OK, Millennial, It's Time To Register To Vote In Hitherto Unseen Numbers!

It turns out that launching memes against a different generation, like the young sprats did with 'OK, Boomer' last year, is vastly easier than putting your own generational house in order.  That includes tossing your hat into the ring and getting politically involved-  thereby demonstrating you have the spunk,  moxie and insight to go to the mat when it counts.  That time is now, as we face the most critical election (and political crisis)  in U.S. history.  The question on everyone's mind is: 'What are the youthful potential voters going to do about it?'  

Are they going to sit back, pout, and express dismay at the candidate choice (in Joe Biden) and not vote, or even register? Or will they come to their senses and grasp that their own lives and futures are as much on the line as the rest of ours? And hence, we simply cannot afford the luxury of demanding some nebulous emotional rapport with a candidate before one deigns to cast a ballot.  Especially if the only option to take down Trump is to verily put on our big boy pants and VOTE - for Biden!  The issue then is existential, and I'd wager, especially for the millennial and Gen Z contingent.

The issue of millennial 'bad breaks' and likely hard futures came up in Gerald Seib's recent column - 'Young Voters Catch Another Bad Break', WSJ, April 21, p. A4).  Seib noted how the young fell into a terrible bit of back luck with "the worst recession since the Great Depression"  - which prevented having any chance getting the jobs originally promised. Not to mention being "loaded with student debt because the system encouraged you to do that." 

All of which is true, as well as dashing any hopes of buying a car, buying a house or having children along the way.  Yep, that sucks, big time! But as I see it, the youngsters have two choices: 1) Throw themselves a big pity party on how life and terrible luck dealt them a lousy hand, or 2) Get up and start fighting for a better future. And btw, that must be one in which the monster Trump is gone, if you are to have any remote chance at all. 

Hence, we in the older generations issue the challenge:  'OK, Millennial!'  

So what is the main way to start fighting back, owning your pain but vowing to do better?  Well, it starts with registering to vote, and then actually going out to vote for the coming November 3 election.  And for Joe Biden, not the moral reprobate Trump! Here's a first clue: staying home is not an option and neither is voting a 3rd party candidate,  especially as Justin Amash has graciously bowed  out.

What is disturbing so far is the lack of evident younger generation energy and  participation in the primaries.  As I wrote in my March 11 post:

"The lack of interest of the Young also contributed to Bernie's demise as he himself put it last night

"Let me tell you the bad news, to be honest with you, young people vote at much lower rates than older people. That is the facts. I hope all of the old people vote, that’s great, but I want young people to vote at the same rates.”

So what happened to all the young voters, the Millennials and Gen Z's who were supposed to turn out?  Well, they clearly believed the effort wasn't worth their time or energy, or perhaps there were too many hurdles - such as obtaining the  right IDs to be able to vote.  But what most of us (older voters) don't want to hear now is any more whining from the young uns about their student debt, oldsters getting all the benefits,  having to move back in with mom and dad, and so on.  

 But  if you don't vote, don't participate, you don't get to complain - or say "OK, Boomer."

A highly disturbing observation of Seib's regarding potential  youthful voters is the following:

"Before the coronavirus hit, the shocks millennials already had endured had left them feeling 'somewhat detached from the political system' says Democratic pollster Celinda Lake".

By contrast, despite the fact that Boomers in the 1960s endured the shocks of three major political assassinations (JFK, Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr.) and the Vietnam War, we became more energized politically and registered to vote. 

Seib goes on (ibid.):

"Indeed, a report by the GQR  polling organization prepared early this year for NextGen America found that a majority of voters under the age of 35 were 'unenthusaistic' about voting in 2020.  Adding: 'A Basic dislike of politics keeps many from voting."

This is well nigh unbelievable to most Boomers, many of whom actually participated as "Freedom Riders" in the mid-60s:  going by rental bus into Klan-infested areas of Mississippi and Alabama to register black voters at great risk to themselves.   So to now learn that a major segment of the young voting block is "turned off" and "unenthusiastic" just doesn't cut it. It reeks of weakness or at least lack of any resilience.   In the more generous latter case, it echoes what I wrote in my November post 'OK, Boomer', quoting college psychologist Linda Bips:

"Many of today’s students lack resilience and at the first sign of difficulty are unable to summon strategies to cope. The hardship can be a failing grade on a test, a cut from the team, or a romantic  breakup. At the first sign of trouble many become unable to function and persevere. Often they even anticipate difficulties and their anxiety alone paralyzes them."

For his part, Seib recognizes that if the young demographic could awaken from their stupor and inertia (or lack of resilience) they could well be a force to be reckoned with, as he writes:

"If they do show to vote, it's clear they will be a force for the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, former Vice President Joe Biden."

