The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Biden, King of the Boomers?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The betting odds between Trump/Biden (~45-50% vs. 40%-45%) have stayed remarkable steady since Bernie got put out of his misery.

However, there’s been one remarkable shift.

Whereas in 2016, support for Trump increased monotonically with age, more and more polls now appear to confirm that older people, especially Silents and Greatest are turning away from Trump to Biden.

Funnily enough, Trump’s most fervid supporters may now very well be Gen X. Which is not inappropriate, I suppose, seeing as his aesthetics and brash mannerisms are closest to that group.

I don’t know the reasons for this, though I can speculate:

  • Biden doesn’t trigger normie conservatives like Hillary did.
  • They don’t appreciate GOP’s stance on Corona.
  • More general matter of “civility brain worms” (though it’s not as if Trump was any less combative in 2016).

FWIW, my Twitter followers are split more or less evenly between those three positions.

Conversely, I don’t see why many normie young Americans should feel enthused about voting for Biden. He is less progressive on virtually all issues, from Medicare and student debt to climate change, than HRC. At least the Donald gave many of them a $1,200 check.

Matt Forney also has some interesting thoughts (see the full thread):

 

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, Joe Biden, US Elections 2020 
Hide 105 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.

    If you are new to my work, start here.

  2. well, if somebody in power implies with their actions/propaganda that you need to die for the economy if you’re old and it should not be a big deal at all, not much wonder that at least some fraction of that 65+ cohort may not be so enthusiastic about it.

  3. Trump and Biden are all USA have left to show the world…

    Someone should really Ctl Alt Del this whole disgraceful gig before US goes full Blue Screen of Death.

    • Replies: @AaronInMVD
    @Ano4

    Kinda why I got the hell out of the US in 2017. I was happy Trump won, he was obviously the less awful choice. Still as rotten as both the boomers and the kids are... it was time to throw in the towel on the US when Trump and HRC were the best the US could offer.

    I suspect a strength of Biden's poll numbers is in the fact he's largely keeping himself out of sight. If he comes out of the bunker and stays out of the bunker... He has developed a greater tendency towards unforced errors in his speaking than Trump, and he's done it fast. If he gets out of the basement too far in advance of the convention he might get sacked and someone else will lead the Dems on the ticket.

    This feels like late soviet gerontocracy.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN

    , @AnonFromTN
    @Ano4


    Someone should really Ctl Alt Del this whole disgraceful gig before US goes full Blue Screen of Death.
     
    The best bumper sticker I saw said “Nobody 2020”. When you have a choice between a narcissistic moron and a corrupt senile moron, that’s the most adequate reaction.
  4. At least the Donald gave many of them a $1,200 check.

    I’m not really sure if this was all of his own doing, but he made darn sure that everybody thought so – within a short time I received a letter, directly from the don, reminding me that he was my direct benefactor for this act of “noblesse oblige.” 🙂

  5. @Ano4
    Trump and Biden are all USA have left to show the world...

    Someone should really Ctl Alt Del this whole disgraceful gig before US goes full Blue Screen of Death.

    Replies: @AaronInMVD, @AnonFromTN

    Kinda why I got the hell out of the US in 2017. I was happy Trump won, he was obviously the less awful choice. Still as rotten as both the boomers and the kids are… it was time to throw in the towel on the US when Trump and HRC were the best the US could offer.

    I suspect a strength of Biden’s poll numbers is in the fact he’s largely keeping himself out of sight. If he comes out of the bunker and stays out of the bunker… He has developed a greater tendency towards unforced errors in his speaking than Trump, and he’s done it fast. If he gets out of the basement too far in advance of the convention he might get sacked and someone else will lead the Dems on the ticket.

    This feels like late soviet gerontocracy.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @AaronInMVD


    This feels like late soviet gerontocracy
     
    Exactly.

    The whole current situation in the US (may be the West in general) feels a lot like USSR just prior to the Perestroika.

    Although Soviet society was less polarized in 1985 than US society is today.

    Thirty years ago they had the world at their feet.

    Today they are the laughingstock of the whole world.

    That was a fast degradation.

    I am starting to think that Dmitry Orlov is possibly partially right in his assessment of US collapse happening soon.

    Replies: @Jaakko Raipala, @Vaterland

    , @AnonFromTN
    @AaronInMVD

    Next to Trump, Biden, and Bernie, Soviet Politburo looks like a youth club.

  6. Ano4 says:
    @AaronInMVD
    @Ano4

    Kinda why I got the hell out of the US in 2017. I was happy Trump won, he was obviously the less awful choice. Still as rotten as both the boomers and the kids are... it was time to throw in the towel on the US when Trump and HRC were the best the US could offer.

    I suspect a strength of Biden's poll numbers is in the fact he's largely keeping himself out of sight. If he comes out of the bunker and stays out of the bunker... He has developed a greater tendency towards unforced errors in his speaking than Trump, and he's done it fast. If he gets out of the basement too far in advance of the convention he might get sacked and someone else will lead the Dems on the ticket.

    This feels like late soviet gerontocracy.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN

    This feels like late soviet gerontocracy

    Exactly.

    The whole current situation in the US (may be the West in general) feels a lot like USSR just prior to the Perestroika.

    Although Soviet society was less polarized in 1985 than US society is today.

    Thirty years ago they had the world at their feet.

    Today they are the laughingstock of the whole world.

    That was a fast degradation.

    I am starting to think that Dmitry Orlov is possibly partially right in his assessment of US collapse happening soon.

    • Replies: @Jaakko Raipala
    @Ano4

    People should be careful about what they wish for. If the current US political system collapses, it doesn't mean that it peacefully turns into a bunch of countries like the Warsaw Pact.

    A big part of the reason why the Soviet collapse was so peaceful is that its elites saw an opportunity to improve their personal position by allowing it to die peacefully. Give up position as communist party chief of some industry, gain position as oligarch of the same industry, it's actually an improvement.

    American elites have everything invested in remaining the top dog in the world's top dog. There's no way for anyone in charge to profit from letting the system collapse. If it starts collapsing they're going to try to keep it together by force and the most likely resolution to political crisis in the US isn't peaceful separation into multiple countries, it's some militant faction taking over in a coup or civil war and a country with the resources of the United States but ruled by evil and competent people with a focused ideology could be a lot worse than the current one preoccupied by an absurd culture war.

    Replies: @Ano4

    , @Vaterland
    @Ano4

    Disagree. Current year America is much more similar to the Yeltsin era. An oligarchical (Jewish) mafia, both legal and illegal, are running the show, manipulating a buffoonish "president" and cutting insider deals enriching themselves while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness. Replace vodka epidemic with opioid epidemic. One of the good things the Putin years have achieved: to solve the drunken Ivan question. Jewish oligarchs like Millner and Berezovsky also controlled the media back then, while others were trying to introduce even more neoliberal capitalism.
    The oligarchs did NOT want the old communist guard to return to power for which there was a slim chance at the end of Yeltsin's second term. Their favorite was the liberal party. Berezovsky introduced Putin as an attempt at controlled opposition into the game. Didn't work out for him.

    Broke: Putin, the slavophile secular Zar, controls the oligarchs and anyone who doesn't cut a deal to benefit the Russian people gets the Berezovsky or Chodorkovsky treatment. He is the greatest Russian right after Stalin!

    Woke: Putin's system depends on the oligarchs and at best it is a system of mutually assured destruction, if it goes down.

    Cope: Russia went from a broken country where 19 of the 20 richest men were predatory Jewish oligarchs to an indeed somewhat recovered nation with a vastly more diversified income situation. How much of it is actually the achievement of Putin and friends is an entirely different matter and Russia would have been much better off, if it had followed the Konrad Adenauer-Ludwig Erhard route and had its own Wirtschaftswunder.

    The difference between post-Soviet Russia and current year America is that there was still a sense of Russianness and unity to fall back to. Imho post Stalin the SU was mostly transformed into Russian imperialism anyway. And there were the non corrupt and infiltrated elements of the Russian Orthodox Church. I remember a priest who really liked how revealing the Protocols of the learned Elder of Zion were and how they explain everything that is happening in the world right now. That basic sense of racio-cultural unity, or simply Americanness doesn't exist in the USA anymore. Choose Brasil, South Africa or Czech-Slovak style peaceful separation as your future.

    There are some parallels between Soviet political correctness, where the state was sacrosanct, and US and UK PC, where multiculturalism is sacrosanct, and the role of the managerial class. And while Chernobyl exposed that this emperor had no clothes, US corona reaction, Epstein, Rotherham and Minnesota expose this other emperor as naked.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kigV0WNaLBk

    But the huge, huge difference is that at the time the general believe in the Soviet Union as a political system itself was already rather low, especially in Eastern Europe and the GDR. Where many Americans are zealots about their anti-white believe system. The American Cultural Revolution is turning out as expected.

    Replies: @AP, @Ano4, @WHAT

  7. I would say Forney is right here, the democratic party has increasingly become the party of the professional managerial class and therefore is increasingly pro-establishment, just look at the level of trust Republicans have relative to democrats in establishment institutions like the media. The young on the whole are more anti-establishment than the old in America, hence the GOP transition to the more anti-establishment party would naturally help Trump do better with younger voters whereas the dems do worse as they become more pro-establishment.

    I would also say though age and race correlate, Trump has lost ground with white voters in most polls vs 2016 and gained ground with Hispanics, Hispanics are younger than Whites so the effect of this would be for Trump to do better with young voters and worse with older voters as younger voters are disproportionately Hispanic even as older ones are disproportionately White.

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Bartholomew
    @Annatar

    The problem is trying to rebrand as anti-establishment while their platform consists solely of deregulations and tax cuts for plutocrats. GOP is great at duping their voters, but that seems like a tough sell even for them.

    , @Daniel H
    @Annatar

    The young on the whole are more anti-establishment than the old in America, hence the GOP transition to the more anti-establishment party would naturally help Trump do better with younger voters whereas the dems do worse as they become more pro-establishment.

    Yeah, but the dinosaurs in the Republican party don't give a bleep about the young or the interests of the young. They will fight for the professional class' interests as ardently as any Schumer or Pelosi. In their defense, the Republicans will say, "Hey we didn't ask to be your representative in bringing about a new, fairer, more equitable social order....." My retort, you have no friggin option ass*ole. You were chosen, now start representing the interests of your voting supporters....Alas, I can dream.

    Replies: @Kronos

  8. Fourth possibility: Comparing polls of likely voters in October-November 2016 to who knows what garbage in May 2020.

    (After reading fine print – yep, a poll of registered voters.)

  9. Funny enough, Biden is a couple of years too old to be a Boomer.

    • Replies: @Not Raul
    @40 Lashes Less One

    So is Paul McCartney.

    , @Kronos
    @40 Lashes Less One

    They actually coincide very well as Boomers.

    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella while those born after 1960 should be kicked to the curb and live a homeless lifestyle with Gen X.

    The War Babies were the Peter Pans of the 1960s leading the Boomers. Both Biden and Bernie are Boomer shamans and possess great respect amongst all those who worship/lived in the 1960s.

    https://youtu.be/5xmNaZqxNpI

    The Boomers (especially independents) are the biggest whoring electoral block in the US. Remember, by 1965 over half of the US population consisted of Boomers. That dramatically changed the Republican and Democratic Parties once they started to vote. There were five Boomers for every one “Greatest Generation” member.

    The thing is, the Boomers are starting to die in significant numbers. This is leading to a major political unwinding in the US, a political Bear Market for the voting electorate. The National parties we’ve had since 1968 might very well break back down to regional power blocks. It’ll be interesting to see what happens.

    For those Gen Xers, have hope, you’ll likely reach numerical parody with the Boomers by 2028 (no joke.)

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @dfordoom, @njguy73

  10. UK says:

    Biden really does seem like a nice and empathetic guy. Unlike HRC, his meanderings into progressive speak tend to come across as well-meaning, if also cringe-worthy and often exaggerated.

    His problem previously was that people didn’t think of him as a serious candidate. Now they do, and it is a good look for him. He beat Bernie handily in conditions that were much harder than those HRC faced.

    Basically, he is fine and affable; which means the polls will be good to him even as turnout may not.

  11. Biden has a major edge with the boomers because of the BBQ factor. They just wanna grill, and Biden is the guy they want to invite to their backyard for brats and bud light.

    Oh and maybe Trump openly committing boomercide with coronavirus has something to do with it.

    • Replies: @Znzn
    @Bartholomew

    Whoever engineered the boomer coronavirus democide should get liquidated.

  12. @Annatar
    I would say Forney is right here, the democratic party has increasingly become the party of the professional managerial class and therefore is increasingly pro-establishment, just look at the level of trust Republicans have relative to democrats in establishment institutions like the media. The young on the whole are more anti-establishment than the old in America, hence the GOP transition to the more anti-establishment party would naturally help Trump do better with younger voters whereas the dems do worse as they become more pro-establishment.

    I would also say though age and race correlate, Trump has lost ground with white voters in most polls vs 2016 and gained ground with Hispanics, Hispanics are younger than Whites so the effect of this would be for Trump to do better with young voters and worse with older voters as younger voters are disproportionately Hispanic even as older ones are disproportionately White.

    Replies: @Bartholomew, @Daniel H

    The problem is trying to rebrand as anti-establishment while their platform consists solely of deregulations and tax cuts for plutocrats. GOP is great at duping their voters, but that seems like a tough sell even for them.

  13. A reason why older Americans may support Biden more than Clinton and indeed Trump is not just that Clinton triggered them more (an anti-rating) but that to older, conservative Americans Biden being a older white man with blue collar cred (even if overblown) has appeal. This harks back to times when that was the virtual default (though POTUS candidates were on average younger than the current crop of contenders among Biden, Bernie, Trump).

    Between Trump and Biden, the old white man with (faux) blue collar appeal cancels out leaving areas like temperament and policies. Biden is middle-of-the-road enough to attract older, moderate conservatives who value stead(ier) temperament – obvious signs of dementia not withstanding – than Trump who all but his most ardent supporters will admit sounds unhinged most of the time.

    While the full impact of COVID-19 and Biden’s frailty along with any other shocks in the next 5 months may still upend calculations, the election, as in 2016, should come down to 5-6 states far removed from the coastal media/pundits who dominate political and cultural discourse in the US.

    • Agree: Blinky Bill
  14. I find it odd how Biden was considered patronising/racist towards blacks specifically for using the word “ain’t”.

    In the UK “ain’t” is typical white working class chav speech, no one here would associate it as a specifically black term. I take it white people generally wouldn’t say “ain’t” in the US?

    • Replies: @Bartholomew
    @Europe Europa

    Most of what is considered "black" in the USA is just lower class southern culture. The food, vernacular, etc. When blacks were shipped up north, the northern whites just conflated it all with blackness.

    Replies: @RadicalCenter

    , @AP
    @Europe Europa

    Southern and working class white people say ain’t. I haven’t heard Biden get criticized for using that word. He was criticized for telling Blacks whom to vote for.

    , @Kronos
    @Europe Europa

    So far Biden has stated some gaffs, but nothing truly “Basket of Deplorables” worthy. Remember, the deplorables remark wasn’t made on the spot. It was written by a Clinton speechwriter and approved by Clinton herself.

    There was plenty of bad blood between various factions of the Democratic Party (Private Unions, Blacks) and the Clintons. Nobody really knew who was going to be kicked of the Democratic Party Island. The deplorable remark sounded like a final “cut down the tall trees” Rwanda genocide remark and Clinton *slightly* showed her hand.


    https://youtu.be/OZHp4JLWjNw

    https://youtu.be/2p9VrpSp-jo

  15. @Europe Europa
    I find it odd how Biden was considered patronising/racist towards blacks specifically for using the word "ain't".

    In the UK "ain't" is typical white working class chav speech, no one here would associate it as a specifically black term. I take it white people generally wouldn't say "ain't" in the US?

    Replies: @Bartholomew, @AP, @Kronos

    Most of what is considered “black” in the USA is just lower class southern culture. The food, vernacular, etc. When blacks were shipped up north, the northern whites just conflated it all with blackness.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    @Bartholomew

    At one time, that may have been true to some degree. But Africans mostly migrated from the South to the North and California long ago, half a century ago or much more. The alleged similarity of non-Southern African-“Americans” to Lower-income Southern whites doesn’t fly nowadays. It doesn’t make sense as an explanation of systematically — really nonstop — violent, vulgar, and anti-social behavior by africans in the non-South USA, in our experience.

    I don’t associate “lower class”, which i take to mean “low-income”, Southern whites with saying the word “motherf—-er”, throwing trash and food on the ground on a town sidewalk, putting their hands on their crotch or even down the front of their pants in public in front of women and children, constantly muttering or “singing” violent lyrics “to themselves” to intimidate passersby, or assaulting and permanently injuring me for no reason.

    Yet I and my wife and children have seen, heard, and suffered everything i just described by the hand of African-“Americans” here in Los Angeles, in Philadelphia, in Chicago, in Baltimore, and in many other U.S. Cities.

    African-“Americans” are a uniquely dimwitted, obnoxious, physically dangerous, socially destructive force in the usa, matched by no other group — and most of them far divorced in time and experience from any traditional Southern cultural roots, “lower class” or otherwise.

    Replies: @Bartholomew

  16. @Europe Europa
    I find it odd how Biden was considered patronising/racist towards blacks specifically for using the word "ain't".

