Home Artists Posts Import Register

Downloads

Content

The fifth and final part of a series on generational consciousness and conflict.

In this episode, we examine the Millennials and Generation Z. Uniquely, generation war today seems to be a conflict over resources more than over values. Is there any basis for this, and what do Millennials actually want? With generational and class conflict seemingly bound together today, we analyse 'Generation Left' and 'Millennial Socialism'. And we ask what the effect of the pandemic may be on the creation of a Gen Z consciousness.

Guests include:

  • Paul Taylor, former director, Pew Research
  • Jennie Bristow, senior lecturer in sociology at Canterbury Christ Church University
  • Helen Andrews, senior editor at The American Conservative
  • Clive Martin, journalist who has written for VICE Magazine
  • Josh Glenn, semiotician, author, and publisher of HiLoBrow
  • Jennifer Silva, assistant professor in sociologist, Indiana University

Original music by: Jonny Mundey

Additional music:

Files

Comments

Paul Brewer

I just finished and my ADHD is driving me to post something quickly while it is still fresh in my mind. The idea of a culturally hegemonic group I think is inextricable from the concept of 'generational conflict/consciousness'. Otherwise it isn't really relevant as an organising principle for any kind of revolutionary political activism. What then strikes me as interesting is the way subsequent to the Baby Boom we keep trying to reproduce generational consciousness into situations where it just might not apply. That seems to implicate somebody in something. I don't know what yet. [insert shrugging emoji] Also, in keeping with my desire to push things further back in time, it's hard not to consider Swing as a global phenomenon, although that might be a consequence of the war. I have read somewhere that Swing didn't really have much play on BBC Radio. Don't know about Radio Luxembourg.

Sosialisten_

I very much liked Josh Glenn's contributions, and he's absolutely right. The division of all people born after 1945 into the groups of Boomers, Gen X, and Millennials, with hard cut-offs dividing them, is a very recent and very American invention. I don't even think I had heard about these concepts until five years ago or so. Who decided that these US marketing categories, with cut-offs in approximately 1964 and 1982, should be imposed on the entire world? It makes more sense to ignore them than to care much about this. That being said, I'm of course familiar with the concept of Boomers, or 68'ers as they are called in Europe. However, it would be ridiculous to call someone born in the late fifties or early sixties a 68'er. If anything, this cohort of people, who came of age in the right-wing 1980s, were reacting to and rebelling against the left-wing politics of the 1970s. This makes me wonder, isn't this exactly the common pattern? People don't rebel against their parents and their generation, but rather in opposition to the half-generation that preceded them, i.e. people 10-15 years their senior. This also corresponds with fashion trends. For instance, I was born in the early 1980s. As a teenager in the 1990s, the most uncool music and fashions were those from the 1980s. On the other hand, our parents' stuff, from the 1970s, were much more attractive to us. I'm not even sure if the Boomers in 1968 protested their parents, to any larger extent than other preceding generations. Rather, this was a reaction against the generation that was born in the 1930s, and had come of age in the conformist climate of 1950s. And most of the political elites at the time were a few years older than the Boomer's parents, anyway. If anything, many Boomers had parents born around 1920. If so, the first election they voted in would have been in the mid-40s, which was the peak of support for communist parties in Europe. So perhaps the Boomers were more like their parents than they realized.