Pointing out that in a WSJ- NBC poll the young voters favored Biden over Trump by a "whopping 23 point margin". 

But that only translates into power if the votes are actually cast. Mere responses to polls don't count.   Millennials  now have a chance to show us Boomers they are much more than mere mouth, chutzpah and catchy memes. Also, that they have the resilience and pluck to stand up and be counted as genuine citizens as opposed to whiners, wimps and losers.  Besides, a generation seeking to change its fortunes - say reducing mounting student loan debt and having government work for you not against you - means voting. Not staying on the sidelines because you "dislike" politics.   As Democratic Pollster Celinda Lake told Seib:

"You can't see a big role for government if you don't take part in picking the government."

And as I wrote in my November, 'Ok, Boomer' post:

"Want to convince me you've "flipped the script"?  Then put down the cell phones and project your power in the real world. "

Projecting power now in this real world, means getting to the polls on Nov. 3rd (or using mail in ballots if that choice is available) and  playing a role in getting rid of Trump. Because if that doesn't happen, the pain and shocks Millennials experience now will be like a day at the beach compared to what will be in your future - hell, all our futures.

Sitting this election out is not an option. Voting for the Democratic candidate offers the chance to show the younger generations have finally become adults.

See Also:

2020 Elections | Donald Trump

Mission Imperative: Come November, Trump Must Go

by Michael Winship | May 13, 2020 - 5:50am | permalink

Excerpt:

"There must be one mission above all, one goal supreme: Vote this monster out of the White House. And along with him, tow to the nearest dump the clown car of malefactors who gave him license to cripple our republic.

Donald Trump’s defeat and the defeat of those in Congress who have enabled him with nary a word of protest are Priorities Number 1 through 100. Focus. Don’t be diverted by ideological hairsplitting and intraparty squabbling. Drive this creature and his army of creeps, leeches and miscreants back to the wet market from which they came."

"OK, Boomer!" Really? Why This Laughable Meme Is Going Nowhere Beyond The Instagram-Twitter Bubble

Here we go again. Time to pound on the Baby Boomers, this time by an apparent "alliance" of twerps consisting of Millennials, Gen Z losers ("Zeds") , and other younger generation malcontents who feel compelled to blame Baby Boomers for their lot in life or state of the world. According to the relevant Denver Post op-ed (Perspective, Nov. 10. p.1D) by one Molly Roberts.

Okay, we know that in the era of Trump and his retinue of enabling, sycophantic Repukes the fetish of grievance and victimhood has attained new heights. One beheld it on 'Fox & Friends Weekend' yesterday a.m. as a trio of caterwauling muppets cried their eyes out at Adam Schiff appearing before California Dems in Long Beach on Saturday and vowing to "send the charlatan back to his golden throne".  "How he could he say that?" They whined in unison. "Isn't he supposed to be above partisanship as head of the House Intel committee?"  

Give me a break. What are you losers, crybabies or journalists?

Given the Reeps will always wear the victim and grievance badge, but one expects the younger generations to rise above that and in particular, cease conflating all Boomers and blaming an entire generation for their ills.

Anyway, Roberts informs us that "OK, Boomer" has now become the all purpose comeback or retort anytime a perceived Boomer offers a criticism, e.g. "your grandpa tells you kids these days have lost all sense of civility for yelling at Ellen Degeneres for going to a football game with George W. Bush"

As Roberts puts it (ibid.):

"It's glib. It's short, and its's not at all sweet but 'OK, Boomer' also reveals something about each of today's generations.  So does the response they wrought."

Fair enough, but again let's be clear that despite the media's laziness it is not okay to conflate entire generations, particularly one like the Boomers that's been singled out for opprobrium far more than any other.

How did the meme originate?    Well, we learn: "the mainstreaming of the meme was making its way onto $36 Redbubble style sweatshirts sold by entrepreneurial 17 -year olds."

The meme evidently then caught fire because a conservative talk radio host (Bob Lonsberry) took to the internet to publicly pout and - instead of ignoring the (then) minor memetic insult - whined that "boomer  was the n-word of ageism".   Well hey, I never said conservos were not whiners and wimps, did I?  After all they're the ones driving the GOP grievance, victimhood mission against impeachment.

In any case, the response of the right wing radio jock  Lonsberry circulated, went viral, and "OK, Boomer" was born. Again, spawned on the back end reaction to a 3rd rate conservative talk show host.