    In the UK "ain't" is typical white working class chav speech, no one here would associate it as a specifically black term. I take it white people generally wouldn't say "ain't" in the US?

    Replies: @Bartholomew, @AP, @Kronos

    Southern and working class white people say ain’t. I haven’t heard Biden get criticized for using that word. He was criticized for telling Blacks whom to vote for.

  17. @Bartholomew
    Biden has a major edge with the boomers because of the BBQ factor. They just wanna grill, and Biden is the guy they want to invite to their backyard for brats and bud light.

    Oh and maybe Trump openly committing boomercide with coronavirus has something to do with it.

    Replies: @Znzn

    Whoever engineered the boomer coronavirus democide should get liquidated.

  18. US culture only started to accelerate its degeneracy and pozzness when the boomers started to retire in the early 2010s, or when the silents started to retire in the mid to late 90s.

  19. @Ano4
    @AaronInMVD


    This feels like late soviet gerontocracy
     
    Exactly.

    The whole current situation in the US (may be the West in general) feels a lot like USSR just prior to the Perestroika.

    Although Soviet society was less polarized in 1985 than US society is today.

    Thirty years ago they had the world at their feet.

    Today they are the laughingstock of the whole world.

    That was a fast degradation.

    I am starting to think that Dmitry Orlov is possibly partially right in his assessment of US collapse happening soon.

    Replies: @Jaakko Raipala, @Vaterland

    People should be careful about what they wish for. If the current US political system collapses, it doesn’t mean that it peacefully turns into a bunch of countries like the Warsaw Pact.

    A big part of the reason why the Soviet collapse was so peaceful is that its elites saw an opportunity to improve their personal position by allowing it to die peacefully. Give up position as communist party chief of some industry, gain position as oligarch of the same industry, it’s actually an improvement.

    American elites have everything invested in remaining the top dog in the world’s top dog. There’s no way for anyone in charge to profit from letting the system collapse. If it starts collapsing they’re going to try to keep it together by force and the most likely resolution to political crisis in the US isn’t peaceful separation into multiple countries, it’s some militant faction taking over in a coup or civil war and a country with the resources of the United States but ruled by evil and competent people with a focused ideology could be a lot worse than the current one preoccupied by an absurd culture war.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Jaakko Raipala

    I agree.

    I have never wished for US to collapse.

    In fact, I am quite disappointed with what is cuttently happening in the US.

  20. @Bartholomew
    @Europe Europa

    Most of what is considered "black" in the USA is just lower class southern culture. The food, vernacular, etc. When blacks were shipped up north, the northern whites just conflated it all with blackness.

    Replies: @RadicalCenter

    At one time, that may have been true to some degree. But Africans mostly migrated from the South to the North and California long ago, half a century ago or much more. The alleged similarity of non-Southern African-“Americans” to Lower-income Southern whites doesn’t fly nowadays. It doesn’t make sense as an explanation of systematically — really nonstop — violent, vulgar, and anti-social behavior by africans in the non-South USA, in our experience.

    I don’t associate “lower class”, which i take to mean “low-income”, Southern whites with saying the word “motherf—-er”, throwing trash and food on the ground on a town sidewalk, putting their hands on their crotch or even down the front of their pants in public in front of women and children, constantly muttering or “singing” violent lyrics “to themselves” to intimidate passersby, or assaulting and permanently injuring me for no reason.

    Yet I and my wife and children have seen, heard, and suffered everything i just described by the hand of African-“Americans” here in Los Angeles, in Philadelphia, in Chicago, in Baltimore, and in many other U.S. Cities.

    African-“Americans” are a uniquely dimwitted, obnoxious, physically dangerous, socially destructive force in the usa, matched by no other group — and most of them far divorced in time and experience from any traditional Southern cultural roots, “lower class” or otherwise.

    • Replies: @Bartholomew
    @RadicalCenter

    I'm not using it as an excuse for their behavior. Just as an explanation of their culture overall. There has been some divergence between southern and northern blacks, but not all that much. And it is still derived from southern white culture overall.

  21. It’s understandable that lots of guys who were young men when “Trump: The Art of the Deal” came out would be nostalgic.

  22. 4chan has an effective ongoing theme that millennials and zoomers voting for Biden, will have an edge in getting a sexy black girlfriend

    Note the lower right corner of the meme below, ‘You cute, whiteboi!’

    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
    @brabantian


    sexy black girlfriend
     
    Further evidence that these people never leave the house
    , @Kronos
    @brabantian

    Yeah, they’d need some good luck with that. I’d imagine trying to find a sexy black girlfriend that isn’t:

    1) Diabetic
    2) Non-Obese
    3) A Single-Mom
    4) Straight up Poor
    5) Racist as Hell

    a very difficult challenge. Who’d want to date a “Rasputa” that’ll crush your mind, body, and soul both mentally and physically. There is a good reason why Black men will choose any white girl over a black chick every time.


    https://youtu.be/DQsjj5pkBd0

  23. @40 Lashes Less One
    Funny enough, Biden is a couple of years too old to be a Boomer.

    Replies: @Not Raul, @Kronos

    So is Paul McCartney.

  24. @Jaakko Raipala
    @Ano4

    People should be careful about what they wish for. If the current US political system collapses, it doesn't mean that it peacefully turns into a bunch of countries like the Warsaw Pact.

    A big part of the reason why the Soviet collapse was so peaceful is that its elites saw an opportunity to improve their personal position by allowing it to die peacefully. Give up position as communist party chief of some industry, gain position as oligarch of the same industry, it's actually an improvement.

    American elites have everything invested in remaining the top dog in the world's top dog. There's no way for anyone in charge to profit from letting the system collapse. If it starts collapsing they're going to try to keep it together by force and the most likely resolution to political crisis in the US isn't peaceful separation into multiple countries, it's some militant faction taking over in a coup or civil war and a country with the resources of the United States but ruled by evil and competent people with a focused ideology could be a lot worse than the current one preoccupied by an absurd culture war.

    Replies: @Ano4

    I agree.

    I have never wished for US to collapse.

    In fact, I am quite disappointed with what is cuttently happening in the US.

  25. @brabantian
    4chan has an effective ongoing theme that millennials and zoomers voting for Biden, will have an edge in getting a sexy black girlfriend

    Note the lower right corner of the meme below, 'You cute, whiteboi!'

    https://i.ibb.co/8NVvb8G/ridin-w-biden-rwb-girls.jpg

    Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Kronos

    sexy black girlfriend

    Further evidence that these people never leave the house

  26. Like their counterpart in the Republican Party, the Democrat Party can only survive if the big buck$ roll in, which is why Bernie is “out” and Biden (a key member of the Democrat money class) is in. At least for now. I will believe that Biden will be their nominee when I see it–the guy’s mind is slowly reducing to applesauce.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    @Prester John


    the guy’s mind is slowly reducing to applesauce.
     
    There is a joke that Biden was always so dumb that when he went senile, his family did not even notice.
  27. @Annatar
    I would say Forney is right here, the democratic party has increasingly become the party of the professional managerial class and therefore is increasingly pro-establishment, just look at the level of trust Republicans have relative to democrats in establishment institutions like the media. The young on the whole are more anti-establishment than the old in America, hence the GOP transition to the more anti-establishment party would naturally help Trump do better with younger voters whereas the dems do worse as they become more pro-establishment.

    I would also say though age and race correlate, Trump has lost ground with white voters in most polls vs 2016 and gained ground with Hispanics, Hispanics are younger than Whites so the effect of this would be for Trump to do better with young voters and worse with older voters as younger voters are disproportionately Hispanic even as older ones are disproportionately White.

    Replies: @Bartholomew, @Daniel H

    The young on the whole are more anti-establishment than the old in America, hence the GOP transition to the more anti-establishment party would naturally help Trump do better with younger voters whereas the dems do worse as they become more pro-establishment.

    Yeah, but the dinosaurs in the Republican party don’t give a bleep about the young or the interests of the young. They will fight for the professional class’ interests as ardently as any Schumer or Pelosi. In their defense, the Republicans will say, “Hey we didn’t ask to be your representative in bringing about a new, fairer, more equitable social order…..” My retort, you have no friggin option ass*ole. You were chosen, now start representing the interests of your voting supporters….Alas, I can dream.

    • Replies: @Kronos
    @Daniel H

    We gotta come up with a better breakdown terminology than just “establishment.” There've been different establishments in different eras made up of different factions.

    Private Unions (think Jimmy Hoffa) used to be part of the previous establishment, but got frozen out of the US economic pecking order via free trade beginning in the 1980s.

    https://youtu.be/9h9W4c2YLCg

    In the 1960s, US industry CEOs were deemed “big dogs” while finance was seen as small and Byzantine. Now hedge funds are the ones walking these old decrepit dogs in the US economy. (They’re actually parasites killing the dogs but that’s another story.)

    https://youtu.be/Hk23s4hh8M8

    https://youtu.be/VXi7kwaXA3w

  28. @40 Lashes Less One
    Funny enough, Biden is a couple of years too old to be a Boomer.

    Replies: @Not Raul, @Kronos

    They actually coincide very well as Boomers.

    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella while those born after 1960 should be kicked to the curb and live a homeless lifestyle with Gen X.

    The War Babies were the Peter Pans of the 1960s leading the Boomers. Both Biden and Bernie are Boomer shamans and possess great respect amongst all those who worship/lived in the 1960s.

    The Boomers (especially independents) are the biggest whoring electoral block in the US. Remember, by 1965 over half of the US population consisted of Boomers. That dramatically changed the Republican and Democratic Parties once they started to vote. There were five Boomers for every one “Greatest Generation” member.

    The thing is, the Boomers are starting to die in significant numbers. This is leading to a major political unwinding in the US, a political Bear Market for the voting electorate. The National parties we’ve had since 1968 might very well break back down to regional power blocks. It’ll be interesting to see what happens.

    For those Gen Xers, have hope, you’ll likely reach numerical parody with the Boomers by 2028 (no joke.)

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    @Kronos


    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella
     
    Exactly.

    My parents were both born in 1943 but they consider themselves full up Boomers.

    Replies: @Kronos

    , @dfordoom
    @Kronos


    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella while those born after 1960 should be kicked to the curb and live a homeless lifestyle with Gen X.
     
    People born between 1935 and 1955 form a much more coherent group in terms of shared attitudes and culture than most of the absurdly artificial generational groups.

    And arguably the next vaguely coherent generational grouping would be those born between 1956 and 1975.

    Replies: @Kronos, @Kronos, @Kronos

    , @njguy73
    @Kronos

    What separates a Boomer from a Silent is 1) not having childhood memories of WW2 and 2) being subject to Vietnam draft lottery.

    Replies: @Kronos, @dfordoom

  29. Trump and the gop formulated a plan to attack biden n his son over a year ago. That means the reds knew biden was going to be the blue candidate over a year ago. Voting is a farce.

    Just want to throw this in the comments.

    • Replies: @cliff arroyo
    @Astuteobservor II

    Surely the Trump team worked out plans for every plausible nominee many months ago.

    Hunter (failson of the century) is an obvious target so.... they didn't have to spend much time on that.

    We'll see if they go after his clearly declining facilities.

    The draft Cuomo movement seems to have stalled (fortunately given his horribly handling of the rona in NY) so I'm not sure they have anyone else unless HRC really is waiting in the wings.... (Which I'm not counting out).

  30. @Kronos
    @40 Lashes Less One

    They actually coincide very well as Boomers.

    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella while those born after 1960 should be kicked to the curb and live a homeless lifestyle with Gen X.

    The War Babies were the Peter Pans of the 1960s leading the Boomers. Both Biden and Bernie are Boomer shamans and possess great respect amongst all those who worship/lived in the 1960s.

    https://youtu.be/5xmNaZqxNpI

    The Boomers (especially independents) are the biggest whoring electoral block in the US. Remember, by 1965 over half of the US population consisted of Boomers. That dramatically changed the Republican and Democratic Parties once they started to vote. There were five Boomers for every one “Greatest Generation” member.

    The thing is, the Boomers are starting to die in significant numbers. This is leading to a major political unwinding in the US, a political Bear Market for the voting electorate. The National parties we’ve had since 1968 might very well break back down to regional power blocks. It’ll be interesting to see what happens.

    For those Gen Xers, have hope, you’ll likely reach numerical parody with the Boomers by 2028 (no joke.)

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @dfordoom, @njguy73

    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella

    Exactly.

    My parents were both born in 1943 but they consider themselves full up Boomers.

    • Replies: @Kronos
    @The Wild Geese Howard

    Your grandparents likely followed the same life trajectory. Grandpa finished his 25 bombing runs and was honorably discharged. He met your mother and they married. Soon afterwords they obtained a house or apartment and your Dad or Mom was born there. (I don’t know your family, this was just a very typical pathway.)

    The only difference was the war was still going on. Birth rates were skyrocketing during the war but become truly supercharged after World War II. The economic conditions in the US improved with the war and (most) “war babies” never experienced the true economic hardships of the Great Depression.

    https://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011/08/11/pf/recession_birth_rate/chart-birth-rate-2.top.gif

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

  31. @The Wild Geese Howard
    @Kronos


    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella
     
    Exactly.

    My parents were both born in 1943 but they consider themselves full up Boomers.

    Replies: @Kronos

    Your grandparents likely followed the same life trajectory. Grandpa finished his 25 bombing runs and was honorably discharged. He met your mother and they married. Soon afterwords they obtained a house or apartment and your Dad or Mom was born there. (I don’t know your family, this was just a very typical pathway.)

    The only difference was the war was still going on. Birth rates were skyrocketing during the war but become truly supercharged after World War II. The economic conditions in the US improved with the war and (most) “war babies” never experienced the true economic hardships of the Great Depression.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    @Kronos


    Your grandparents likely followed the same life trajectory. Grandpa finished his 25 bombing runs and was honorably discharged.
     
    That's close enough to running around occupied Europe with a BAR for 6 months.


    He met your mother and they married.
     
    !

    I know this is a typo. My grandparents were married in the 30s and had my mother in the 40s.

    The economic conditions in the US improved with the war and (most) “war babies” never experienced the true economic hardships of the Great Depression.
     
    This part is spot on.

    My mother was born in '43, and she absolutely worships the TV.
  32. @Kronos
    @The Wild Geese Howard

    Your grandparents likely followed the same life trajectory. Grandpa finished his 25 bombing runs and was honorably discharged. He met your mother and they married. Soon afterwords they obtained a house or apartment and your Dad or Mom was born there. (I don’t know your family, this was just a very typical pathway.)

    The only difference was the war was still going on. Birth rates were skyrocketing during the war but become truly supercharged after World War II. The economic conditions in the US improved with the war and (most) “war babies” never experienced the true economic hardships of the Great Depression.

    https://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011/08/11/pf/recession_birth_rate/chart-birth-rate-2.top.gif

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    Your grandparents likely followed the same life trajectory. Grandpa finished his 25 bombing runs and was honorably discharged.

    That’s close enough to running around occupied Europe with a BAR for 6 months.

    He met your mother and they married.

    !

    I know this is a typo. My grandparents were married in the 30s and had my mother in the 40s.

    The economic conditions in the US improved with the war and (most) “war babies” never experienced the true economic hardships of the Great Depression.

    This part is spot on.

    My mother was born in ’43, and she absolutely worships the TV.

  33. My mother was born in ’43, and she absolutely worships the TV.

    Mine was born in the mid-1950s. She’s been hopelessly addicted to Oprah (and fairly recently Ellen, *Sigh*) for decades. It’s weird, whenever I visit she’s always having a “mental communion” with the tv about Oprah/Ellen’s happy messages and other b.s.

    Thankfully, she doesn’t watch “The View” or I’d need to pull a “Old Yeller/Lenny” mercy kill.

  34. ,,,more and more polls now appear to confirm that older people, especially Silents and Greatest are turning away from Trump to Biden.

    With a record number of over-85 year olds in the US still working, this surprises anyone?

    Most American workers didn’t survive the downsize-outsourcing years. Lose all you’ve worked for when your 35-55 or so and you just don’t get your life back.

    I know plenty of boomers, not one is retired and the story is always the same: Somewhere in between Carter and Clinton, they got the ax and often lost their homes, families and health while searching for get-by jobs till they landed something permanent but low-paying.

    Despite Trumpian bunkum, the oldsters who still vote might have figured that the Democrats will at least leave Social Security alone. When you already know you’re going to work till you drop, the extra bucks are to keep a roof over your head. The job is for food. Small stuff, I know, but it matters.

  35. @Daniel H
    @Annatar

    The young on the whole are more anti-establishment than the old in America, hence the GOP transition to the more anti-establishment party would naturally help Trump do better with younger voters whereas the dems do worse as they become more pro-establishment.

    Yeah, but the dinosaurs in the Republican party don't give a bleep about the young or the interests of the young. They will fight for the professional class' interests as ardently as any Schumer or Pelosi. In their defense, the Republicans will say, "Hey we didn't ask to be your representative in bringing about a new, fairer, more equitable social order....." My retort, you have no friggin option ass*ole. You were chosen, now start representing the interests of your voting supporters....Alas, I can dream.

    Replies: @Kronos

    We gotta come up with a better breakdown terminology than just “establishment.” There’ve been different establishments in different eras made up of different factions.

