[p2p-research] does this correspond to your experience of contemporary youth?

[Ryan Lanham]

On 2/28/10, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> A few remarks on my own. While greed is undoubtedly hardwired, along with
> altruism and many other emotions, it's our social design that directs it to
> accumulation of material goods, there is nothing hardwired about that, since
> for most of human history, it was notably absent


We've been accumulating for a while.  Pharoahs built empires as did the
Chinese 4000 years ago.  We've been a species for about 100,000-200,000
years.  Hard to say if those pre-technology times matter for much.  There is
an active debate now in so-called "Paleo" diet circles where people
emphasize meat eating, for instance, because "Grok" did.  I'm personally of
a mind that technology changes all games and the species is evolving now
interactively with its own technology--not with other species (the latest
science) or with environment (Darwinism)...though technology could be viewed
as a subset of environment--I'd call that a stretch.  Perhaps environment is
becoming a subset of technology.

>As for generations, while I'm sure there are people with the
charactereristics she describes, as there were in the sixties, there are
many >others that are different.

Of course.

>My feeling is this generation, at least in the West, has a much higher
propensity for sharing and cooperation that the previous ones, and >that the
kind of hyper-careerism is, if anything, diminishing in force.

Maybe...perhaps even probably.  But the interesting question then would be
why?  Capacity to share?  Moral change?  An interaction of th two?

I'm rather disappointed in the current generation.  They seem to believe
that they invented self-accualization.  All youth tend to claim moral high
ground, but this one seems particularly self-righteous...rather like the
60s...who ended up a real dud.  Tom Brokaw claimed the WW2 Americans were
the "best" generation in an eponymous book.  I doubt that too.  Mostly I see
abdication of responsibility for the state, for local communities, for
schools, for environments.  If I had to name the coming generation, I'd call
them the hypocrit gen...rather like the 60s folks.  There's good reason why
strong self-sense generations fail.  They are heavy on identity.  Identity
tends to skew behavior but only for a time.  In time, people do what they
do.  So there were lots of people wearing peace necklaces in the 60s who, by
1982, were working for Goldman Sachs or Lockheed.  I know, I have them in my
own family...and they aren't a rarity.  The same is happening here where
people talk about doing more for the environment and each other and then,
when they get their shot at a 1400 sq m. home or a flat on the right square
in London, they seem to re-evaluate.

These are frightening times and I don't see anyone particularly responding
that well as a group.  We are closer to our own mortality than we've ever
been.  Things seem more in our control in a micro-sense while ironically
less in our control in a maco sense.  The economists are talking about an
"Age of Moderation" where growth cycles are less intense...and yet we feel
the economy is out of control.  Maybe this is driven by excessive and
hyper-speeded media.  Regardless, I don't see a shining generation marching
to save us.  Quite the opposite.  I see apathy, entitlement and fear equal
to any group prior.

Ryan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100301/58c22531/attachment.html>