Roberts goes on to inform us:

"Millennials have allied with Gen Z and managed to vitiate the meme in the process by basically, overdoing it.  'OK, Boomer' was fun and funny, so we said it about a million times on Twitter in the space of one day, and now it has become unfunny and lame.  That's appropriate too for a generation that supposedly kills every good thing."

But, of course, as one Denver Post letter writer (Susan Cummings),  responding to the piece in yesterday's paper noted (Perspective, p. 3D)::

"Boomers created the internet, the personal computer,  synthetic skin, the artificial heart and the cell phone so beloved by the young- all of which are taken for granted. Being a Boomer is an honor. We protested for peace, the environment, the end of the Berlin Wall, LGBTQ rights, animal rights, etc. At this point, all a Boomer can say is, 'OK, Kid".

Another letter writer (Douglas Croot) sounded off (ibid.):

"Being universally dismissive and surly is probably not the surest path to the success and fulfillment you seek,"

So it's a bit off to say - or even suppose- that  the Boomers "killed every good thing" especially given "recycling and composting programs around the nation were started at the demand of Baby Boomers, same for fuel efficient cars" (Letter from Mandell S. Winter Jr.).

Then the kicker from the 'OK, Boomer' author:

"It makes sense that millennials are taking up arms with our Gen  Z comrades-  because we're the ones who've been maligned the most for the sin of our birth years."

In fact it's not the "sin of your birth years"  but your indolence and insufferable lack of pluck especially (for millennials) in getting your asses out to vote and away from the tiny screens!  What we're all about then is the evident lack of independence, autonomy, and resilience i.e. that most of us had to develop very quickly given there was next to zero hand -holding from parents.   As one commenter put it, in response to my March 16, 2017 post excoriating Bruce Cannon Gibney and his anti-Boomer book:

"Most of us were raised by people with massive and undiagnosed PTSD from WW2. Mr Gibney has no concept of how much those people scraped up their lives and bravely had children and encouraged them to be better, and no, most of us, did not have a golden ticket."

The generational differences in autonomy and resilience are most evident in the younger generations' dealing with the  environments of college and political representation (namely lackadaisical voting patterns for the Millennial brigade). 

Hara Estroff Marano, the author of A Nation of Wimps: The High Cost of Invasive Parenting,  put the issue in a nutshell in the case of the first:

"But in a real sense, students don't really leave their parents behind. Their parents go to college right along with them — in their front pockets. That is, the parents are a speed dial away by cellphone. And the evidence is clear that students call parents and parents call students at an alarmingly frequent rate. This, of course, significantly reduces independence.

A student gets a C on her first paper? Instead of absorbing the negative information and figuring out how to resolve the problem or how to do better, the call gets made to home, where Mom or Dad solves the problem, often by calling the school administration. This kind of behavior is, sadly, commonplace today and is a mark of the lack of coping skills among students because all the lumps and bumps have been taken out of life for them until now."

Protect the precious little dears so they undergo a minimum of pain or travail. Keep them in an artificial cocoon to sustain their dependence as long as possible. Don't allow them to have to negotiate their way in an unfamiliar college environment.  God forbid!

This take has also been confirmed by Linda Bips, a college psychologist:

"Many of today’s students lack resilience and at the first sign of difficulty are unable to summon strategies to cope. The hardship can be a failing grade on a test, a cut from the team, or a romantic  breakup. At the first sign of trouble many become unable to function and persevere. Often they even anticipate difficulties and their anxiety alone paralyzes them."

She then goes on to point out just how many incoming college students are on "meds" and writes:

"The number of students who arrive at college already medicated for unwanted emotions has increased dramatically in the past 10 years. We, as a society, don’t want to “feel” anything unpleasant and we certainly don’t want our children to “suffer.”

As Prof. Bips also observes:

 "The resulting problem is that by not experiencing negative emotions, one does not learn the necessary skills to tolerate and negotiate adversity.

The preceding observations are relevant if we (older Boomers especially)  are expected to take the young rebels' snark and memetic impudence seriously.  Particularly after Ms. Roberts writes:

"OK, Boomer' flips the script and is now telling old people that they're the one who don't  get it, and this 'despite countless chances to learn'"

But if she (and the OK, Boomer contingent) expect us to take that ""flipped script"   seriously - and not howl with laughter-  how about proving it. Showing us you have some moxie by being independent and not texting mommy and daddy every minute while at university, or expecting them to run interference with your college instructors. 

In the 60s, in our college days then, we took our lumps like the adults we one day wanted to be - whether from our profs or fellow students (including for 'Hell Week' orientation). The lumps taken helped us build character, personal authenticity (not just being part of a crowd) as well as reinforced critical thinking skills, i.e. when we engaged in sometimes animated 'bull sessions' in the dorms..

