|
Lyapunov Unstable posted:what because the entrenched interests aren't democratically elected or I'm wrong about the demographics poo poo or what? the generation of '68 grew up to be the boomer fucks dismantling what few public institutions are left in the present day. they were actual radicals who looked up to actual revolutionaries and still became hateful creatures of pure spite after the left movements got cointelpro'd. the current generation doesn't even have that kind of radical spirit. most self-identify as "socially liberal and fiscally conservative," the emptiest political descriptors known to man. it would be nice for this brylcreem liberalism to harden into something more meaningful but the track record of white settlers in the united states (the people who vote) just doesn't suggest it'll happen. which is, y'know, by design. Reason posted:Loopholes is the biggest cop out political buzz word ever "middle class," imo
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 04:52 |
|
|
Omi-Polari posted:The mistake is assuming a bunch of '68 radicals mutated into the boomer fucks, though that happened to a lot of people, there were a whole ton of right-wing young people back then who history sort of forgot about. this is a fair point. and even then most of the white radicals were paper tigers, the panthers were the only really well-organized group to come out of those years and even they got sabotaged today's no different, either. there are tons of people like vile out in the world
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:Regarding the Boomer shift right, a lot of the 60's radicalism was anti-institutional and focused on individual freedoms. the present-day "radicalism" is similarly aligned. who will be the reagan 20 years from now? time will tell.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2016 20:12
|
|