138
gen Z is not a uniquely reactionary generation nor is it a uniquely revolutionary generation
(hexbear.net)
it is somewhere in-between 
this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
138 points (100.0% liked)
chapotraphouse
13530 readers
1 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think boomers were real, that was something that happened with a clear cause and a huge bubble worked its way through the age distribution like a big rat through a snake. Every other "generation" is just arbitrary intervals.
Even boomers is mostly referring to well-off white people (and some people of other backgrounds) who have reaped the rewards of the emergence of the American Empire as the global superpower. It's really a label about wealth, not just being born somewhat soon after WWII.
The bubble of population growth ie the "boom" in "boomer" is part of what contributed to their wealth. The surplus labor of boomers in their youth did not need to support as significant a population of older generations who were less numerous to start off with and additionally lost a great many as casualties of war. As boomers age the reverse becomes true and the new generations must support an enormous elderly population of boomers. This intersects with the many other factors that we are all familiar with on this forum.
My parents are technically boomers, even though they were born in 1962 and 1963, a bit far after the war to be part of a post-war baby boom.
That too -- even the upper endpoint of that interval is arbitrary.