So the issue is not decrying Gen Zs or Millennials as "profligate"  or being "basement dwellers" but rather the consistent failure to evince pluck and autonomy,   to project their own authentic power and exercise it - whether in university or the political arena. You may be a "basement dweller" but (if a Millennial) you can still vote, and in so doing affect the arc of your life and that of your generation.

What one would like to see- certainly in my Boomer demographic - is more of the "OK, Boomer" lot not merely churning out snarky memes but emulating the courageous Parkland students, like David Hogg, Emma Gonzalez. and Delaney Tarr.  They not only mounted a credible and effective move for more gun control in Florida after the Feb. 14, 2018 Parkland massacre, but actively went out to sign up young prospective voters.  What are the rest of you doing? Will you even vote next year?

I ask this because it turns out that seniors, e.g. Boomers,  are the most reliable voters with nearly 70 percent counted on to cast ballots as in the 2020 election. Compare that to the 18-24 year demographic  who've only exceeded a 40 percent turnout twice since 1996. Pew Research reports consistently that only 10 percent of likely voters are under 30.  Do you really want to change things so your agenda is dealt with and not ignored? Then you need to triple or quadruple that performance.

 Yet this is the age demographic most adversely affected by a plurality of federal resources being spent on seniors. So what exactly do these under 30s  (e.g. Millennials)  expect when the political class feels it can write them off each year as non-serious threats?

The voting percentages are even worse in the off year elections, which are often as important as general elections. The reason is that House seats are often up for grabs and it is in the House that budgets are made and where economic winners and losers determined. In the 2010 election, for example, barely 16% of 18-24 years olds voted compared to 28 % in 2008. 

My point is that if you really want to impress me and other Boomers, don't invoke a dumb meme and then wear it out. Get your butts out to vote - in every election- and change your lot in life by pushing the political class to recognize you instead of ignoring you.  Even more impressive, put down your cell phones and the incessant, vacuous search for 'likes'  and cut out the social media -instagram blabber.  Instead,  emulate the Parkland students' style of activism and maybe even voter enrollment instead. 

Thus, we want to see action - again, voting is a start- as opposed to reading this malarkey from Roberts:

"'OK, Boomer' indicts not an individual but an entire generation, or entire generation's attitude- and it does so with two words dripping with dismissal. "

Adding:

 "OK, Boomer sends the message that grown-ups have screwed up  totally, and are veering so speedily into irrelevance that convincing them of anything is a waste of keyboard characters."

But you don't get to be "dismissive" unless and until you make your own marks on the world, and not merely as petulant victims of older generations' perceived attitudes.  As Post letter writer Mandell Winter Jr. went on to point out (ibid.)

"The dismissive 'OK, Boomer' is the same as saying the classic, disrespectful  'whatever' - when you don't have a constructive response.  

Not happy with the world you got? Neither were we. So start fixing it and stop blaming."

Want to convince me you've "flipped the script"?  Then put down the cell phones and project your power in the real world.  Tired of all the "long endless Middle east wars"? Then take to the streets and protest like we did against the Vietnam war, playing a huge role in its more rapid ending. Do more than we did in our era and I will grant that you've truly "flipped the script".

 In other words, start acting more like the Parkland students in the wake of the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas school massacre, and not like the grievance -filled twerps who spawned the 'OK, Boomer' meme misfire.

See also:

• Another Clueless Dimwit - Bruce Cannon Gibney - ...

Wait! College -Bound U.S. Kids Need Mommy & Daddy to Come Along?

"Emilio" - a Loyola freshman, ca. 1966, studies physics while his clothes dry in the laundry room of Biever Hall. He'd have been humiliated if his parents got an apartment near by so they could oversee his choices, study habits etc. (From Loyola Wolf, 1966-67)



Back in the 1960s we deemed it a badge of independence and honor to go off to college, and commence establishing our own persons and lives in the academic environment. You never remotely heard of a parent or parents accompanying the freshman - say to Loyola or State U. - and taking a rented home or apt. to be near the little dweezil so he or she didn't feel too homesick - out of sorts, or having less than optimal study conditions.  Today, it appears to be a trend, with super-helicopter parents following their charges all the way to the hallowed halls to hold their widdo hands and ensure every textbook is pre-bookmarked for later study. .

According to an AP report in yesterday's D. Post (p. 4E):

"Coldwell Banker, the real estate firm, first noticed parents making such moves in 2008 while compiling its annual College Home Price Comparison Index that ranked average home prices in more than 300 college towns."

