any toughness at all. Kids don't grow up at their parents sides any more, but in institutions where nothing much is taught them except rote leanring of acdemic material. Parents are so busy they don't spend a lot of time instilling life's lessons in their kids. The kids spend their time on the internet, playing video games. They're coddled and expect to be given every possible break, and forgiven when they screw up. They look to television to see how their lives should be lived. And when their lives fail to measure up they're profoundlly unhappy.

Every generation seems mentally weaker, more prone to selfishness and very narrow worldviews than the one before, more whiny about little things, less able to cope with challenges. How can whiny, narcisistic teachers teach toughness to our youth when they have little enough of it themselves? How can parents who do everything they can to coddle their kids, and give them everything but their time teach anything?

In harsh, third world countries, kids are working 12 hour days making rugs, or scavaging food from garbage dumps, or carrying loads of produce to market, three miles away without complaint. And here, comfortable middle class kids kill themselves, unable to bear the thought that people are saying nasty things about them on the internet. How do we change our culture to toughen our kids up? Should they all go to military school or something? Because I don't see many parents today as being able to, or having the time to teach toughness to anyone.

I think a lot of us were bullied when younger. I certainly was, particularly in that grade 6-9 time. The thought of suicide never entered my mind, not even once. If there were any thoughts of violence they involved wild lions and my tormenters, not self immolation to make people feel bad. When did that change? When did people stop learning how to cope with unpleasantness and dissapointment? And what is a society full of such people going to look like in the very near future?

[eyeball]

You better hope this screed doesn't fall into the hands of whoever winds up having to change your Depends.

[bleeding heart]

Just as a point of order about the "should we send them to military school" bit: according to Stripes, the suicide rate is higher among the military than for similar demographics outside it.

So, no, that does not appear to be the solution to this particular problem.

[Black Dog]

Anybody have any stats on global teen suicide rates? From what I've seen, the highest rate in the world for all suicides is among Indian girls aged 15-19. I guess they must be super soft.

[bleeding heart]

Well, while the op claimed not be referencing any single incident (fair enough) it was certainly influenced by the recent, and no doubt temporary, media cycle about teen suicide in North America.

Mostly it's an unsubstantiated paen to the glories of earlier generations; no doubt with some truths to it (and some baloney) but useless as a thesis about suicide.

[dre]

Almost right but you are a generation off. The worst generation of Canadians so far is us... or at least I assume most of us are part of it. These are folks born immediately after the babyboomers, that I refer to as generation useless. They are the ones responsible for 100% of our national debt, our crumbling infrastructure, our declining education system, and most of our other problems.

They will be the first generation in the history of Canada to leave their children with a worse plight than the generation before them. They inherited a nation someone else built then just sat there and got fat off borrowed money.

As for todays youth... Youll have to wait another 30 or 40 years to pass judgement on that generation but I imagine they will be to busy trying to fix the mess we left them to do much else.

Edited October 13, 2012 by dre

[cybercoma]

There is so much wrong with the OP that I don't even know where to begin. At least some of it has already been identified.

Argus, how old are you? You sound like the grumpy old man that complains about kids on his lawn.

[August1991]

There is so much wrong with the OP that I don't even know where to begin. At least some of it has already been identified.

Argus, how old are you? You sound like the grumpy old man that complains about kids on his lawn.

I think Argus has a point, and for you Cybercoma, I'll approach Argus' point in a different way.

Today, I renewed my driver's licence, license plates and my Quebec health card. (Such "taxes" in Montreal are hefty - over $400.) Walking down the street to the SAAQ office, I noticed two magnificent churches. St-Patrick something or other, and Notre-Dame of Whatever. Both churches were probably built in the 1890s, or the 1920s. One Catholic English and the other Catholic French.

As I looked at these two impressive churches, now with rusting roofs, I imagined the priests/parishioners who used them when they first opened. Like you Cybercoma, they probably never imagined that life would change.

Edited October 13, 2012 by August1991

[Bonam]

In regards to Argus' post, a few points:

- Suicide is something done by a tiny tiny minority and is not reflective of the "generation" at large.

- Pretty much every old man in history complains about "kids these days" and how they don't measure up to what he remembers from his youth.

- The whole idea of "generations" is flawed. People are born continuously, not in discrete groups. The lines between generations as commonly defined are totally arbitrary, and there are many contrary definitions. So which "generation" are you even talking about?

- Toughness is an attribute people gain when they need it, when faced with adversity. It is a part of human nature, of our genetic programming. When life is easy you don't need to be tough. But humans have evolved to cope well with physical adversity, hence are well adapted to work hard to survive when it comes to hunting or farming (your examples). When and if such toughness is required, it will manifest itself.

- The way society will "look in the near future" is driven by one thing above all others: technological change. Humans are the same as they've always been, social structures change only very slowly, but technology transforms the world from decade to decade.

[msj]

Bonam, very intelligent post. Nicely stated and to the point.