    Private Unions (think Jimmy Hoffa) used to be part of the previous establishment, but got frozen out of the US economic pecking order via free trade beginning in the 1980s.

    In the 1960s, US industry CEOs were deemed “big dogs” while finance was seen as small and Byzantine. Now hedge funds are the ones walking these old decrepit dogs in the US economy. (They’re actually parasites killing the dogs but that’s another story.)

  36. @Europe Europa
    I find it odd how Biden was considered patronising/racist towards blacks specifically for using the word "ain't".

    In the UK "ain't" is typical white working class chav speech, no one here would associate it as a specifically black term. I take it white people generally wouldn't say "ain't" in the US?

    Replies: @Bartholomew, @AP, @Kronos

    So far Biden has stated some gaffs, but nothing truly “Basket of Deplorables” worthy. Remember, the deplorables remark wasn’t made on the spot. It was written by a Clinton speechwriter and approved by Clinton herself.

    There was plenty of bad blood between various factions of the Democratic Party (Private Unions, Blacks) and the Clintons. Nobody really knew who was going to be kicked of the Democratic Party Island. The deplorable remark sounded like a final “cut down the tall trees” Rwanda genocide remark and Clinton *slightly* showed her hand.

  37. @Kronos
    @40 Lashes Less One

    They actually coincide very well as Boomers.

    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella while those born after 1960 should be kicked to the curb and live a homeless lifestyle with Gen X.

    The War Babies were the Peter Pans of the 1960s leading the Boomers. Both Biden and Bernie are Boomer shamans and possess great respect amongst all those who worship/lived in the 1960s.

    https://youtu.be/5xmNaZqxNpI

    The Boomers (especially independents) are the biggest whoring electoral block in the US. Remember, by 1965 over half of the US population consisted of Boomers. That dramatically changed the Republican and Democratic Parties once they started to vote. There were five Boomers for every one “Greatest Generation” member.

    The thing is, the Boomers are starting to die in significant numbers. This is leading to a major political unwinding in the US, a political Bear Market for the voting electorate. The National parties we’ve had since 1968 might very well break back down to regional power blocks. It’ll be interesting to see what happens.

    For those Gen Xers, have hope, you’ll likely reach numerical parody with the Boomers by 2028 (no joke.)

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @dfordoom, @njguy73

    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella while those born after 1960 should be kicked to the curb and live a homeless lifestyle with Gen X.

    People born between 1935 and 1955 form a much more coherent group in terms of shared attitudes and culture than most of the absurdly artificial generational groups.

    And arguably the next vaguely coherent generational grouping would be those born between 1956 and 1975.

    • Replies: @Kronos
    @dfordoom

    Keep in mind the “Generation” factor is relatively weak especially compared to more crucial factors like race and socio/economic class. But in terms of sheer numbers, it’s really been Baby Boomers vs. everyone else in voting, consumer preferences, and synchronizing government policies to their life cycle.

    The Boomer political “cliche” really is the real deal regardless if it’s the local Rotary Club or the Bohemian Grove. If you were a college student in a certain place and time during the 1960s, that segment would rule their respective country for the next 60+ years typically unfettered.

    https://youtu.be/YCtcD9CfMOI

    Replies: @dfordoom

    , @Kronos
    @dfordoom

    Keep in mind the “Generation” factor is relatively weak especially compared to more crucial factors like race and socio/economic class. But in terms of sheer numbers, it’s really been Baby Boomers vs. everyone else in voting, consumer preferences, and synchronizing government policies to their life cycle.

    The Boomer political “cliche” really is the real deal regardless if it’s the local Rotary Club or the Bohemian Grove. If you were a college student in a certain place and time during the 1960s, that segment would rule their respective country for the next 60+ years typically unfettered.

    https://youtu.be/YCtcD9CfMOI

    , @Kronos
    @dfordoom

    Keep in mind the “Generation” factor is relatively weak especially compared to more crucial factors like race and socio/economic class. But in terms of sheer numbers, it’s really been Baby Boomers vs. everyone else in voting, consumer preferences, and synchronizing government policies to their life cycle.

    The Boomer political “cliche” really is the real deal regardless if it’s the local Rotary Club or the Bohemian Grove. If you were a college student in a certain place and time during the 1960s, that segment would rule their respective country for the next 60+ years typically unfettered.

    https://youtu.be/YCtcD9CfMOI

  38. I just realized that betting odds are better indicators vs polls.

    That is fuck up.

  39. @Ano4
    @AaronInMVD


    This feels like late soviet gerontocracy
     
    Exactly.

    The whole current situation in the US (may be the West in general) feels a lot like USSR just prior to the Perestroika.

    Although Soviet society was less polarized in 1985 than US society is today.

    Thirty years ago they had the world at their feet.

    Today they are the laughingstock of the whole world.

    That was a fast degradation.

    I am starting to think that Dmitry Orlov is possibly partially right in his assessment of US collapse happening soon.

    Replies: @Jaakko Raipala, @Vaterland

    Disagree. Current year America is much more similar to the Yeltsin era. An oligarchical (Jewish) mafia, both legal and illegal, are running the show, manipulating a buffoonish “president” and cutting insider deals enriching themselves while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness. Replace vodka epidemic with opioid epidemic. One of the good things the Putin years have achieved: to solve the drunken Ivan question. Jewish oligarchs like Millner and Berezovsky also controlled the media back then, while others were trying to introduce even more neoliberal capitalism.
    The oligarchs did NOT want the old communist guard to return to power for which there was a slim chance at the end of Yeltsin’s second term. Their favorite was the liberal party. Berezovsky introduced Putin as an attempt at controlled opposition into the game. Didn’t work out for him.

    Broke: Putin, the slavophile secular Zar, controls the oligarchs and anyone who doesn’t cut a deal to benefit the Russian people gets the Berezovsky or Chodorkovsky treatment. He is the greatest Russian right after Stalin!

    Woke: Putin’s system depends on the oligarchs and at best it is a system of mutually assured destruction, if it goes down.

    Cope: Russia went from a broken country where 19 of the 20 richest men were predatory Jewish oligarchs to an indeed somewhat recovered nation with a vastly more diversified income situation. How much of it is actually the achievement of Putin and friends is an entirely different matter and Russia would have been much better off, if it had followed the Konrad Adenauer-Ludwig Erhard route and had its own Wirtschaftswunder.

    The difference between post-Soviet Russia and current year America is that there was still a sense of Russianness and unity to fall back to. Imho post Stalin the SU was mostly transformed into Russian imperialism anyway. And there were the non corrupt and infiltrated elements of the Russian Orthodox Church. I remember a priest who really liked how revealing the Protocols of the learned Elder of Zion were and how they explain everything that is happening in the world right now. That basic sense of racio-cultural unity, or simply Americanness doesn’t exist in the USA anymore. Choose Brasil, South Africa or Czech-Slovak style peaceful separation as your future.

    There are some parallels between Soviet political correctness, where the state was sacrosanct, and US and UK PC, where multiculturalism is sacrosanct, and the role of the managerial class. And while Chernobyl exposed that this emperor had no clothes, US corona reaction, Epstein, Rotherham and Minnesota expose this other emperor as naked.

    But the huge, huge difference is that at the time the general believe in the Soviet Union as a political system itself was already rather low, especially in Eastern Europe and the GDR. Where many Americans are zealots about their anti-white believe system. The American Cultural Revolution is turning out as expected.

    • LOL: WHAT
    • Replies: @AP
    @Vaterland


    Current year America is much more similar to the Yeltsin era. An oligarchical (Jewish) mafia, both legal and illegal, are running the show, manipulating a buffoonish “president” and cutting insider deals enriching themselves while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness.
     
    This is even more ridiculous than some of the stuff written about Russia.

    Replies: @Vaterland

    , @Ano4
    @Vaterland


    And while Chernobyl exposed that this emperor had no clothes, US corona reaction, Epstein, Rotherham and Minnesota expose this other emperor as naked
     
    .

    Agree with that.

    When the whole coronapanic started it really felt like a Chernobyl moment in the West.
    , @WHAT
    @Vaterland

    If anything, Chernobyl demonstated prompt - if not always super-effective - response to the never before seen type of crisis. US at the Three Mile Island literally ran away, lol.

    You should stop watching HBO agitprop. And FtN bullshit, for that matter.

    Replies: @Vaterland

  40. @Kronos
    @40 Lashes Less One

    They actually coincide very well as Boomers.

    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella while those born after 1960 should be kicked to the curb and live a homeless lifestyle with Gen X.

    The War Babies were the Peter Pans of the 1960s leading the Boomers. Both Biden and Bernie are Boomer shamans and possess great respect amongst all those who worship/lived in the 1960s.

    https://youtu.be/5xmNaZqxNpI

    The Boomers (especially independents) are the biggest whoring electoral block in the US. Remember, by 1965 over half of the US population consisted of Boomers. That dramatically changed the Republican and Democratic Parties once they started to vote. There were five Boomers for every one “Greatest Generation” member.

    The thing is, the Boomers are starting to die in significant numbers. This is leading to a major political unwinding in the US, a political Bear Market for the voting electorate. The National parties we’ve had since 1968 might very well break back down to regional power blocks. It’ll be interesting to see what happens.

    For those Gen Xers, have hope, you’ll likely reach numerical parody with the Boomers by 2028 (no joke.)

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @dfordoom, @njguy73

    What separates a Boomer from a Silent is 1) not having childhood memories of WW2 and 2) being subject to Vietnam draft lottery.

    • Replies: @Kronos
    @njguy73

    The Silents were also a very tiny generation. The Great Depression induced a “Baby Bust” and the contemporary Welfare system wasn’t in place.

    https://www.stickershoppe.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/827-0329.jpg

    Gen X is tiny because the Boomers aborted 1/4 of their entire generation. Now we need mass immigration to sustain the Boomer’s Social Security benefits and such.

    https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/01/17/abortion-rate_wide-cbbca06f6cb3d95cd42ec98404d576aa6ab44ef7.png?s=1400

    Replies: @njguy73

    , @dfordoom
    @njguy73


    What separates a Boomer from a Silent is 1) not having childhood memories of WW2 and 2) being subject to Vietnam draft lottery.
     
    If the draft is what defines being a Boomer then given that the draft ended in 1973 anyone born after about 1955 cannot be a Boomer.

    Replies: @Kronos

  41. @brabantian
    4chan has an effective ongoing theme that millennials and zoomers voting for Biden, will have an edge in getting a sexy black girlfriend

    Note the lower right corner of the meme below, 'You cute, whiteboi!'

    https://i.ibb.co/8NVvb8G/ridin-w-biden-rwb-girls.jpg

    Replies: @Kent Nationalist, @Kronos

    Yeah, they’d need some good luck with that. I’d imagine trying to find a sexy black girlfriend that isn’t:

    1) Diabetic
    2) Non-Obese
    3) A Single-Mom
    4) Straight up Poor
    5) Racist as Hell

    a very difficult challenge. Who’d want to date a “Rasputa” that’ll crush your mind, body, and soul both mentally and physically. There is a good reason why Black men will choose any white girl over a black chick every time.

  42. @njguy73
    @Kronos

    What separates a Boomer from a Silent is 1) not having childhood memories of WW2 and 2) being subject to Vietnam draft lottery.

    Replies: @Kronos, @dfordoom

    The Silents were also a very tiny generation. The Great Depression induced a “Baby Bust” and the contemporary Welfare system wasn’t in place.

    Gen X is tiny because the Boomers aborted 1/4 of their entire generation. Now we need mass immigration to sustain the Boomer’s Social Security benefits and such.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @njguy73
    @Kronos

    You're mostly correct. The postwar baby boom peaked in 1957, followed by eleven straight years ('58-'68) of decline, the longest and steepest birthrate decline in US history, fueled by the Pill and nascent feminism. Roe v. Wade led to the second wave of low birth rate. For further information:

    www.babybusters.org

  43. @dfordoom
    @Kronos


    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella while those born after 1960 should be kicked to the curb and live a homeless lifestyle with Gen X.
     
    People born between 1935 and 1955 form a much more coherent group in terms of shared attitudes and culture than most of the absurdly artificial generational groups.

    And arguably the next vaguely coherent generational grouping would be those born between 1956 and 1975.

    Replies: @Kronos, @Kronos, @Kronos

    Keep in mind the “Generation” factor is relatively weak especially compared to more crucial factors like race and socio/economic class. But in terms of sheer numbers, it’s really been Baby Boomers vs. everyone else in voting, consumer preferences, and synchronizing government policies to their life cycle.

    The Boomer political “cliche” really is the real deal regardless if it’s the local Rotary Club or the Bohemian Grove. If you were a college student in a certain place and time during the 1960s, that segment would rule their respective country for the next 60+ years typically unfettered.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Kronos


    Keep in mind the “Generation” factor is relatively weak especially compared to more crucial factors like race and socio/economic class. But in terms of sheer numbers, it’s really been Baby Boomers vs. everyone else in voting, consumer preferences, and synchronizing government policies to their life cycle.
     
    I'd say that it's the 1935-1955 birth cohorts vs everyone else. Gen X begins in 1956.

    If you were born in 1956 or later you were not going to be sent to Vietnam and you do not remember JFK. You probably grew up (as I did) despising hippies. Woodstock made you cringe. Your drug of choice was speed, not marijuana or LSD. You couldn't stand the Beatles or acid rock. You were into glam rock, disco or punk. Your experience of young adulthood was that of an economy in ruins due to the Oil Crisis.

    These are the crucial cultural markers that distinguish Boomers from Gen X.

    Look at Steve Sailer. He's obsessed with The Clash, not the Beatles. He was born in 1958. He's Gen X.

    Replies: @AP, @njguy73

  44. @dfordoom
    @Kronos


    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella while those born after 1960 should be kicked to the curb and live a homeless lifestyle with Gen X.
     
    People born between 1935 and 1955 form a much more coherent group in terms of shared attitudes and culture than most of the absurdly artificial generational groups.

    And arguably the next vaguely coherent generational grouping would be those born between 1956 and 1975.

    Replies: @Kronos, @Kronos, @Kronos

    Keep in mind the “Generation” factor is relatively weak especially compared to more crucial factors like race and socio/economic class. But in terms of sheer numbers, it’s really been Baby Boomers vs. everyone else in voting, consumer preferences, and synchronizing government policies to their life cycle.

    The Boomer political “cliche” really is the real deal regardless if it’s the local Rotary Club or the Bohemian Grove. If you were a college student in a certain place and time during the 1960s, that segment would rule their respective country for the next 60+ years typically unfettered.

  45. @Kronos
    @njguy73

    The Silents were also a very tiny generation. The Great Depression induced a “Baby Bust” and the contemporary Welfare system wasn’t in place.

    https://www.stickershoppe.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/827-0329.jpg

    Gen X is tiny because the Boomers aborted 1/4 of their entire generation. Now we need mass immigration to sustain the Boomer’s Social Security benefits and such.

    https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2017/01/17/abortion-rate_wide-cbbca06f6cb3d95cd42ec98404d576aa6ab44ef7.png?s=1400

    Replies: @njguy73

    You’re mostly correct. The postwar baby boom peaked in 1957, followed by eleven straight years (’58-’68) of decline, the longest and steepest birthrate decline in US history, fueled by the Pill and nascent feminism. Roe v. Wade led to the second wave of low birth rate. For further information:

    http://www.babybusters.org

  46. @njguy73
    @Kronos

    What separates a Boomer from a Silent is 1) not having childhood memories of WW2 and 2) being subject to Vietnam draft lottery.

    Replies: @Kronos, @dfordoom

    What separates a Boomer from a Silent is 1) not having childhood memories of WW2 and 2) being subject to Vietnam draft lottery.

    If the draft is what defines being a Boomer then given that the draft ended in 1973 anyone born after about 1955 cannot be a Boomer.

    • Replies: @Kronos
    @dfordoom

    Also, what about those who willingly enlisted in the armed services? You had many young, middle age, and old farts (generals, etc) stationed in Vietnam.

  47. @dfordoom
    @Kronos


    The “War Babies” (1940-1945) should be merged under the Boomer umbrella while those born after 1960 should be kicked to the curb and live a homeless lifestyle with Gen X.
     
    People born between 1935 and 1955 form a much more coherent group in terms of shared attitudes and culture than most of the absurdly artificial generational groups.

    And arguably the next vaguely coherent generational grouping would be those born between 1956 and 1975.

    Replies: @Kronos, @Kronos, @Kronos

    Keep in mind the “Generation” factor is relatively weak especially compared to more crucial factors like race and socio/economic class. But in terms of sheer numbers, it’s really been Baby Boomers vs. everyone else in voting, consumer preferences, and synchronizing government policies to their life cycle.

    The Boomer political “cliche” really is the real deal regardless if it’s the local Rotary Club or the Bohemian Grove. If you were a college student in a certain place and time during the 1960s, that segment would rule their respective country for the next 60+ years typically unfettered.

  48. @Kronos
    @dfordoom

    Keep in mind the “Generation” factor is relatively weak especially compared to more crucial factors like race and socio/economic class. But in terms of sheer numbers, it’s really been Baby Boomers vs. everyone else in voting, consumer preferences, and synchronizing government policies to their life cycle.