Quoting David Siroty (a company spokesman) it was noted that agents had seen new home buys and rentals pop up around the country - always near campuses. Getting inside the numbers, they found that parents were the purchasers or renters, and typically set up home so little Debby or Bobby could come home to a nice din-din and home cookin' rather than have to eat that nasty cafeteria food.

Regina Santore, a Coldwell agent in Knoxville, TN, cited a case where she relocated one couple from a town 380 miles away on the western end of the state "so their freshman could live with them".  What ever happened to establishing one's independence which used to be something to be proud of when you were 18 - and leaving HS? Did one not "put away the things of a child" when s/he left the toys of high school behind? Apparently not any more.

According to Ms. Santore:

"They felt very strongly they did not want their daughter living on campus. They felt she would have a better study environment if she were with them."

Well, of course she'd have a better study environment! They don't usually call dormitories "zoos" for no reason! But the whole point missing this pair is that college isn't ALL about studying, it's also about learning how to negotiate interpersonal connections, interests and making life long friends.  In this case, one grasps that one might sacrifice a half a point GPA or whatever in the interest of more profound human goals. But given today's success freaks - students and parents - it's no surprise that has gone by the backboards. Better to grab that 4.0 and be a total douche than come away with friends - easier to just connect with virtual friends on FB. Sad.  But it elicits the question: What's behind the mollycoddling?

Hara Estroff Marano, editor-at-large of Psychology Today and the author, most recently, of A Nation of Wimps: The High Cost of Invasive Parenting, seems to have the answer nailed:

"But in a real sense, students don't really leave their parents behind. Their parents go to college right along with them — in their front pockets. That is, the parents are a speed dial away by cellphone. And the evidence is clear that students call parents and parents call students at an alarmingly frequent rate. This, of course, significantly reduces independence.

A student gets a C on her first paper? Instead of absorbing the negative information and figuring out how to resolve the problem or how to do better, the call gets made to home, where Mom or Dad solves the problem, often by calling the school administration. This kind of behavior is, sadly, commonplace today and is a mark of the lack of coping skills among students because all the lumps and bumps have been taken out of life for them until now."

Which is pretty much my take. Protect the precious little dears so they undergo a minimum of pain or travail. Keep them in an artificial cocoon to sustain their dependence as long as possible. Don't allow them to have to negotiate their way in an unfamiliar college environment.  God forbid!

This take is also supported by Linda Bips, college psychologist:

"Many of today’s students lack resilience and at the first sign of difficulty are unable to summon strategies to cope. The hardship can be a failing grade on a test, a cut from the team, or a romantic breakup. At the first sign of trouble many become unable to function and persevere. Often they even anticipate difficulties and their anxiety alone paralyzes them."

She then goes on to point out just how many incoming college students are on "meds" and writes:

"The number of students who arrive at college already medicated for unwanted emotions has increased dramatically in the past 10 years. We, as a society, don’t want to “feel” anything unpleasant and we certainly don’t want our children to “suffer.”

Bingo! The problem,of course, is that when they hit 29 or 35 they are still dependent little spoiled brats. Worse, they will lack any personal authenticity. Templates for narcissists as one psychologist put it.

As Prof. Bips also observes:

"The resulting problem is that by not experiencing negative emotions, one does not learn the necessary skills to tolerate and negotiate adversity. As a psychologist, I am well aware of the fact that some individuals suffer from depression and anxiety and can benefit from treatment, but I question the growing number of medicated adolescents today."

So kids are overly medicated because they can't handle too much reality and hence this also explains why they need mommy and daddy to tag along to even tell them when to take a dump. In the 60s, in our college days then, we took our lumps like the adults we one day wanted to be - whether from our profs or fellow students (including for 'Hell Week' orientation). The lumps taken helped us build character, personal authenticity (not just being part of a crowd) as well as reinforced critical thinking skills, i.e. when we engaged in sometimes animated 'bull sessions' in the dorms.

Today, the presence of parents neutralizes that critical first step to adulthood and keeps the would-be college student in a prolonged state of infancy.

Fortunately, at least some of the kids saddled with parental helicopters know which end is up and aren't overly enthused. This was uncovered by a Georgetown alum, Sheila Baker Gujral - who has interviewed prospective frosh for that D.C. school. She was surprised in the course of one interview when the girl replied that her parents didn't mind "living on the east coast or west coast" then adding "so I'm applying to those places". In other words, the girl was more or less resigned to mommy and daddy tagging along.

When Ms. Gujral asked if they were going to move wherever she went to school the girl responded "Yeah" but Gujral observed "she didn't look too happy about it."

Good! Because she shouldn't! Those parents, like the misguided others, are actually retarding their charges' ability to reach adulthood. If the parents don't know that, at least the kids should.