[Bonam]

Thanks

[August1991]

- Suicide is something done by a tiny tiny minority and is not reflective of the "generation" at large.

- Pretty much every old man in history complains about "kids these days" and how they don't measure up to what he remembers from his youth.

- The whole idea of "generations" is flawed. People are born continuously, not in discrete groups. The lines between generations as commonly defined are totally arbitrary, and there are many contrary definitions. So which "generation" are you even talking about?

- Toughness is an attribute people gain when they need it, when faced with adversity. It is a part of human nature, of our genetic programming. When life is easy you don't need to be tough. But humans have evolved to cope well with physical adversity, hence are well adapted to work hard to survive when it comes to hunting or farming (your examples). When and if such toughness is required, it will manifest itself.

- The way society will "look in the near future" is driven by one thing above all others: technological change. Humans are the same as they've always been, social structures change only very slowly, but technology transforms the world from decade to decade.

I largely agree with each of your points, Bonam. But I think Argus is making a larger point - ATM (according to me).

In this new millenia, many people identify as "progressive". In the 1890s and 1920s, "progressive" meant residential schools and even larger, neo-classical Catholic churches.

Nowadays, these neo-classical Catholic churches, these Christian Cathedrals, in Montreal or Europe, are white elephants.

In 2075, when people look back, what will they see as our white elephants?

----

It is wrong to assume that a promise is never broken.

Edited October 13, 2012 by August1991

[Bonam]

I largely agree with each of your points, Bonam. But I think Argus is making a larger point - ATM (according to me).

In this new millenia, many people identify as "progressive". In the 1890s and 1920s, "progressive" meant residential schools and even larger, neo-classical Catholic churches.

Progressive is a largely meaningless term. Progress towards what? Not well defined. Anyway, how people "identify" isn't of as much important as how they act. And they act as they've always acted, mostly in their own self-interest, to the extent that their abilities and intelligence and circumstances permit.

Nowadays, these Christian Cathedrals, in Montreal or Europe, are white elephants. In 2075, what will be our white elephants?

Hard to predict anything meaningfully past about 2050, technological change will have made the world unrecognizable by then.

[August1991]

Progressive is a largely meaningless term. Progress towards what? Not well defined.

Imagine!

Hard to predict anything meaningfully past about 2050, technological change will have made the world unrecognizable by then.

You entirely miss the point of my post, and I suspect the point of Argus' OP. (It happens.)

----

Go back and re-read Argus' OP, or my post.

Edited October 13, 2012 by August1991

[Bonam]

You entirely miss the point of my post, and I suspect the point of Argus' OP. It happens.

To be honest, I miss the point of most of your posts, though I believe I understood Argus just fine. Your thought process seems kind of alien to me. But if you would care to state your point in explicit terms, rather than metaphorically, I will try to comment on it.

Edited October 13, 2012 by Bonam

[August1991]

To be honest, I miss the point of most of your posts, though I believe I understood Argus just fine. Your thought process seems kind of alien to me. But if you would care to state your point in explicit terms, rather than metaphorically, I will try to comment on it.

In this particular example and post, many so-called progressive people in the past built large churches in Montreal. These churches are now a huge waste.

Nowadays, modern progressive people want to build a new church: a socialist government in a democratic State. In this case though, I am fearful of the consequence. In Quebec, the Roman Catholic Church at least defended the French language. A State based on "social justice" is a fad.

-----

What is my point? I suspect that socialists (or modern progressives) don't quite understand how quickly the world can change. The idea of revolution works both ways.

Edited October 13, 2012 by August1991

[Bonam]

In this particular example and post, many so-called progressive people in the past built large churches in Montreal. These churches are now a huge waste.

Hmm. Any evidence/citation to suggest that the people who built churches considered themselves to be "progressive"?

Nowadays, modern progressive people want to build a new church: a socialist government in a democratic State. In this case though, I am fearful of the consequence. In Quebec, the Roman Catholic Church at least defended the French language. A State based on "social justice" is a fad.

I am certainly no fan of a socialist government or state, as I'm sure my postings on this forum over the years have made abundantly clear.

What is my point? I suspect that socialists (or modern progressives) don't quite understand how quickly the world can change. The idea of revolution works both ways.

Yes, the world can change quickly. I don't see that this has much to do with the "weakness" of any particular generation of history.

[TimG]

But I'm kind of troubled about the narcissism and victim mentality of so much of today's youth.

I would put it differently. Society used to celebrate success. Now it celebrates victims and denigrates the successful. I think the girl who committed suicide did not do it because of the bullying - that was just the excuse. She did it because she saw suicide as a way to get society to pay attention to her. The public fawning over this girl's suicide pretty much guarantees there will be another kid that decides they want the same treatment in the future and commits suicide to get it.

[Michael Hardner]

Almost right but you are a generation off. The worst generation of Canadians so far is us... or at least I assume most of us are part of it. These are folks born immediately after the babyboomers, that I refer to as generation useless. They are the ones responsible for 100% of our national debt, our crumbling infrastructure, our declining education system, and most of our other problems.