    The Boomer political “cliche” really is the real deal regardless if it’s the local Rotary Club or the Bohemian Grove. If you were a college student in a certain place and time during the 1960s, that segment would rule their respective country for the next 60+ years typically unfettered.

    https://youtu.be/YCtcD9CfMOI

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Keep in mind the “Generation” factor is relatively weak especially compared to more crucial factors like race and socio/economic class. But in terms of sheer numbers, it’s really been Baby Boomers vs. everyone else in voting, consumer preferences, and synchronizing government policies to their life cycle.

    I’d say that it’s the 1935-1955 birth cohorts vs everyone else. Gen X begins in 1956.

    If you were born in 1956 or later you were not going to be sent to Vietnam and you do not remember JFK. You probably grew up (as I did) despising hippies. Woodstock made you cringe. Your drug of choice was speed, not marijuana or LSD. You couldn’t stand the Beatles or acid rock. You were into glam rock, disco or punk. Your experience of young adulthood was that of an economy in ruins due to the Oil Crisis.

    These are the crucial cultural markers that distinguish Boomers from Gen X.

    Look at Steve Sailer. He’s obsessed with The Clash, not the Beatles. He was born in 1958. He’s Gen X.

    • Replies: @AP
    @dfordoom

    Generally agree but it's a bit strange for someone born in 1958 to care about punk music. The Clash didn't become known in the USA until around 1980, so Sailer would have been over 20. Discovering brand new musical forms like that is usually a teen thing. He should be a late Boomer into Led Zeppelin or whatever. So he is atypical.

    Early 60s, that's another matter. I'd put the cutoff when people stopped being Boomers at 1960.

    Replies: @Ano4

    , @njguy73
    @dfordoom

    Generations have two waves.

    Silent: Organization Man 1925-1933, War Babies 1934-1942

    Boomers: Woodstock Wave 1943-1952, Disco/Punk Wave 1953-1960

    Gen X: Atari Wave 1961-1971, Nintendo Wave 1972-1981

    The first wave is a turn away from their elders, the second a turn towards their juniors.

    The dates are estimates. Your mileage may vary.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  49. AP says:
    @Vaterland
    @Ano4

    Disagree. Current year America is much more similar to the Yeltsin era. An oligarchical (Jewish) mafia, both legal and illegal, are running the show, manipulating a buffoonish "president" and cutting insider deals enriching themselves while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness. Replace vodka epidemic with opioid epidemic. One of the good things the Putin years have achieved: to solve the drunken Ivan question. Jewish oligarchs like Millner and Berezovsky also controlled the media back then, while others were trying to introduce even more neoliberal capitalism.
    The oligarchs did NOT want the old communist guard to return to power for which there was a slim chance at the end of Yeltsin's second term. Their favorite was the liberal party. Berezovsky introduced Putin as an attempt at controlled opposition into the game. Didn't work out for him.

    Broke: Putin, the slavophile secular Zar, controls the oligarchs and anyone who doesn't cut a deal to benefit the Russian people gets the Berezovsky or Chodorkovsky treatment. He is the greatest Russian right after Stalin!

    Woke: Putin's system depends on the oligarchs and at best it is a system of mutually assured destruction, if it goes down.

    Cope: Russia went from a broken country where 19 of the 20 richest men were predatory Jewish oligarchs to an indeed somewhat recovered nation with a vastly more diversified income situation. How much of it is actually the achievement of Putin and friends is an entirely different matter and Russia would have been much better off, if it had followed the Konrad Adenauer-Ludwig Erhard route and had its own Wirtschaftswunder.

    The difference between post-Soviet Russia and current year America is that there was still a sense of Russianness and unity to fall back to. Imho post Stalin the SU was mostly transformed into Russian imperialism anyway. And there were the non corrupt and infiltrated elements of the Russian Orthodox Church. I remember a priest who really liked how revealing the Protocols of the learned Elder of Zion were and how they explain everything that is happening in the world right now. That basic sense of racio-cultural unity, or simply Americanness doesn't exist in the USA anymore. Choose Brasil, South Africa or Czech-Slovak style peaceful separation as your future.

    There are some parallels between Soviet political correctness, where the state was sacrosanct, and US and UK PC, where multiculturalism is sacrosanct, and the role of the managerial class. And while Chernobyl exposed that this emperor had no clothes, US corona reaction, Epstein, Rotherham and Minnesota expose this other emperor as naked.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kigV0WNaLBk

    But the huge, huge difference is that at the time the general believe in the Soviet Union as a political system itself was already rather low, especially in Eastern Europe and the GDR. Where many Americans are zealots about their anti-white believe system. The American Cultural Revolution is turning out as expected.

    Replies: @AP, @Ano4, @WHAT

    Current year America is much more similar to the Yeltsin era. An oligarchical (Jewish) mafia, both legal and illegal, are running the show, manipulating a buffoonish “president” and cutting insider deals enriching themselves while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness.

    This is even more ridiculous than some of the stuff written about Russia.

    • Replies: @Vaterland
    @AP

    Income disparity in the USA is higher than anywhere else in the so called Western world, especially including its predatory elites. Most Americans have less than 500$ in savings and were living paycheck to paycheck long before the great increase in unemployment due to the pandemic. Add relative poverty, if you want. And the current race riots are a glaring example of its state of lawlessness, as are the cases of Epstein and US assassinations.

    Replies: @AP

  50. AP says:
    @dfordoom
    @Kronos


    Keep in mind the “Generation” factor is relatively weak especially compared to more crucial factors like race and socio/economic class. But in terms of sheer numbers, it’s really been Baby Boomers vs. everyone else in voting, consumer preferences, and synchronizing government policies to their life cycle.
     
    I'd say that it's the 1935-1955 birth cohorts vs everyone else. Gen X begins in 1956.

    If you were born in 1956 or later you were not going to be sent to Vietnam and you do not remember JFK. You probably grew up (as I did) despising hippies. Woodstock made you cringe. Your drug of choice was speed, not marijuana or LSD. You couldn't stand the Beatles or acid rock. You were into glam rock, disco or punk. Your experience of young adulthood was that of an economy in ruins due to the Oil Crisis.

    These are the crucial cultural markers that distinguish Boomers from Gen X.

    Look at Steve Sailer. He's obsessed with The Clash, not the Beatles. He was born in 1958. He's Gen X.

    Replies: @AP, @njguy73

    Generally agree but it’s a bit strange for someone born in 1958 to care about punk music. The Clash didn’t become known in the USA until around 1980, so Sailer would have been over 20. Discovering brand new musical forms like that is usually a teen thing. He should be a late Boomer into Led Zeppelin or whatever. So he is atypical.

    Early 60s, that’s another matter. I’d put the cutoff when people stopped being Boomers at 1960.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @AP


    Generally agree but it’s a bit strange for someone born in 1958 to care about punk music
     
    Punk rock actually started in US around 1975.

    Those born in 1958 were exactly in the right age group when it all started.

    Replies: @AP, @dfordoom

  51. @AP
    @dfordoom

    Generally agree but it's a bit strange for someone born in 1958 to care about punk music. The Clash didn't become known in the USA until around 1980, so Sailer would have been over 20. Discovering brand new musical forms like that is usually a teen thing. He should be a late Boomer into Led Zeppelin or whatever. So he is atypical.

    Early 60s, that's another matter. I'd put the cutoff when people stopped being Boomers at 1960.

    Replies: @Ano4

    Generally agree but it’s a bit strange for someone born in 1958 to care about punk music

    Punk rock actually started in US around 1975.

    Those born in 1958 were exactly in the right age group when it all started.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Ano4


    Punk rock actually started in US around 1975.
     
    Well, technically yes in some clubs in New York but it was pretty marginal and unheard of until the late 70s when someone born in 1958 would be around 20 years old. I doubt many kids in 1975 were listening to punk music.

    1975 music was late Boomer music: Elton John, Led Zeppelin, Bob Dylan, Eagles, disco:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_200_number-one_albums_of_1975

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_Hot_100_number-one_singles_of_1975

    But in 1979, for the first time, Blondie and Michael Jackson have made their appearance:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_Hot_100_number-one_singles_of_1979

    :::::::::::

    Generally speaking, in terms of popular music people listen to the music made by those born of the previous generation or the oldest ones from their own. Boomers listened to music made by the War generation (Paul McCartney, Bob Dylan, Mick Jagger born in the early 1940s; Elton John, Robert Plant, Freddie Mercury were born in the mid to late 40s so they were the earliest of the Boomers).

    Gen X preferred popular musicians who were Boomers: the punks and post-punks were born in the mid to late 1950s, as was Michael Jackson, Prince, and Madonna (all three of these were born in 1958) and then you have the earliest of the Gen Xers also (Axl Rose born in 1962, Metallica singer James Hetfield 1963, Eddie Vedder 1964, Kurt Cobain and early techno pioneers were born in the mid 60s).

    Millenials listened to music made by Gen X people: Blink-182 and Weezer (born early 1970s), Spice Girls (born mid 1970s), Fall Out Boy (singer born 1979) and Britney Spears (born 1981), etc.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @martin_2

    , @dfordoom
    @Ano4


    Punk rock actually started in US around 1975.

    Those born in 1958 were exactly in the right age group when it all started.
     
    Television, The Ramones and Blondie were all performing in New York City as early as 1974.

    And Sailer strikes me as the kind of guy who probably got into that kind of music very early on, before it became mainstream. I'm sure he was aware of The Clash long before 1980.

    I was born in '57 and I was heavily into punk (which started in Australia around 1975-76 with Radio Birdman and The Saints). And I was listening to Patti Smith (very much proto-punk) in 1975.

    Anyone who was into punk was consciously rejecting the music of the previous generation, in other words consciously rejecting the music of the Boomers. In fact rejecting everything that the Boomers stood for.

    Replies: @martin_2

  52. @dfordoom
    @Kronos


    Keep in mind the “Generation” factor is relatively weak especially compared to more crucial factors like race and socio/economic class. But in terms of sheer numbers, it’s really been Baby Boomers vs. everyone else in voting, consumer preferences, and synchronizing government policies to their life cycle.
     
    I'd say that it's the 1935-1955 birth cohorts vs everyone else. Gen X begins in 1956.

    If you were born in 1956 or later you were not going to be sent to Vietnam and you do not remember JFK. You probably grew up (as I did) despising hippies. Woodstock made you cringe. Your drug of choice was speed, not marijuana or LSD. You couldn't stand the Beatles or acid rock. You were into glam rock, disco or punk. Your experience of young adulthood was that of an economy in ruins due to the Oil Crisis.

    These are the crucial cultural markers that distinguish Boomers from Gen X.

    Look at Steve Sailer. He's obsessed with The Clash, not the Beatles. He was born in 1958. He's Gen X.

    Replies: @AP, @njguy73

    Generations have two waves.

    Silent: Organization Man 1925-1933, War Babies 1934-1942

    Boomers: Woodstock Wave 1943-1952, Disco/Punk Wave 1953-1960

    Gen X: Atari Wave 1961-1971, Nintendo Wave 1972-1981

    The first wave is a turn away from their elders, the second a turn towards their juniors.

    The dates are estimates. Your mileage may vary.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @njguy73


    Generations have two waves.

    Silent: Organization Man 1925-1933, War Babies 1934-1942

    Boomers: Woodstock Wave 1943-1952, Disco/Punk Wave 1953-1960

    Gen X: Atari Wave 1961-1971, Nintendo Wave 1972-1981

    The first wave is a turn away from their elders, the second a turn towards their juniors.

    The dates are estimates. Your mileage may vary.
     
    That certainly makes more sense than most of the conventional ideas about the generations.

    My only quibble with it would be that I'd put the beginning of the Woodstock Wave earlier than 1943. Probably 1939.
  53. White Americans are more invested in the “melting pot” nonsense that most Europeans are. Even most Trump voters believe that blacks will turn into peaceful, law abiding citizens if only someone would give them “good jerbs”.

    Americans are always trying to justify or shift blame for black violence, a popular one on the right is blaming the Democrat Party, ie black cities are violent war zones because they’re run by Democrats, not because they’re full of blacks.

    I think most Europeans are more quietly racially aware and understand that blacks, etc, are just different to them, whereas most white Americans are deeply attached to the “we’re all the same”, melting pot nonsense.

  54. AP says:
    @Ano4
    @AP


    Generally agree but it’s a bit strange for someone born in 1958 to care about punk music
     
    Punk rock actually started in US around 1975.

    Those born in 1958 were exactly in the right age group when it all started.

    Replies: @AP, @dfordoom

    Punk rock actually started in US around 1975.

    Well, technically yes in some clubs in New York but it was pretty marginal and unheard of until the late 70s when someone born in 1958 would be around 20 years old. I doubt many kids in 1975 were listening to punk music.

    1975 music was late Boomer music: Elton John, Led Zeppelin, Bob Dylan, Eagles, disco:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_200_number-one_albums_of_1975

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_Hot_100_number-one_singles_of_1975

    But in 1979, for the first time, Blondie and Michael Jackson have made their appearance:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_Hot_100_number-one_singles_of_1979

    :::::::::::

    Generally speaking, in terms of popular music people listen to the music made by those born of the previous generation or the oldest ones from their own. Boomers listened to music made by the War generation (Paul McCartney, Bob Dylan, Mick Jagger born in the early 1940s; Elton John, Robert Plant, Freddie Mercury were born in the mid to late 40s so they were the earliest of the Boomers).

    Gen X preferred popular musicians who were Boomers: the punks and post-punks were born in the mid to late 1950s, as was Michael Jackson, Prince, and Madonna (all three of these were born in 1958) and then you have the earliest of the Gen Xers also (Axl Rose born in 1962, Metallica singer James Hetfield 1963, Eddie Vedder 1964, Kurt Cobain and early techno pioneers were born in the mid 60s).

    Millenials listened to music made by Gen X people: Blink-182 and Weezer (born early 1970s), Spice Girls (born mid 1970s), Fall Out Boy (singer born 1979) and Britney Spears (born 1981), etc.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @AP

    Somehow magically, I recently got interested in "club music" of the 2000's and started listening to DJ' productions like "Dimitri from Paris"and "Cassius". Some of this stuff is boring, recycled rap music, but some of it is passable and bright if not delightful disco ear candy. If you're familiar with this genre of music and could recommend anybody, I'd be grateful. (I was listening to Cirque du Soleil stuff yesterday too - way too much time on my hands these days!). :-)

    Replies: @AP

    , @martin_2
    @AP

    Punk was definitely later than 1975. I remember well the Sex Pistols creating headlines owing to their offensive demeanour and lyrics in 1977.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XGe_hncsiM

    And Punk fashion hitting the High Street was later still. I remember seeing a girl with spiky hair, for the first time, in 1982.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  55. @AP
    @Vaterland


    Current year America is much more similar to the Yeltsin era. An oligarchical (Jewish) mafia, both legal and illegal, are running the show, manipulating a buffoonish “president” and cutting insider deals enriching themselves while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness.
     
    This is even more ridiculous than some of the stuff written about Russia.

    Replies: @Vaterland

    Income disparity in the USA is higher than anywhere else in the so called Western world, especially including its predatory elites. Most Americans have less than 500$ in savings and were living paycheck to paycheck long before the great increase in unemployment due to the pandemic. Add relative poverty, if you want. And the current race riots are a glaring example of its state of lawlessness, as are the cases of Epstein and US assassinations.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Vaterland


    Income disparity in the USA is higher than anywhere else in the so called Western world
     
    Sure, which means that the poor lumpen minorities aren't doing well but the middle class and above are richer than average Europeans.

    If you are a lifetime cashier at a gas station who hasn't completed secondary school, or completely unemployed, you are certainly better off in Western Europe. For such people Western Europe really is the place to be. Everyone above that has a higher income in the USA.

    So the median (not mean) personal income in the USA is $35,600; in Germany it is $27,569:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income#Median_equivalent_adult_income

    For an American who has at least a 4 year university degree it is $61,400.

    You can google comparative salaries of various professions. So electrical engineer: $75,000 USA. $55,140 Germany:

    https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Electrical_Engineer/Salary

    https://www.payscale.com/research/DE/Job=Electrical_Engineer/Salary

    From the same website, secretary: $33,375 USA vs. $27,980 Germany.

    Pharmacist: $114,000 USA; $43,328 Germany (!).

    Remember that you wrote about America: "while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness."

    Of course Western Europe has real advantages over the USA such as much longer vacations. But relative lack of poverty isn't one of them.


    Most Americans have less than 500$ in savings and were living paycheck to paycheck long
     
    Because they like to buy a lot of stuff. It's a personal choice, not "poverty." There are nurses where I work who drive new BMWs and Audis but have little to no savings. Lacking savings is not proof of poverty, but of non forward thinking.

    And the current race riots are a glaring example of its state of lawlessness
     
    These are limited to a handful of ghettos in a vast country. The overwhelming majority of Americans don't see them, except on TV.

    as are the cases of Epstein and US assassinations.
     
    Non-issues in anyone's life. Russians killed some Chechen-Georgian in Berlin. Does this mean Germans are subject to killings by Russians and experience lawlessness? Of course not.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Vaterland

  56. …white Americans are deeply attached to the “we’re all the same”, melting pot nonsense

    What choice do they have? People’s views reflect their circumstances, white Americans cannot at this point change the numbers, or correct the fatal mistakes of the past. Who thought that importing millions of slaves from Africa was a great idea? Who followed up in the late 20th century by basically opening up America to all of the Third World?

