I am privileged and I am thankful. But the comment I replied to didn’t hurt my feelings. What it did was stereotype an entire generation, many times, and I am opposed to doing that. I don’t do that when thinking about Gen X or Y or Z (or anyone else) and I’d hope we could move on from that kind of prejudice. That’s all.
I’d ask yourself why you’re sensitive to a “stereotype” being used to explain the outcomes of capitalist exploitation. I would ask you if you’d understand and agree with the same type of comment but with replacing “generation” with “white privilege”? Would you be so quick to defend the white working class from a “stereotype” in a frustrated rant?
My comment was off the cuff and crude. I think we can both agree there. But, I don’t think I was being unfair. Maybe a bit hyperbolic. My comment was definitely weighing in heavily to the “fuck boomers” feeling of the younger generations. But, it was not without a point of class structures, capitalist exploitation, and understanding that the stereotype is not all inclusive, but simply a venting of those frustrations.
I think the “no war but class war” crowd has fallen pray to class reductionism and the methods in which to communicate with the working class. The “no war but class war” is literal, not figurative. I think people forget that.
In the same way that “white privilege” in a vacuum is insufficient in describing the entire picture of of working class exploitation. Without it, it is insufficient in understanding how to address the issues of intersectionality in order to communicate with and radicalize the masses.
Also, let’s be clear, “Boomers” as a term is never referring to black or otherwise oppressed people of that generation. I would hope that anyone reading a comment like mine would assume that in good faith.
The issue is of class, the issue is of privilege, but for some reason i get more people ready to fight back against a criticism of “boomers” than I do when criticizing “white people”. When the term is literally specifically about the most privileged generation of white people that ever existed.
For me, I’m ok with using stereotypes of privileged groups to vent frustrations. I think it’s a way normal people communicate. And it’s a lot more popular than a comment like this that is much heavier with leftist vocabulary. And I don’t think it’s a bad way to communicate to the masses and vent a frustration with capitalism.
The “good” boomers. They are just as frustrated with their generation as we are. You think they love the Senate with an average age of 65? Fuck no.
They aren’t offended by a classification and frustration that they feel as well. And as long as their is a bit of understanding (that I gave in my original comment) that the stereotype is not all inclusive there is no problem with it.
If there is one category of people I’m NOT communicating to, it’s the “boomers” that would be offended by my original comment. There is no hope for them at this point. And it’s ok to accept that and use the language of the current generation to direct their frustrations towards class conflict.
Long comment. Sorry. But, I do respect the criticism. I was not communicating in a way that was meant to reach out to someone with your perspective. But I hope you can at least understand where the original comment came from in the first place.
Edit: Just realized I gave you a wall of text previously from another comment and didn’t get a reply. Second times a charm? I’m in a better mood tonight at least.
If this hurt your feelings that bad you’re privileged. Be thankful.
I am privileged and I am thankful. But the comment I replied to didn’t hurt my feelings. What it did was stereotype an entire generation, many times, and I am opposed to doing that. I don’t do that when thinking about Gen X or Y or Z (or anyone else) and I’d hope we could move on from that kind of prejudice. That’s all.
I’d ask yourself why you’re sensitive to a “stereotype” being used to explain the outcomes of capitalist exploitation. I would ask you if you’d understand and agree with the same type of comment but with replacing “generation” with “white privilege”? Would you be so quick to defend the white working class from a “stereotype” in a frustrated rant?
My comment was off the cuff and crude. I think we can both agree there. But, I don’t think I was being unfair. Maybe a bit hyperbolic. My comment was definitely weighing in heavily to the “fuck boomers” feeling of the younger generations. But, it was not without a point of class structures, capitalist exploitation, and understanding that the stereotype is not all inclusive, but simply a venting of those frustrations.
I think the “no war but class war” crowd has fallen pray to class reductionism and the methods in which to communicate with the working class. The “no war but class war” is literal, not figurative. I think people forget that.
In the same way that “white privilege” in a vacuum is insufficient in describing the entire picture of of working class exploitation. Without it, it is insufficient in understanding how to address the issues of intersectionality in order to communicate with and radicalize the masses.
Also, let’s be clear, “Boomers” as a term is never referring to black or otherwise oppressed people of that generation. I would hope that anyone reading a comment like mine would assume that in good faith.
The issue is of class, the issue is of privilege, but for some reason i get more people ready to fight back against a criticism of “boomers” than I do when criticizing “white people”. When the term is literally specifically about the most privileged generation of white people that ever existed.
For me, I’m ok with using stereotypes of privileged groups to vent frustrations. I think it’s a way normal people communicate. And it’s a lot more popular than a comment like this that is much heavier with leftist vocabulary. And I don’t think it’s a bad way to communicate to the masses and vent a frustration with capitalism.
The “good” boomers. They are just as frustrated with their generation as we are. You think they love the Senate with an average age of 65? Fuck no.
They aren’t offended by a classification and frustration that they feel as well. And as long as their is a bit of understanding (that I gave in my original comment) that the stereotype is not all inclusive there is no problem with it.
If there is one category of people I’m NOT communicating to, it’s the “boomers” that would be offended by my original comment. There is no hope for them at this point. And it’s ok to accept that and use the language of the current generation to direct their frustrations towards class conflict.
Long comment. Sorry. But, I do respect the criticism. I was not communicating in a way that was meant to reach out to someone with your perspective. But I hope you can at least understand where the original comment came from in the first place.
Edit: Just realized I gave you a wall of text previously from another comment and didn’t get a reply. Second times a charm? I’m in a better mood tonight at least.