Blaming a generation is really just pointless scapegoating. I must say, though, nobody has blamed generation X from my memory.

--- --- ---

There's a saying in consulting - when you solve problem #1, then problem #2 gets a promotion.

Western society is a victim of its own success. Starvation, mass disease, misery is a thing of the past in many respects. As a society, we're solving our basic needs and moving up Maslow's pyramid to the middle parts. It's hard to get depressed about the meaning of life when you're fighting to survive... when that fight ends, the mind turns to deeper questions.

Maslow's heirarchy, for those of you who haven't seen it. "A theory of human motivation"

[jacee]

You better hope this screed doesn't fall into the hands of whoever winds up having to change your Depends.

:lol:

The only certainties in life are death and taxes ... and that some disgruntled old farts will diss the 'youth of today'. Has it ever been any different?

[Michael Hardner]

The only certainties in life are death and taxes ... and that some disgruntled old farts will diss the 'youth of today'. Has it ever been any different?

But boomers "dissing" Gen X is a new one on me. I ever heard Gen X disparage Gen Y but not this one...

[cybercoma]

In regards to Argus' post, a few points:

- Suicide is something done by a tiny tiny minority and is not reflective of the "generation" at large.

- Pretty much every old man in history complains about "kids these days" and how they don't measure up to what he remembers from his youth.

- The whole idea of "generations" is flawed. People are born continuously, not in discrete groups. The lines between generations as commonly defined are totally arbitrary, and there are many contrary definitions. So which "generation" are you even talking about?

- Toughness is an attribute people gain when they need it, when faced with adversity. It is a part of human nature, of our genetic programming. When life is easy you don't need to be tough. But humans have evolved to cope well with physical adversity, hence are well adapted to work hard to survive when it comes to hunting or farming (your examples). When and if such toughness is required, it will manifest itself.

- The way society will "look in the near future" is driven by one thing above all others: technological change. Humans are the same as they've always been, social structures change only very slowly, but technology transforms the world from decade to decade.

Great post.

[msj]

Maslow's heirarchy, for those of you who haven't seen it. "A theory of human motivation"

So what you're saying is that some of us are dragging others, kicking and screaming and whining and knuckle dragging, into the "Love and Belonging" phase?

Next thing you know we'll be accused of bullying for doing this.

Edited October 13, 2012 by msj

[Argus]

In regards to Argus' post, a few points:

- Suicide is something done by a tiny tiny minority and is not reflective of the "generation" at large.

Granted. But I wasn't just talking about suicide. I was talking about a kind of cultural state of mind, and the lack of toughness of so many young people who have had it so good, who have been coddled and expect to be coddled. It sometimes seems to me that young people are praised just for waking up in the morning! We eliminate risk in their lives as much as possible, and parents do their best to give them everything they want. Without risk or adversity, what do young people strive for? Nothing more than social acceptance by being pretty or hot or popular.

There was an item in the paper a couple of weeks back reminiscing about being a kid in Ottawa in the twenties and thirties, and how the city was basically their playground. Kids would roam everywere, poking their noses into slaughterhouses and factories and warehouses, play on the Ottawa river in homemade rafts, or explore forests. They'd leave home in the morning and wouldn't get home till dark. Most of the kids I know aren't allowed out of the house without parental supervision until they're teenagers. A colleague of mine was worrying over her 15 year old son the other day, who was riding the bus for the first time in his life... just a city bus! Schools do their best to encourage children, and that means not failing them, and making things easy for them. You get marks just for trying, or as one college profesor lamented a short time back "They expect to get good marks because they tried hard. They don't understand that trying hard is not going to get you anything from me unless they succeed."

- Toughness is an attribute people gain when they need it, when faced with adversity. It is a part of human nature, of our genetic programming. When life is easy you don't need to be tough. But humans have evolved to cope well with physical adversity, hence are well adapted to work hard to survive when it comes to hunting or farming (your examples). When and if such toughness is required, it will manifest itself.

What, magically? I disagree. I'm sure it will in some, but it seems to me that the great bulk of the young, never having faced much adversity, are flummoxed when they do, and have no idea how to cope. Suicide or mass murder in response to bullying is just one small indicator of the psychological trauma many get at being denied what they want -- when they're simply not used to it. I note most of these cases seem to involve the well off kids of suburbia. You don't seem to see the kids in slums doing extreme things because they're not popular. Maye they don't expect life to be all sweetness and roses?

[Guest American Woman]

I think it's because we do not instill in our youth just who and what they are any more, and can't tell them what their purpose in life is. Once, it was simple. Fathers brought their sons hunting, taught them how to do everything they did. They met girls, girls who had spent all their time with their mothers, learning their roles in life.

Are you saying that girls should be learning that their role in life is to be a housewife and mother? - that that's their purpose in life?