    Yeah, it was the celebrated ‘entrepreneurs‘. First tobacco, then cotton, later it occurred to them that really any work can be done cheaper if the supply is unlimited. All else are simply consequences – if the ruling idea is that business is more important than anything else, the cheap labor dynamic is inevitable.

    Europe is a generation or two behind, but the same mentality has been imported and the results will be the same. It is a choice: a lasting society or businessmen with a right to an ever cheaper labor. Until people face up to it and stop sacrificing their long-term interests for the business-uber-alles American ideology, there will be no solution.

  57. AP says:
    @Vaterland
    @AP

    Income disparity in the USA is higher than anywhere else in the so called Western world, especially including its predatory elites. Most Americans have less than 500$ in savings and were living paycheck to paycheck long before the great increase in unemployment due to the pandemic. Add relative poverty, if you want. And the current race riots are a glaring example of its state of lawlessness, as are the cases of Epstein and US assassinations.

    Replies: @AP

    Income disparity in the USA is higher than anywhere else in the so called Western world

    Sure, which means that the poor lumpen minorities aren’t doing well but the middle class and above are richer than average Europeans.

    If you are a lifetime cashier at a gas station who hasn’t completed secondary school, or completely unemployed, you are certainly better off in Western Europe. For such people Western Europe really is the place to be. Everyone above that has a higher income in the USA.

    So the median (not mean) personal income in the USA is $35,600; in Germany it is $27,569:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income#Median_equivalent_adult_income

    For an American who has at least a 4 year university degree it is $61,400.

    You can google comparative salaries of various professions. So electrical engineer: $75,000 USA. $55,140 Germany:

    https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Electrical_Engineer/Salary

    https://www.payscale.com/research/DE/Job=Electrical_Engineer/Salary

    From the same website, secretary: $33,375 USA vs. $27,980 Germany.

    Pharmacist: $114,000 USA; $43,328 Germany (!).

    Remember that you wrote about America: “while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness.”

    Of course Western Europe has real advantages over the USA such as much longer vacations. But relative lack of poverty isn’t one of them.

    Most Americans have less than 500$ in savings and were living paycheck to paycheck long

    Because they like to buy a lot of stuff. It’s a personal choice, not “poverty.” There are nurses where I work who drive new BMWs and Audis but have little to no savings. Lacking savings is not proof of poverty, but of non forward thinking.

    And the current race riots are a glaring example of its state of lawlessness

    These are limited to a handful of ghettos in a vast country. The overwhelming majority of Americans don’t see them, except on TV.

    as are the cases of Epstein and US assassinations.

    Non-issues in anyone’s life. Russians killed some Chechen-Georgian in Berlin. Does this mean Germans are subject to killings by Russians and experience lawlessness? Of course not.

    • Agree: Rattus Norwegius
    • Replies: @Ano4
    @AP


    These are limited to a handful of ghettos in a vast country. The overwhelming majority of Americans don’t see them, except on TV.
     
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZQ979rXgAAUu74?format=jpg&

    Looks like widespread social unrest to me and it's actually not race riots at all.

    The crowd is multiracial everywhere.

    Replies: @AP

    , @Vaterland
    @AP

    I know about that, and the spending, credit card and debt culture in the USA is indeed often ignored when the lack of US savings is mentioned. However the higher US salaries also become less impressive, if you consider the equally higher living costs, rent and especially health-care. This is of course an issue everywhere, but relatively more so in the USA, I think. And comparing anything in the health sector is not a good example, because it is in general much higher paid in the USA than in Germany and Western Europe. Which is again reflected in higher health care costs. And at the same time reacted much worse to the Corona virus than ours. I concede that wealth concentration is probably the better term than poverty.

    And you can damage control Epstein, if you think of it as some distant murder that has nothing to do with you, but in reality it reflects the nature of your government. If Jewish supremacists run child sex rings to black mail your politicians, if they don't outright assassinate them as Mossad did to JFK, then what is that, if not total lawlessness? And the assassination of Soleimani equally exposed what the same deep state thinks of international law.

    Same for the race riots. They highlight the underlying reality of black crime and anti-white media and ideology in your country. The later exported to Europe through our universities and cultural Americanization. And is Minnesota a ghetto?

    So yes, a political mafia controlled and basically owned by oligarchs is better compared to the Yeltsin era. And obviously the day-to-day reality in the current world hegemon is drastically different than in Russia right after the collapse of the Soviet Union. When it comes to the nature of these governments though? Not so much.

    Replies: @Vaterland, @AP

  58. @Vaterland
    @Ano4

    Disagree. Current year America is much more similar to the Yeltsin era. An oligarchical (Jewish) mafia, both legal and illegal, are running the show, manipulating a buffoonish "president" and cutting insider deals enriching themselves while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness. Replace vodka epidemic with opioid epidemic. One of the good things the Putin years have achieved: to solve the drunken Ivan question. Jewish oligarchs like Millner and Berezovsky also controlled the media back then, while others were trying to introduce even more neoliberal capitalism.
    The oligarchs did NOT want the old communist guard to return to power for which there was a slim chance at the end of Yeltsin's second term. Their favorite was the liberal party. Berezovsky introduced Putin as an attempt at controlled opposition into the game. Didn't work out for him.

    Broke: Putin, the slavophile secular Zar, controls the oligarchs and anyone who doesn't cut a deal to benefit the Russian people gets the Berezovsky or Chodorkovsky treatment. He is the greatest Russian right after Stalin!

    Woke: Putin's system depends on the oligarchs and at best it is a system of mutually assured destruction, if it goes down.

    Cope: Russia went from a broken country where 19 of the 20 richest men were predatory Jewish oligarchs to an indeed somewhat recovered nation with a vastly more diversified income situation. How much of it is actually the achievement of Putin and friends is an entirely different matter and Russia would have been much better off, if it had followed the Konrad Adenauer-Ludwig Erhard route and had its own Wirtschaftswunder.

    The difference between post-Soviet Russia and current year America is that there was still a sense of Russianness and unity to fall back to. Imho post Stalin the SU was mostly transformed into Russian imperialism anyway. And there were the non corrupt and infiltrated elements of the Russian Orthodox Church. I remember a priest who really liked how revealing the Protocols of the learned Elder of Zion were and how they explain everything that is happening in the world right now. That basic sense of racio-cultural unity, or simply Americanness doesn't exist in the USA anymore. Choose Brasil, South Africa or Czech-Slovak style peaceful separation as your future.

    There are some parallels between Soviet political correctness, where the state was sacrosanct, and US and UK PC, where multiculturalism is sacrosanct, and the role of the managerial class. And while Chernobyl exposed that this emperor had no clothes, US corona reaction, Epstein, Rotherham and Minnesota expose this other emperor as naked.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kigV0WNaLBk

    But the huge, huge difference is that at the time the general believe in the Soviet Union as a political system itself was already rather low, especially in Eastern Europe and the GDR. Where many Americans are zealots about their anti-white believe system. The American Cultural Revolution is turning out as expected.

    Replies: @AP, @Ano4, @WHAT

    And while Chernobyl exposed that this emperor had no clothes, US corona reaction, Epstein, Rotherham and Minnesota expose this other emperor as naked

    .

    Agree with that.

    When the whole coronapanic started it really felt like a Chernobyl moment in the West.

  59. Ano4 says:
    @AP
    @Vaterland


    Income disparity in the USA is higher than anywhere else in the so called Western world
     
    Sure, which means that the poor lumpen minorities aren't doing well but the middle class and above are richer than average Europeans.

    If you are a lifetime cashier at a gas station who hasn't completed secondary school, or completely unemployed, you are certainly better off in Western Europe. For such people Western Europe really is the place to be. Everyone above that has a higher income in the USA.

    So the median (not mean) personal income in the USA is $35,600; in Germany it is $27,569:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income#Median_equivalent_adult_income

    For an American who has at least a 4 year university degree it is $61,400.

    You can google comparative salaries of various professions. So electrical engineer: $75,000 USA. $55,140 Germany:

    https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Electrical_Engineer/Salary

    https://www.payscale.com/research/DE/Job=Electrical_Engineer/Salary

    From the same website, secretary: $33,375 USA vs. $27,980 Germany.

    Pharmacist: $114,000 USA; $43,328 Germany (!).

    Remember that you wrote about America: "while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness."

    Of course Western Europe has real advantages over the USA such as much longer vacations. But relative lack of poverty isn't one of them.


    Most Americans have less than 500$ in savings and were living paycheck to paycheck long
     
    Because they like to buy a lot of stuff. It's a personal choice, not "poverty." There are nurses where I work who drive new BMWs and Audis but have little to no savings. Lacking savings is not proof of poverty, but of non forward thinking.

    And the current race riots are a glaring example of its state of lawlessness
     
    These are limited to a handful of ghettos in a vast country. The overwhelming majority of Americans don't see them, except on TV.

    as are the cases of Epstein and US assassinations.
     
    Non-issues in anyone's life. Russians killed some Chechen-Georgian in Berlin. Does this mean Germans are subject to killings by Russians and experience lawlessness? Of course not.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Vaterland

    These are limited to a handful of ghettos in a vast country. The overwhelming majority of Americans don’t see them, except on TV.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZQ979rXgAAUu74?format=jpg&

    Looks like widespread social unrest to me and it’s actually not race riots at all.

    The crowd is multiracial everywhere.

    • Replies: @AP
    @Ano4

    I was discussing the looting/riots.

    Even the protests are mostly small in scale and scattered. So New York (metro population 18 million including suburbs) had 3,000 protesters and 200 arrests in some specific areas:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/30/nyregion/nyc-protests-george-floyd.html

    Relative to New York, even the pathetic recent Navalny protests in Moscow were much more substantial. Most people here would laugh if it were claimed that Moscow or Russia was overcome with anti-government unrest.

    Boston (metro area 4.8 million) had a few hundred protesters.

    Columbus Ohio (metro area population 2 million) had 400 protesters/rioters, limited to a few blocks downtown:

    https://apnews.com/a988344637cf0145000f61a0a55abf77

    If you aren't in those few blocks you see and hear nothing.

    It's a few small pinpoints in a vast country.

  60. @AP
    @Ano4


    Punk rock actually started in US around 1975.
     
    Well, technically yes in some clubs in New York but it was pretty marginal and unheard of until the late 70s when someone born in 1958 would be around 20 years old. I doubt many kids in 1975 were listening to punk music.

    1975 music was late Boomer music: Elton John, Led Zeppelin, Bob Dylan, Eagles, disco:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_200_number-one_albums_of_1975

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_Hot_100_number-one_singles_of_1975

    But in 1979, for the first time, Blondie and Michael Jackson have made their appearance:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_Hot_100_number-one_singles_of_1979

    :::::::::::

    Generally speaking, in terms of popular music people listen to the music made by those born of the previous generation or the oldest ones from their own. Boomers listened to music made by the War generation (Paul McCartney, Bob Dylan, Mick Jagger born in the early 1940s; Elton John, Robert Plant, Freddie Mercury were born in the mid to late 40s so they were the earliest of the Boomers).

    Gen X preferred popular musicians who were Boomers: the punks and post-punks were born in the mid to late 1950s, as was Michael Jackson, Prince, and Madonna (all three of these were born in 1958) and then you have the earliest of the Gen Xers also (Axl Rose born in 1962, Metallica singer James Hetfield 1963, Eddie Vedder 1964, Kurt Cobain and early techno pioneers were born in the mid 60s).

    Millenials listened to music made by Gen X people: Blink-182 and Weezer (born early 1970s), Spice Girls (born mid 1970s), Fall Out Boy (singer born 1979) and Britney Spears (born 1981), etc.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @martin_2

    Somehow magically, I recently got interested in “club music” of the 2000’s and started listening to DJ’ productions like “Dimitri from Paris”and “Cassius”. Some of this stuff is boring, recycled rap music, but some of it is passable and bright if not delightful disco ear candy. If you’re familiar with this genre of music and could recommend anybody, I’d be grateful. (I was listening to Cirque du Soleil stuff yesterday too – way too much time on my hands these days!). 🙂

    • Replies: @AP
    @Mr. Hack

    If you like Baroque music you maybe would appreciate German trance music from the 90s; if you like black music such as gospel you would maybe like classic Detroit techno which is older.

    Here is Inner City from Detroit:



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ap48v1JXs7k

    Sven Vath from Frankfurt:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyEQMF5Gsqw

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

  61. @Ano4
    @AP


    Generally agree but it’s a bit strange for someone born in 1958 to care about punk music
     
    Punk rock actually started in US around 1975.

    Those born in 1958 were exactly in the right age group when it all started.

    Replies: @AP, @dfordoom

    Punk rock actually started in US around 1975.

    Those born in 1958 were exactly in the right age group when it all started.

    Television, The Ramones and Blondie were all performing in New York City as early as 1974.

    And Sailer strikes me as the kind of guy who probably got into that kind of music very early on, before it became mainstream. I’m sure he was aware of The Clash long before 1980.

    I was born in ’57 and I was heavily into punk (which started in Australia around 1975-76 with Radio Birdman and The Saints). And I was listening to Patti Smith (very much proto-punk) in 1975.

    Anyone who was into punk was consciously rejecting the music of the previous generation, in other words consciously rejecting the music of the Boomers. In fact rejecting everything that the Boomers stood for.

    • Replies: @martin_2
    @dfordoom

    Many of the groups before the Punk movement - they preferred to be called bands - which makes my point, were incredibly pretentious and took themselves far too seriously. If you can bear it, read the lyrics of "Stairway To Heaven" and you'll see what I mean. I think that Punk Rock was a reaction to the pomposity of Rock Rock.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  62. @njguy73
    @dfordoom

    Generations have two waves.

    Silent: Organization Man 1925-1933, War Babies 1934-1942

    Boomers: Woodstock Wave 1943-1952, Disco/Punk Wave 1953-1960

    Gen X: Atari Wave 1961-1971, Nintendo Wave 1972-1981

    The first wave is a turn away from their elders, the second a turn towards their juniors.

    The dates are estimates. Your mileage may vary.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Generations have two waves.

    Silent: Organization Man 1925-1933, War Babies 1934-1942

    Boomers: Woodstock Wave 1943-1952, Disco/Punk Wave 1953-1960

    Gen X: Atari Wave 1961-1971, Nintendo Wave 1972-1981

    The first wave is a turn away from their elders, the second a turn towards their juniors.

    The dates are estimates. Your mileage may vary.

    That certainly makes more sense than most of the conventional ideas about the generations.

    My only quibble with it would be that I’d put the beginning of the Woodstock Wave earlier than 1943. Probably 1939.

  63. AP says:
    @Ano4
    @AP


    These are limited to a handful of ghettos in a vast country. The overwhelming majority of Americans don’t see them, except on TV.
     
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZQ979rXgAAUu74?format=jpg&

    Looks like widespread social unrest to me and it's actually not race riots at all.

    The crowd is multiracial everywhere.

    Replies: @AP

    I was discussing the looting/riots.

    Even the protests are mostly small in scale and scattered. So New York (metro population 18 million including suburbs) had 3,000 protesters and 200 arrests in some specific areas:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/30/nyregion/nyc-protests-george-floyd.html

    Relative to New York, even the pathetic recent Navalny protests in Moscow were much more substantial. Most people here would laugh if it were claimed that Moscow or Russia was overcome with anti-government unrest.

    Boston (metro area 4.8 million) had a few hundred protesters.

    Columbus Ohio (metro area population 2 million) had 400 protesters/rioters, limited to a few blocks downtown:

    https://apnews.com/a988344637cf0145000f61a0a55abf77

    If you aren’t in those few blocks you see and hear nothing.

    It’s a few small pinpoints in a vast country.

  64. @AP
    @Vaterland


    Income disparity in the USA is higher than anywhere else in the so called Western world
     
    Sure, which means that the poor lumpen minorities aren't doing well but the middle class and above are richer than average Europeans.

    If you are a lifetime cashier at a gas station who hasn't completed secondary school, or completely unemployed, you are certainly better off in Western Europe. For such people Western Europe really is the place to be. Everyone above that has a higher income in the USA.

    So the median (not mean) personal income in the USA is $35,600; in Germany it is $27,569:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income#Median_equivalent_adult_income

    For an American who has at least a 4 year university degree it is $61,400.

    You can google comparative salaries of various professions. So electrical engineer: $75,000 USA. $55,140 Germany:

    https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Electrical_Engineer/Salary

    https://www.payscale.com/research/DE/Job=Electrical_Engineer/Salary

    From the same website, secretary: $33,375 USA vs. $27,980 Germany.

    Pharmacist: $114,000 USA; $43,328 Germany (!).

    Remember that you wrote about America: "while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness."

    Of course Western Europe has real advantages over the USA such as much longer vacations. But relative lack of poverty isn't one of them.


    Most Americans have less than 500$ in savings and were living paycheck to paycheck long
     
    Because they like to buy a lot of stuff. It's a personal choice, not "poverty." There are nurses where I work who drive new BMWs and Audis but have little to no savings. Lacking savings is not proof of poverty, but of non forward thinking.

    And the current race riots are a glaring example of its state of lawlessness
     
    These are limited to a handful of ghettos in a vast country. The overwhelming majority of Americans don't see them, except on TV.

    as are the cases of Epstein and US assassinations.
     
    Non-issues in anyone's life. Russians killed some Chechen-Georgian in Berlin. Does this mean Germans are subject to killings by Russians and experience lawlessness? Of course not.

    Replies: @Ano4, @Vaterland

    I know about that, and the spending, credit card and debt culture in the USA is indeed often ignored when the lack of US savings is mentioned. However the higher US salaries also become less impressive, if you consider the equally higher living costs, rent and especially health-care. This is of course an issue everywhere, but relatively more so in the USA, I think. And comparing anything in the health sector is not a good example, because it is in general much higher paid in the USA than in Germany and Western Europe. Which is again reflected in higher health care costs. And at the same time reacted much worse to the Corona virus than ours. I concede that wealth concentration is probably the better term than poverty.

    And you can damage control Epstein, if you think of it as some distant murder that has nothing to do with you, but in reality it reflects the nature of your government. If Jewish supremacists run child sex rings to black mail your politicians, if they don’t outright assassinate them as Mossad did to JFK, then what is that, if not total lawlessness? And the assassination of Soleimani equally exposed what the same deep state thinks of international law.

    Same for the race riots. They highlight the underlying reality of black crime and anti-white media and ideology in your country. The later exported to Europe through our universities and cultural Americanization. And is Minnesota a ghetto?

    So yes, a political mafia controlled and basically owned by oligarchs is better compared to the Yeltsin era. And obviously the day-to-day reality in the current world hegemon is drastically different than in Russia right after the collapse of the Soviet Union. When it comes to the nature of these governments though? Not so much.

    • Replies: @Vaterland
    @Vaterland

    *Minneapolis not Minnesota

    , @AP
    @Vaterland


    However the higher US salaries also become less impressive, if you consider the equally higher living costs, rent and especially health-care.
     
    Coat of living (consumer prices) are not always lower in the Germany than in the USA. Automobiles, for example, as much more expensive in Germany. Looking at the Subaru websites for each country, the base Outback in the USA is about $26,600 vs. $42,700 in Germany.

    Also, a substantially lower tax rate in the USA offsets much of the price of healthcare.

    And comparing anything in the health sector is not a good example, because it is in general much higher paid in the USA than in Germany and Western Europe.
     
    Sure, but even engineer salary - electrical engineer $75,000 in USA vs. $55,000 Germany.

    Plumber - $55,4000 USA, vs. $45,200 Germany.

    And you can damage control Epstein, if you think of it as some distant murder that has nothing to do with you, but in reality it reflects the nature of your government.
     
    Is a government that allows a flood of millions of Syrians, Afghans etc, into your country better? Because this affects regular people much, much more than does an Epstein blackmail ring for billionaires.

    And is Minnesota a ghetto?
     
    The specific part trashed by the riots is.

    a political mafia controlled and basically owned by oligarchs is better compared to the Yeltsin era.
     
    The nature of American vs. Yeltsin-era Russian oligarchs is fundamentally different.

    But I primarily responded not to this claim of yours but to your statement which, sorry, is pure nonsense: "the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness.."

    Majority of Americans are prosperous (nearly the richest people in the world) not poor, and experience order not lawlessness.
  65. AP says:
    @Mr. Hack
    @AP

    Somehow magically, I recently got interested in "club music" of the 2000's and started listening to DJ' productions like "Dimitri from Paris"and "Cassius". Some of this stuff is boring, recycled rap music, but some of it is passable and bright if not delightful disco ear candy. If you're familiar with this genre of music and could recommend anybody, I'd be grateful. (I was listening to Cirque du Soleil stuff yesterday too - way too much time on my hands these days!). :-)

    Replies: @AP

    If you like Baroque music you maybe would appreciate German trance music from the 90s; if you like black music such as gospel you would maybe like classic Detroit techno which is older.

    Here is Inner City from Detroit:

    [MORE]

    Sven Vath from Frankfurt:

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @AP

    Both look interesting, I'll be sure to check them out. My only exposure to old school electronica and techno wold include Jean Michelle Jarre, Synergy, Yellow Magic Orchestra, Tangerine Dream and one of my favorites, Malcolm McLaren, who was an all around musical prodigy. Check out this pop masterpiece, from his collage of fun pop hits, "Duck Rock" (there's more than a touch of Detroit on display here from this British impresario). :-)

    Double Dutch:

    https://youtu.be/FZ4jMSCBswY

    Replies: @Ano4

  66. @Astuteobservor II
    Trump and the gop formulated a plan to attack biden n his son over a year ago. That means the reds knew biden was going to be the blue candidate over a year ago. Voting is a farce.

    Just want to throw this in the comments.

    Replies: @cliff arroyo

    Surely the Trump team worked out plans for every plausible nominee many months ago.

    Hunter (failson of the century) is an obvious target so…. they didn’t have to spend much time on that.

    We’ll see if they go after his clearly declining facilities.

    The draft Cuomo movement seems to have stalled (fortunately given his horribly handling of the rona in NY) so I’m not sure they have anyone else unless HRC really is waiting in the wings…. (Which I’m not counting out).

  67. @Vaterland
    @AP

    I know about that, and the spending, credit card and debt culture in the USA is indeed often ignored when the lack of US savings is mentioned. However the higher US salaries also become less impressive, if you consider the equally higher living costs, rent and especially health-care. This is of course an issue everywhere, but relatively more so in the USA, I think. And comparing anything in the health sector is not a good example, because it is in general much higher paid in the USA than in Germany and Western Europe. Which is again reflected in higher health care costs. And at the same time reacted much worse to the Corona virus than ours. I concede that wealth concentration is probably the better term than poverty.

    And you can damage control Epstein, if you think of it as some distant murder that has nothing to do with you, but in reality it reflects the nature of your government. If Jewish supremacists run child sex rings to black mail your politicians, if they don't outright assassinate them as Mossad did to JFK, then what is that, if not total lawlessness? And the assassination of Soleimani equally exposed what the same deep state thinks of international law.

    Same for the race riots. They highlight the underlying reality of black crime and anti-white media and ideology in your country. The later exported to Europe through our universities and cultural Americanization. And is Minnesota a ghetto?

    So yes, a political mafia controlled and basically owned by oligarchs is better compared to the Yeltsin era. And obviously the day-to-day reality in the current world hegemon is drastically different than in Russia right after the collapse of the Soviet Union. When it comes to the nature of these governments though? Not so much.

    Replies: @Vaterland, @AP

    *Minneapolis not Minnesota

  68. @Vaterland
    @Ano4

    Disagree. Current year America is much more similar to the Yeltsin era. An oligarchical (Jewish) mafia, both legal and illegal, are running the show, manipulating a buffoonish "president" and cutting insider deals enriching themselves while the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness. Replace vodka epidemic with opioid epidemic. One of the good things the Putin years have achieved: to solve the drunken Ivan question. Jewish oligarchs like Millner and Berezovsky also controlled the media back then, while others were trying to introduce even more neoliberal capitalism.
    The oligarchs did NOT want the old communist guard to return to power for which there was a slim chance at the end of Yeltsin's second term. Their favorite was the liberal party. Berezovsky introduced Putin as an attempt at controlled opposition into the game. Didn't work out for him.

    Broke: Putin, the slavophile secular Zar, controls the oligarchs and anyone who doesn't cut a deal to benefit the Russian people gets the Berezovsky or Chodorkovsky treatment. He is the greatest Russian right after Stalin!

    Woke: Putin's system depends on the oligarchs and at best it is a system of mutually assured destruction, if it goes down.

    Cope: Russia went from a broken country where 19 of the 20 richest men were predatory Jewish oligarchs to an indeed somewhat recovered nation with a vastly more diversified income situation. How much of it is actually the achievement of Putin and friends is an entirely different matter and Russia would have been much better off, if it had followed the Konrad Adenauer-Ludwig Erhard route and had its own Wirtschaftswunder.

    The difference between post-Soviet Russia and current year America is that there was still a sense of Russianness and unity to fall back to. Imho post Stalin the SU was mostly transformed into Russian imperialism anyway. And there were the non corrupt and infiltrated elements of the Russian Orthodox Church. I remember a priest who really liked how revealing the Protocols of the learned Elder of Zion were and how they explain everything that is happening in the world right now. That basic sense of racio-cultural unity, or simply Americanness doesn't exist in the USA anymore. Choose Brasil, South Africa or Czech-Slovak style peaceful separation as your future.

    There are some parallels between Soviet political correctness, where the state was sacrosanct, and US and UK PC, where multiculturalism is sacrosanct, and the role of the managerial class. And while Chernobyl exposed that this emperor had no clothes, US corona reaction, Epstein, Rotherham and Minnesota expose this other emperor as naked.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kigV0WNaLBk

    But the huge, huge difference is that at the time the general believe in the Soviet Union as a political system itself was already rather low, especially in Eastern Europe and the GDR. Where many Americans are zealots about their anti-white believe system. The American Cultural Revolution is turning out as expected.

    Replies: @AP, @Ano4, @WHAT

    If anything, Chernobyl demonstated prompt – if not always super-effective – response to the never before seen type of crisis. US at the Three Mile Island literally ran away, lol.

    You should stop watching HBO agitprop. And FtN bullshit, for that matter.

    • Replies: @Vaterland
    @WHAT

    I'm sure, if we keep posting, we will undo the collapse of the Soviet Union and the USA is doing just fine and Epstein killed himself.

    Replies: @WHAT

  69. @WHAT
    @Vaterland

    If anything, Chernobyl demonstated prompt - if not always super-effective - response to the never before seen type of crisis. US at the Three Mile Island literally ran away, lol.

    You should stop watching HBO agitprop. And FtN bullshit, for that matter.

    Replies: @Vaterland

    I’m sure, if we keep posting, we will undo the collapse of the Soviet Union and the USA is doing just fine and Epstein killed himself.

    • Replies: @WHAT
    @Vaterland

    I`m sure you`ll manage a coherent answer someday. Just stop watching HBO agitprop and FtN stormfront-tier babbling.

    Continuing with the theme, no, Chernobyl had nothing to do with soviet collapse. Yes, soviet response was exemplary compared to Fukushima fail as well.

  70. @Vaterland
    @WHAT

    I'm sure, if we keep posting, we will undo the collapse of the Soviet Union and the USA is doing just fine and Epstein killed himself.

    Replies: @WHAT

    I`m sure you`ll manage a coherent answer someday. Just stop watching HBO agitprop and FtN stormfront-tier babbling.

    Continuing with the theme, no, Chernobyl had nothing to do with soviet collapse. Yes, soviet response was exemplary compared to Fukushima fail as well.

  71. @AP
    @Ano4


    Punk rock actually started in US around 1975.
     
    Well, technically yes in some clubs in New York but it was pretty marginal and unheard of until the late 70s when someone born in 1958 would be around 20 years old. I doubt many kids in 1975 were listening to punk music.

    1975 music was late Boomer music: Elton John, Led Zeppelin, Bob Dylan, Eagles, disco:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_200_number-one_albums_of_1975

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_Hot_100_number-one_singles_of_1975

    But in 1979, for the first time, Blondie and Michael Jackson have made their appearance:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_Hot_100_number-one_singles_of_1979

    :::::::::::

    Generally speaking, in terms of popular music people listen to the music made by those born of the previous generation or the oldest ones from their own. Boomers listened to music made by the War generation (Paul McCartney, Bob Dylan, Mick Jagger born in the early 1940s; Elton John, Robert Plant, Freddie Mercury were born in the mid to late 40s so they were the earliest of the Boomers).

    Gen X preferred popular musicians who were Boomers: the punks and post-punks were born in the mid to late 1950s, as was Michael Jackson, Prince, and Madonna (all three of these were born in 1958) and then you have the earliest of the Gen Xers also (Axl Rose born in 1962, Metallica singer James Hetfield 1963, Eddie Vedder 1964, Kurt Cobain and early techno pioneers were born in the mid 60s).

    Millenials listened to music made by Gen X people: Blink-182 and Weezer (born early 1970s), Spice Girls (born mid 1970s), Fall Out Boy (singer born 1979) and Britney Spears (born 1981), etc.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @martin_2

    Punk was definitely later than 1975. I remember well the Sex Pistols creating headlines owing to their offensive demeanour and lyrics in 1977.

    And Punk fashion hitting the High Street was later still. I remember seeing a girl with spiky hair, for the first time, in 1982.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @martin_2


    Punk was definitely later than 1975. I remember well the Sex Pistols creating headlines owing to their offensive demeanour and lyrics in 1977.
     
    You're talking about when it started to attract the attention of the mainstream media. By the time the mainstream media started to freak out about the Sex Pistols punk had been around in New York since 1974, in Australia since 1975. In Britain the Sex Pistols played their first gig in 1975. American and Australian punk slightly pre-dated British punk.

    Anyone really interested in the latest musical trends would have been aware of punk by 1976 at the latest.

    If you don't think punk was around in the mid-70s take a listen to the Raw Power album by Iggy and the Stooges, released in 1973. It's pure punk. Television released their first single in 1975. Patti Smith's Horses album (from 1975) is punk. By the mid-70s people born in the late 1950s were consciously rejecting the music that people born in the late 40s and early 50s liked. They were also rejecting their tastes in fashion and movies, and their political and social attitudes. They were reacting, violently, against the hippie culture of those born 1935-1955.

    And before the punk era was glam rock (early 70s), which was also a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes. Even disco was a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes.

    There was a huge cultural chasm opening up between those born 1935-1955 and those born in the late 50s.

    There was virtually no cultural common ground between someone born in 1958 and someone born in 1948.

    Replies: @AP

  72. @dfordoom
    @Ano4


    Punk rock actually started in US around 1975.

    Those born in 1958 were exactly in the right age group when it all started.
     
    Television, The Ramones and Blondie were all performing in New York City as early as 1974.

    And Sailer strikes me as the kind of guy who probably got into that kind of music very early on, before it became mainstream. I'm sure he was aware of The Clash long before 1980.

    I was born in '57 and I was heavily into punk (which started in Australia around 1975-76 with Radio Birdman and The Saints). And I was listening to Patti Smith (very much proto-punk) in 1975.

    Anyone who was into punk was consciously rejecting the music of the previous generation, in other words consciously rejecting the music of the Boomers. In fact rejecting everything that the Boomers stood for.

    Replies: @martin_2

    Many of the groups before the Punk movement – they preferred to be called bands – which makes my point, were incredibly pretentious and took themselves far too seriously. If you can bear it, read the lyrics of “Stairway To Heaven” and you’ll see what I mean. I think that Punk Rock was a reaction to the pomposity of Rock Rock.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @martin_2


    Many of the groups before the Punk movement – they preferred to be called bands – which makes my point, were incredibly pretentious and took themselves far too seriously. If you can bear it, read the lyrics of “Stairway To Heaven” and you’ll see what I mean. I think that Punk Rock was a reaction to the pomposity of Rock Rock.
     
    Yes. It was a reaction to the acid-fuelled pomposity of late 60s/early 70s mainstream rock.

    "No Elvis, Beatles, or The Rolling Stones in 1977" - The Clash.

    Have you ever tried to sit down and listen to the whole of the Beatles' White Album? That's the sort of dreck that the late 50s birth cohort was reacting against.
  73. @AP
    @Mr. Hack

    If you like Baroque music you maybe would appreciate German trance music from the 90s; if you like black music such as gospel you would maybe like classic Detroit techno which is older.

    Here is Inner City from Detroit:



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ap48v1JXs7k

    Sven Vath from Frankfurt:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyEQMF5Gsqw

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Both look interesting, I’ll be sure to check them out. My only exposure to old school electronica and techno wold include Jean Michelle Jarre, Synergy, Yellow Magic Orchestra, Tangerine Dream and one of my favorites, Malcolm McLaren, who was an all around musical prodigy. Check out this pop masterpiece, from his collage of fun pop hits, “Duck Rock” (there’s more than a touch of Detroit on display here from this British impresario). 🙂

    Double Dutch:

    • Thanks: AP
    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack

    If you're interested in early 90ies electronic music (Rave, Techno and Ambient) you might want to try listening to (in no particular order):

    Aphex Twin.
    Autechre (early records)
    Future Sound of London.
    The Orb.
    Rabbit in the Moon.
    Sun Electric.
    Banco de Gaia
    Boards of Canada
    Art of Trance
    Finary Binary.
    Orbital.

    Mid nineties:
    Underworld.
    Prodigy.
    Crystal Method
    Sasha & John Digweed

    And my absolute favorite ambient duo: Global Communication.

    There were many others of course, I just listed the ones that first came to my mind.

    Also, you might go by record companies:

    Bonzai Records
    Warp Records
    Wax Trax! Records
    Dragonfly Records
    Etc.

    Sorry for the long rant.

    🙂

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

  74. @Ano4
    Trump and Biden are all USA have left to show the world...

    Someone should really Ctl Alt Del this whole disgraceful gig before US goes full Blue Screen of Death.

    Replies: @AaronInMVD, @AnonFromTN

    Someone should really Ctl Alt Del this whole disgraceful gig before US goes full Blue Screen of Death.

    The best bumper sticker I saw said “Nobody 2020”. When you have a choice between a narcissistic moron and a corrupt senile moron, that’s the most adequate reaction.

    • Agree: Ano4
  75. @AaronInMVD
    @Ano4

    Kinda why I got the hell out of the US in 2017. I was happy Trump won, he was obviously the less awful choice. Still as rotten as both the boomers and the kids are... it was time to throw in the towel on the US when Trump and HRC were the best the US could offer.

    I suspect a strength of Biden's poll numbers is in the fact he's largely keeping himself out of sight. If he comes out of the bunker and stays out of the bunker... He has developed a greater tendency towards unforced errors in his speaking than Trump, and he's done it fast. If he gets out of the basement too far in advance of the convention he might get sacked and someone else will lead the Dems on the ticket.

    This feels like late soviet gerontocracy.

    Replies: @Ano4, @AnonFromTN

    Next to Trump, Biden, and Bernie, Soviet Politburo looks like a youth club.

  76. @martin_2
    @AP

    Punk was definitely later than 1975. I remember well the Sex Pistols creating headlines owing to their offensive demeanour and lyrics in 1977.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XGe_hncsiM

    And Punk fashion hitting the High Street was later still. I remember seeing a girl with spiky hair, for the first time, in 1982.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Punk was definitely later than 1975. I remember well the Sex Pistols creating headlines owing to their offensive demeanour and lyrics in 1977.

    You’re talking about when it started to attract the attention of the mainstream media. By the time the mainstream media started to freak out about the Sex Pistols punk had been around in New York since 1974, in Australia since 1975. In Britain the Sex Pistols played their first gig in 1975. American and Australian punk slightly pre-dated British punk.

    Anyone really interested in the latest musical trends would have been aware of punk by 1976 at the latest.

    If you don’t think punk was around in the mid-70s take a listen to the Raw Power album by Iggy and the Stooges, released in 1973. It’s pure punk. Television released their first single in 1975. Patti Smith’s Horses album (from 1975) is punk. By the mid-70s people born in the late 1950s were consciously rejecting the music that people born in the late 40s and early 50s liked. They were also rejecting their tastes in fashion and movies, and their political and social attitudes. They were reacting, violently, against the hippie culture of those born 1935-1955.

    And before the punk era was glam rock (early 70s), which was also a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes. Even disco was a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes.

    There was a huge cultural chasm opening up between those born 1935-1955 and those born in the late 50s.

    There was virtually no cultural common ground between someone born in 1958 and someone born in 1948.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @AP
    @dfordoom


    By the mid-70s people born in the late 1950s were consciously rejecting the music that people born in the late 40s and early 50s liked. They were also rejecting their tastes in fashion and movies, and their political and social attitudes. They were reacting, violently, against the hippie culture of those born 1935-1955.
     
    It seems that these were a small minority of people though - it didn't get widespread until the very end of the 70s. So you were like a vanguard of the coming Gen X, but all around you (judging by record sales) people were listening to Bob Dylan, Led Zeppelin, etc.

    And before the punk era was glam rock (early 70s), which was also a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes. Even disco was a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes.
     
    Were they? They seems to have been all about self-indulgence and "me me me" which was the Boomers' ethos. It was only just more developed and ornate. 60s Hippies grew their hair long, 70s people styled it. The 70s were Rococo to the 60s Baroque.

    The clean break came with punk.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Ano4

  77. @martin_2
    @dfordoom

    Many of the groups before the Punk movement - they preferred to be called bands - which makes my point, were incredibly pretentious and took themselves far too seriously. If you can bear it, read the lyrics of "Stairway To Heaven" and you'll see what I mean. I think that Punk Rock was a reaction to the pomposity of Rock Rock.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Many of the groups before the Punk movement – they preferred to be called bands – which makes my point, were incredibly pretentious and took themselves far too seriously. If you can bear it, read the lyrics of “Stairway To Heaven” and you’ll see what I mean. I think that Punk Rock was a reaction to the pomposity of Rock Rock.

    Yes. It was a reaction to the acid-fuelled pomposity of late 60s/early 70s mainstream rock.

    “No Elvis, Beatles, or The Rolling Stones in 1977” – The Clash.

    Have you ever tried to sit down and listen to the whole of the Beatles’ White Album? That’s the sort of dreck that the late 50s birth cohort was reacting against.

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
  78. @Prester John
    Like their counterpart in the Republican Party, the Democrat Party can only survive if the big buck$ roll in, which is why Bernie is "out" and Biden (a key member of the Democrat money class) is in. At least for now. I will believe that Biden will be their nominee when I see it--the guy's mind is slowly reducing to applesauce.

    Replies: @AnonFromTN

    the guy’s mind is slowly reducing to applesauce.

    There is a joke that Biden was always so dumb that when he went senile, his family did not even notice.

  79. AP says:
    @dfordoom
    @martin_2


    Punk was definitely later than 1975. I remember well the Sex Pistols creating headlines owing to their offensive demeanour and lyrics in 1977.
     
    You're talking about when it started to attract the attention of the mainstream media. By the time the mainstream media started to freak out about the Sex Pistols punk had been around in New York since 1974, in Australia since 1975. In Britain the Sex Pistols played their first gig in 1975. American and Australian punk slightly pre-dated British punk.

    Anyone really interested in the latest musical trends would have been aware of punk by 1976 at the latest.

    If you don't think punk was around in the mid-70s take a listen to the Raw Power album by Iggy and the Stooges, released in 1973. It's pure punk. Television released their first single in 1975. Patti Smith's Horses album (from 1975) is punk. By the mid-70s people born in the late 1950s were consciously rejecting the music that people born in the late 40s and early 50s liked. They were also rejecting their tastes in fashion and movies, and their political and social attitudes. They were reacting, violently, against the hippie culture of those born 1935-1955.

    And before the punk era was glam rock (early 70s), which was also a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes. Even disco was a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes.

    There was a huge cultural chasm opening up between those born 1935-1955 and those born in the late 50s.

    There was virtually no cultural common ground between someone born in 1958 and someone born in 1948.

    Replies: @AP

    By the mid-70s people born in the late 1950s were consciously rejecting the music that people born in the late 40s and early 50s liked. They were also rejecting their tastes in fashion and movies, and their political and social attitudes. They were reacting, violently, against the hippie culture of those born 1935-1955.

    It seems that these were a small minority of people though – it didn’t get widespread until the very end of the 70s. So you were like a vanguard of the coming Gen X, but all around you (judging by record sales) people were listening to Bob Dylan, Led Zeppelin, etc.

    And before the punk era was glam rock (early 70s), which was also a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes. Even disco was a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes.

    Were they? They seems to have been all about self-indulgence and “me me me” which was the Boomers’ ethos. It was only just more developed and ornate. 60s Hippies grew their hair long, 70s people styled it. The 70s were Rococo to the 60s Baroque.

    The clean break came with punk.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @AP


    Were they? They seems to have been all about self-indulgence and “me me me” which was the Boomers’ ethos. It was only just more developed and ornate. 60s Hippies grew their hair long, 70s people styled it. The 70s were Rococo to the 60s Baroque.
     
    Well I was there at the time (born in '57) and I'm simply reporting what I observed. Hippie culture was the creation of people born in the 1935 to 1955 period. Among my peer group (and I don't just mean myself and a few nerdy friends, I mean every single person I encountered in my age bracket) there was a visceral loathing for hippie culture and an overwhelming desire to disassociate themselves from everything connected to hippiedom. Which means disassociating themselves from the musical tastes, the fashions, the tastes in TV and movies and (to a very strong degree) the social and political attitudes of the hippies.

    And in young adulthood I can vividly the recall the chasm between people in my age bracket and those born five or ten years earlier. They found our cultural tastes and attitudes bewildering.

    The clean break came with punk.
     
    More or less, but there was already a cultural shift underway in the early 70s.

    I'm not saying that the pop culture of the period from about 1972 to 1977 (the glam rock/disco era) was necessarily much better than the pop culture of the period 1967-1971 (the Summer of Love era) but it was definitely beginning to diverge. Punk didn't just magically appear. It was the inevitable result of a cultural shift that had been happening for several years.

    Disco and glam rock were just as self-indulgent as hippie culture but it was a different kind of self-indulgence. Instead of being filthy and smelly and sitting round smoking dope the disco/glam rock crowd wanted to be clean, to make some effort about their appearance, and do a few lines of speed and go out and dance and party.

    Punk was very much a matter of a new cohort seeking to sweep away hippiedom and establish themselves as the dominant youth culture.

    Also I think that many of the defining characteristic of Gen X, such as cynicism and pessimism and a contempt for the peace and love ethos of the 60s, were already fully developed in the 1956-1960 birth cohort. So I think it's reasonable to place the beginning of Gen X around 1956.

    Replies: @Sparkon, @AP

    , @Ano4
    @AP


    It seems that these were a small minority of people though – it didn’t get widespread until the very end of the 70s.
     
    Punk was never about trying to become mainstream.

    It was a fringe movement.

    As soon as they become mainstream, punk rockers lost their punk rock attitude and become just pop musicians (I specifically thought about the Clash here).

    Even in the UK where it was promoted a lot during the Thatcher era (a distraction for the British youth?) punk has never become a mass movement.

    When the Offspring and Green Day started filling up stadiums real Punk was already dead for some twenty years.

    Mike Muir from Suicidal Tendencies joked about it by saying something along the lines that when he was young parents could send you to a shrink if you listened to Punk Rock, but that end of 90ies parents would send you to a shrink if you didn't want to go to a Green Day show with them.

    The Stooges and Yggy, MC5 are protopunk both in form and spirit.

    Ramones, Patti Smith, Television and even early Blondie are early NY Punk.

    Buzzcocks, Sex Pistols, the Damned, Stranglers and the Clash are the secondary UK Punk embodiment that has been mistakenly taken for the real thing.

    And the "massive movement " with the clothing/style/haircuts was the "Punk Not Dead" revival of early 1980-ies (the Exploited, GBH etc.)

    I could go on classifying all these things until we reach industrial postpunk and gothic new wave, but it is not as satisfying anymore to talk about it as when I was in my late teen years.

    Which was a long time ago.

    🙂

    Replies: @dfordoom, @AP, @Bartholomew

  80. @dfordoom
    @njguy73


    What separates a Boomer from a Silent is 1) not having childhood memories of WW2 and 2) being subject to Vietnam draft lottery.
     
    If the draft is what defines being a Boomer then given that the draft ended in 1973 anyone born after about 1955 cannot be a Boomer.

    Replies: @Kronos

    Also, what about those who willingly enlisted in the armed services? You had many young, middle age, and old farts (generals, etc) stationed in Vietnam.

  81. AP says:
    @Vaterland
    @AP

    I know about that, and the spending, credit card and debt culture in the USA is indeed often ignored when the lack of US savings is mentioned. However the higher US salaries also become less impressive, if you consider the equally higher living costs, rent and especially health-care. This is of course an issue everywhere, but relatively more so in the USA, I think. And comparing anything in the health sector is not a good example, because it is in general much higher paid in the USA than in Germany and Western Europe. Which is again reflected in higher health care costs. And at the same time reacted much worse to the Corona virus than ours. I concede that wealth concentration is probably the better term than poverty.

    And you can damage control Epstein, if you think of it as some distant murder that has nothing to do with you, but in reality it reflects the nature of your government. If Jewish supremacists run child sex rings to black mail your politicians, if they don't outright assassinate them as Mossad did to JFK, then what is that, if not total lawlessness? And the assassination of Soleimani equally exposed what the same deep state thinks of international law.

    Same for the race riots. They highlight the underlying reality of black crime and anti-white media and ideology in your country. The later exported to Europe through our universities and cultural Americanization. And is Minnesota a ghetto?

    So yes, a political mafia controlled and basically owned by oligarchs is better compared to the Yeltsin era. And obviously the day-to-day reality in the current world hegemon is drastically different than in Russia right after the collapse of the Soviet Union. When it comes to the nature of these governments though? Not so much.

    Replies: @Vaterland, @AP

    However the higher US salaries also become less impressive, if you consider the equally higher living costs, rent and especially health-care.

    Coat of living (consumer prices) are not always lower in the Germany than in the USA. Automobiles, for example, as much more expensive in Germany. Looking at the Subaru websites for each country, the base Outback in the USA is about $26,600 vs. $42,700 in Germany.

    Also, a substantially lower tax rate in the USA offsets much of the price of healthcare.

    And comparing anything in the health sector is not a good example, because it is in general much higher paid in the USA than in Germany and Western Europe.

    Sure, but even engineer salary – electrical engineer $75,000 in USA vs. $55,000 Germany.

    Plumber – $55,4000 USA, vs. $45,200 Germany.

    And you can damage control Epstein, if you think of it as some distant murder that has nothing to do with you, but in reality it reflects the nature of your government.

    Is a government that allows a flood of millions of Syrians, Afghans etc, into your country better? Because this affects regular people much, much more than does an Epstein blackmail ring for billionaires.

    And is Minnesota a ghetto?

    The specific part trashed by the riots is.

    a political mafia controlled and basically owned by oligarchs is better compared to the Yeltsin era.

    The nature of American vs. Yeltsin-era Russian oligarchs is fundamentally different.

    But I primarily responded not to this claim of yours but to your statement which, sorry, is pure nonsense: “the majority lives in poverty and has to endure lawlessness..”

    Majority of Americans are prosperous (nearly the richest people in the world) not poor, and experience order not lawlessness.

  82. @AP
    @dfordoom


    By the mid-70s people born in the late 1950s were consciously rejecting the music that people born in the late 40s and early 50s liked. They were also rejecting their tastes in fashion and movies, and their political and social attitudes. They were reacting, violently, against the hippie culture of those born 1935-1955.
     
    It seems that these were a small minority of people though - it didn't get widespread until the very end of the 70s. So you were like a vanguard of the coming Gen X, but all around you (judging by record sales) people were listening to Bob Dylan, Led Zeppelin, etc.

    And before the punk era was glam rock (early 70s), which was also a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes. Even disco was a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes.
     
    Were they? They seems to have been all about self-indulgence and "me me me" which was the Boomers' ethos. It was only just more developed and ornate. 60s Hippies grew their hair long, 70s people styled it. The 70s were Rococo to the 60s Baroque.

    The clean break came with punk.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Ano4

    Were they? They seems to have been all about self-indulgence and “me me me” which was the Boomers’ ethos. It was only just more developed and ornate. 60s Hippies grew their hair long, 70s people styled it. The 70s were Rococo to the 60s Baroque.

    Well I was there at the time (born in ’57) and I’m simply reporting what I observed. Hippie culture was the creation of people born in the 1935 to 1955 period. Among my peer group (and I don’t just mean myself and a few nerdy friends, I mean every single person I encountered in my age bracket) there was a visceral loathing for hippie culture and an overwhelming desire to disassociate themselves from everything connected to hippiedom. Which means disassociating themselves from the musical tastes, the fashions, the tastes in TV and movies and (to a very strong degree) the social and political attitudes of the hippies.

    And in young adulthood I can vividly the recall the chasm between people in my age bracket and those born five or ten years earlier. They found our cultural tastes and attitudes bewildering.

    The clean break came with punk.

    More or less, but there was already a cultural shift underway in the early 70s.

    I’m not saying that the pop culture of the period from about 1972 to 1977 (the glam rock/disco era) was necessarily much better than the pop culture of the period 1967-1971 (the Summer of Love era) but it was definitely beginning to diverge. Punk didn’t just magically appear. It was the inevitable result of a cultural shift that had been happening for several years.

    Disco and glam rock were just as self-indulgent as hippie culture but it was a different kind of self-indulgence. Instead of being filthy and smelly and sitting round smoking dope the disco/glam rock crowd wanted to be clean, to make some effort about their appearance, and do a few lines of speed and go out and dance and party.

    Punk was very much a matter of a new cohort seeking to sweep away hippiedom and establish themselves as the dominant youth culture.

    Also I think that many of the defining characteristic of Gen X, such as cynicism and pessimism and a contempt for the peace and love ethos of the 60s, were already fully developed in the 1956-1960 birth cohort. So I think it’s reasonable to place the beginning of Gen X around 1956.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @Sparkon
    @dfordoom


    Disco and glam rock were just as self-indulgent as hippie culture but it was a different kind of self-indulgence. Instead of being filthy and smelly and sitting round smoking dope the disco/glam rock crowd wanted to be clean, to make some effort about their appearance, and do a few lines of speed and go out and dance and party.
     
    I don't think so. I'm eleven years older than you - born in '46 - and I can tell you most people my age were never into being filthy and smelly, but we did like to dance and party, just like our parents. The mid to late '60s were very stylish with great fashions, and great music too.

    Paisley baby! Too bad you missed it.


    https://66.media.tumblr.com/d65cdd6d788263bc1c5c59c5ec30e64f/tumblr_oo0zny7Qrg1s7vauoo1_500.jpg

    https://www.thetrendspotter.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/60s-style-shift-dresses.jpg

    https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TdRzKkKEifI/URh7BmiYH2I/AAAAAAAARsM/bUKWW4RhksM/s640/Gems+of+Fashion+1967c.JPG
    , @AP
    @dfordoom


    Well I was there at the time (born in ’57) and I’m simply reporting what I observed. Hippie culture was the creation of people born in the 1935 to 1955 period. Among my peer group (and I don’t just mean myself and a few nerdy friends, I mean every single person I encountered in my age bracket) there was a visceral loathing for hippie culture and an overwhelming desire to disassociate themselves from everything connected to hippiedom.
     
    That's interesting. Maybe you were from an advanced region? I'm just going by what was popular as reflected in stuff like record sales. I was much too young to pay attention to this kind of stuff in the the mid seventies. The first time I noticed punks was in the early 80s when visiting Toronto and New York.

    there was a visceral loathing for hippie culture and an overwhelming desire to disassociate themselves from everything connected to hippiedom.
     
    Yeah, we had that in the 80s. There were songs about killing hippies at the time.

    Disco and glam rock were just as self-indulgent as hippie culture but it was a different kind of self-indulgence. Instead of being filthy and smelly and sitting round smoking dope the disco/glam rock crowd wanted to be clean, to make some effort about their appearance, and do a few lines of speed and go out and dance and party.

    Punk was very much a matter of a new cohort seeking to sweep away hippiedom and establish themselves as the dominant youth culture.
     
    I agree with this. It's interesting to see how Gen X evolved in its tastes in a way that can be analogous to that of the Boomers. Classic punk is much too simple and primitive for my taste, the various post-punk stuff is more complex and more competently made while retaining a similar spirit, just as just as Queen or Bowie or disco are more complex and well-made, relative to 60s stuff, while still being all about empty self-indulgence.

    So I think it’s reasonable to place the beginning of Gen X around 1956.
     
    I think that proto-Gen Xers like you existed from your age group but that the wide generational shift caught up a few years later. In that sense you might be like the beatniks from the 50s who were proto-Boomers.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  83. @AP
    @dfordoom


    By the mid-70s people born in the late 1950s were consciously rejecting the music that people born in the late 40s and early 50s liked. They were also rejecting their tastes in fashion and movies, and their political and social attitudes. They were reacting, violently, against the hippie culture of those born 1935-1955.
     
    It seems that these were a small minority of people though - it didn't get widespread until the very end of the 70s. So you were like a vanguard of the coming Gen X, but all around you (judging by record sales) people were listening to Bob Dylan, Led Zeppelin, etc.

    And before the punk era was glam rock (early 70s), which was also a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes. Even disco was a rejection of hippie music, hippie fashions and hippie attitudes.
     
    Were they? They seems to have been all about self-indulgence and "me me me" which was the Boomers' ethos. It was only just more developed and ornate. 60s Hippies grew their hair long, 70s people styled it. The 70s were Rococo to the 60s Baroque.

    The clean break came with punk.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Ano4

    It seems that these were a small minority of people though – it didn’t get widespread until the very end of the 70s.

    Punk was never about trying to become mainstream.

    It was a fringe movement.

    As soon as they become mainstream, punk rockers lost their punk rock attitude and become just pop musicians (I specifically thought about the Clash here).

    Even in the UK where it was promoted a lot during the Thatcher era (a distraction for the British youth?) punk has never become a mass movement.

    When the Offspring and Green Day started filling up stadiums real Punk was already dead for some twenty years.

    Mike Muir from Suicidal Tendencies joked about it by saying something along the lines that when he was young parents could send you to a shrink if you listened to Punk Rock, but that end of 90ies parents would send you to a shrink if you didn’t want to go to a Green Day show with them.

    The Stooges and Yggy, MC5 are protopunk both in form and spirit.

    Ramones, Patti Smith, Television and even early Blondie are early NY Punk.

    Buzzcocks, Sex Pistols, the Damned, Stranglers and the Clash are the secondary UK Punk embodiment that has been mistakenly taken for the real thing.

    And the “massive movement ” with the clothing/style/haircuts was the “Punk Not Dead” revival of early 1980-ies (the Exploited, GBH etc.)

    I could go on classifying all these things until we reach industrial postpunk and gothic new wave, but it is not as satisfying anymore to talk about it as when I was in my late teen years.

    Which was a long time ago.

    🙂

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Ano4


    Punk was never about trying to become mainstream.
     
    In their own way the punks (the real punks from the late 70s) were quite culturally elitist. They weren't fantasising about filling stadiums or selling millions of records. What they were hoping to do was to establish themselves in the arty-literary-musical elite. Not as pop stars. There were plenty who were more involved in punk-related activities (fanzines, art design, fashion). Think people like Julie Burchill and Malcolm McLaren.
    , @AP
    @Ano4


    Punk was never about trying to become mainstream.

    It was a fringe movement.

    As soon as they become mainstream, punk rockers lost their punk rock attitude and become just pop musicians (I specifically thought about the Clash here).
     
    The attitude persisted and became widespread though, all through Gen X until the end. Popular musicians such as Cobain struggled with being "mainstream" or becoming a "sellout", that was a generational thing that seems to have become important with the punks.

    I could go on classifying all these things until we reach industrial postpunk and gothic new wave, but it is not as satisfying anymore to talk about it as when I was in my late teen years.
     
    Caring about this sort of stuff also seems to be a generational marker :-)

    Replies: @dfordoom

    , @Bartholomew
    @Ano4

    Correction: punk was never meant to *appear* like it was trying to become mainstream. But is was mainstream all along because punk was an astroturf cultural movement, like most of the cultural movements that emerged from the 60s and 70s.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  84. @Mr. Hack
    @AP

    Both look interesting, I'll be sure to check them out. My only exposure to old school electronica and techno wold include Jean Michelle Jarre, Synergy, Yellow Magic Orchestra, Tangerine Dream and one of my favorites, Malcolm McLaren, who was an all around musical prodigy. Check out this pop masterpiece, from his collage of fun pop hits, "Duck Rock" (there's more than a touch of Detroit on display here from this British impresario). :-)

    Double Dutch:

    https://youtu.be/FZ4jMSCBswY

    Replies: @Ano4

    If you’re interested in early 90ies electronic music (Rave, Techno and Ambient) you might want to try listening to (in no particular order):

    Aphex Twin.
    Autechre (early records)
    Future Sound of London.
    The Orb.
    Rabbit in the Moon.
    Sun Electric.
    Banco de Gaia
    Boards of Canada
    Art of Trance
    Finary Binary.
    Orbital.

    Mid nineties:
    Underworld.
    Prodigy.
    Crystal Method
    Sasha & John Digweed

    And my absolute favorite ambient duo: Global Communication.

    There were many others of course, I just listed the ones that first came to my mind.

    Also, you might go by record companies:

    Bonzai Records
    Warp Records
    Wax Trax! Records
    Dragonfly Records
    Etc.

    Sorry for the long rant.

    🙂

    • Thanks: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Long rant? What else can you do these days, epecially if you're all couped up sitting around the house?

    I can see that you're another fount of pop music information. If you read my original comment when entering this discussion, you'll see that my real interest at the moment is to become more acquainted with "club music", that started, I think, sometime in the 90's and is still going strong? #60:


    Somehow magically, I recently got interested in “club music” of the 2000’s and started listening to DJ’ productions like “Dimitri from Paris”and “Cassius”. Some of this stuff is boring, recycled rap music, but some of it is passable and bright if not delightful disco ear candy. If you’re familiar with this genre of music and could recommend anybody, I’d be grateful.
     
    https://is4-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Music128/v4/7f/2b/5a/7f2b5ab7-8e4c-5c08-48ed-8daf2d57bb8f/00602547813145.rgb.jpg/300x300bb.jpg

    This stuff is Okay.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @Ano4

  85. @Ano4
    @AP


    It seems that these were a small minority of people though – it didn’t get widespread until the very end of the 70s.
     
    Punk was never about trying to become mainstream.

    It was a fringe movement.

    As soon as they become mainstream, punk rockers lost their punk rock attitude and become just pop musicians (I specifically thought about the Clash here).

    Even in the UK where it was promoted a lot during the Thatcher era (a distraction for the British youth?) punk has never become a mass movement.

    When the Offspring and Green Day started filling up stadiums real Punk was already dead for some twenty years.

    Mike Muir from Suicidal Tendencies joked about it by saying something along the lines that when he was young parents could send you to a shrink if you listened to Punk Rock, but that end of 90ies parents would send you to a shrink if you didn't want to go to a Green Day show with them.

    The Stooges and Yggy, MC5 are protopunk both in form and spirit.

    Ramones, Patti Smith, Television and even early Blondie are early NY Punk.

    Buzzcocks, Sex Pistols, the Damned, Stranglers and the Clash are the secondary UK Punk embodiment that has been mistakenly taken for the real thing.

    And the "massive movement " with the clothing/style/haircuts was the "Punk Not Dead" revival of early 1980-ies (the Exploited, GBH etc.)

    I could go on classifying all these things until we reach industrial postpunk and gothic new wave, but it is not as satisfying anymore to talk about it as when I was in my late teen years.

    Which was a long time ago.

    🙂

    Replies: @dfordoom, @AP, @Bartholomew

    Punk was never about trying to become mainstream.

    In their own way the punks (the real punks from the late 70s) were quite culturally elitist. They weren’t fantasising about filling stadiums or selling millions of records. What they were hoping to do was to establish themselves in the arty-literary-musical elite. Not as pop stars. There were plenty who were more involved in punk-related activities (fanzines, art design, fashion). Think people like Julie Burchill and Malcolm McLaren.

  86. @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack

    If you're interested in early 90ies electronic music (Rave, Techno and Ambient) you might want to try listening to (in no particular order):

    Aphex Twin.
    Autechre (early records)
    Future Sound of London.
    The Orb.
    Rabbit in the Moon.
    Sun Electric.
    Banco de Gaia
    Boards of Canada
    Art of Trance
    Finary Binary.
    Orbital.

    Mid nineties:
    Underworld.
    Prodigy.
    Crystal Method
    Sasha & John Digweed

    And my absolute favorite ambient duo: Global Communication.

    There were many others of course, I just listed the ones that first came to my mind.

    Also, you might go by record companies:

    Bonzai Records
    Warp Records
    Wax Trax! Records
    Dragonfly Records
    Etc.

    Sorry for the long rant.

    🙂

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    Long rant? What else can you do these days, epecially if you’re all couped up sitting around the house?

    I can see that you’re another fount of pop music information. If you read my original comment when entering this discussion, you’ll see that my real interest at the moment is to become more acquainted with “club music”, that started, I think, sometime in the 90’s and is still going strong? #60:

    Somehow magically, I recently got interested in “club music” of the 2000’s and started listening to DJ’ productions like “Dimitri from Paris”and “Cassius”. Some of this stuff is boring, recycled rap music, but some of it is passable and bright if not delightful disco ear candy. If you’re familiar with this genre of music and could recommend anybody, I’d be grateful.


    This stuff is Okay.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Mr. Hack

    Also, nobody here has even mentioned one of my favorite pop music "subdivisions", that being Progressive rock music. Prog Rock still has legions of followers, with about just a many groups still playing this type of music. Just google in "prog rock" and you'll find dozens of websites that are devoted to this genre of music. A very important segment of the pop music world.

    , @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack

    Seems early Ibiza club music is an influence for this Cassius album.

    This kind of thing:

    https://youtu.be/AVmBEiTI-zc

  87. @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Long rant? What else can you do these days, epecially if you're all couped up sitting around the house?

    I can see that you're another fount of pop music information. If you read my original comment when entering this discussion, you'll see that my real interest at the moment is to become more acquainted with "club music", that started, I think, sometime in the 90's and is still going strong? #60:


    Somehow magically, I recently got interested in “club music” of the 2000’s and started listening to DJ’ productions like “Dimitri from Paris”and “Cassius”. Some of this stuff is boring, recycled rap music, but some of it is passable and bright if not delightful disco ear candy. If you’re familiar with this genre of music and could recommend anybody, I’d be grateful.
     
    https://is4-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Music128/v4/7f/2b/5a/7f2b5ab7-8e4c-5c08-48ed-8daf2d57bb8f/00602547813145.rgb.jpg/300x300bb.jpg

    This stuff is Okay.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @Ano4

    Also, nobody here has even mentioned one of my favorite pop music “subdivisions”, that being Progressive rock music. Prog Rock still has legions of followers, with about just a many groups still playing this type of music. Just google in “prog rock” and you’ll find dozens of websites that are devoted to this genre of music. A very important segment of the pop music world.

  88. @dfordoom
    @AP


    Were they? They seems to have been all about self-indulgence and “me me me” which was the Boomers’ ethos. It was only just more developed and ornate. 60s Hippies grew their hair long, 70s people styled it. The 70s were Rococo to the 60s Baroque.
     
    Well I was there at the time (born in '57) and I'm simply reporting what I observed. Hippie culture was the creation of people born in the 1935 to 1955 period. Among my peer group (and I don't just mean myself and a few nerdy friends, I mean every single person I encountered in my age bracket) there was a visceral loathing for hippie culture and an overwhelming desire to disassociate themselves from everything connected to hippiedom. Which means disassociating themselves from the musical tastes, the fashions, the tastes in TV and movies and (to a very strong degree) the social and political attitudes of the hippies.

    And in young adulthood I can vividly the recall the chasm between people in my age bracket and those born five or ten years earlier. They found our cultural tastes and attitudes bewildering.

    The clean break came with punk.
     
    More or less, but there was already a cultural shift underway in the early 70s.

    I'm not saying that the pop culture of the period from about 1972 to 1977 (the glam rock/disco era) was necessarily much better than the pop culture of the period 1967-1971 (the Summer of Love era) but it was definitely beginning to diverge. Punk didn't just magically appear. It was the inevitable result of a cultural shift that had been happening for several years.

    Disco and glam rock were just as self-indulgent as hippie culture but it was a different kind of self-indulgence. Instead of being filthy and smelly and sitting round smoking dope the disco/glam rock crowd wanted to be clean, to make some effort about their appearance, and do a few lines of speed and go out and dance and party.

    Punk was very much a matter of a new cohort seeking to sweep away hippiedom and establish themselves as the dominant youth culture.

    Also I think that many of the defining characteristic of Gen X, such as cynicism and pessimism and a contempt for the peace and love ethos of the 60s, were already fully developed in the 1956-1960 birth cohort. So I think it's reasonable to place the beginning of Gen X around 1956.

    Replies: @Sparkon, @AP

    Disco and glam rock were just as self-indulgent as hippie culture but it was a different kind of self-indulgence. Instead of being filthy and smelly and sitting round smoking dope the disco/glam rock crowd wanted to be clean, to make some effort about their appearance, and do a few lines of speed and go out and dance and party.

    I don’t think so. I’m eleven years older than you – born in ’46 – and I can tell you most people my age were never into being filthy and smelly, but we did like to dance and party, just like our parents. The mid to late ’60s were very stylish with great fashions, and great music too.

    Paisley baby! Too bad you missed it.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
  89. You guys were lucky, I grew up listening to this when young.

    [MORE]

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • LOL: AP
    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Blinky Bill

    Funked up East has many rare Soviet and Eastern Block music gems on YouTube.

    https://www.youtube.com/user/mishapanfilov

    But I think the majority of USSR kids in 70ies were subjected to a heavy dose of Vyssotsky and Okudzhava (possibly leading to a permanent psychological damage that manifested itself in Perestroika times).

    To be fair, there were also some soft "Rock" bands in USSR at the time (late 70ies).

    Some of them were more or less worth listening to.

    https://youtu.be/ZnD6cVl_-zA

    Although what came later was way more interesting:

    https://youtu.be/FXWqHRdrxyk

    😁

  90. AP says:
    @dfordoom
    @AP


    Were they? They seems to have been all about self-indulgence and “me me me” which was the Boomers’ ethos. It was only just more developed and ornate. 60s Hippies grew their hair long, 70s people styled it. The 70s were Rococo to the 60s Baroque.
     
    Well I was there at the time (born in '57) and I'm simply reporting what I observed. Hippie culture was the creation of people born in the 1935 to 1955 period. Among my peer group (and I don't just mean myself and a few nerdy friends, I mean every single person I encountered in my age bracket) there was a visceral loathing for hippie culture and an overwhelming desire to disassociate themselves from everything connected to hippiedom. Which means disassociating themselves from the musical tastes, the fashions, the tastes in TV and movies and (to a very strong degree) the social and political attitudes of the hippies.

    And in young adulthood I can vividly the recall the chasm between people in my age bracket and those born five or ten years earlier. They found our cultural tastes and attitudes bewildering.

    The clean break came with punk.
     
    More or less, but there was already a cultural shift underway in the early 70s.

    I'm not saying that the pop culture of the period from about 1972 to 1977 (the glam rock/disco era) was necessarily much better than the pop culture of the period 1967-1971 (the Summer of Love era) but it was definitely beginning to diverge. Punk didn't just magically appear. It was the inevitable result of a cultural shift that had been happening for several years.

    Disco and glam rock were just as self-indulgent as hippie culture but it was a different kind of self-indulgence. Instead of being filthy and smelly and sitting round smoking dope the disco/glam rock crowd wanted to be clean, to make some effort about their appearance, and do a few lines of speed and go out and dance and party.

    Punk was very much a matter of a new cohort seeking to sweep away hippiedom and establish themselves as the dominant youth culture.

    Also I think that many of the defining characteristic of Gen X, such as cynicism and pessimism and a contempt for the peace and love ethos of the 60s, were already fully developed in the 1956-1960 birth cohort. So I think it's reasonable to place the beginning of Gen X around 1956.

    Replies: @Sparkon, @AP

    Well I was there at the time (born in ’57) and I’m simply reporting what I observed. Hippie culture was the creation of people born in the 1935 to 1955 period. Among my peer group (and I don’t just mean myself and a few nerdy friends, I mean every single person I encountered in my age bracket) there was a visceral loathing for hippie culture and an overwhelming desire to disassociate themselves from everything connected to hippiedom.

    That’s interesting. Maybe you were from an advanced region? I’m just going by what was popular as reflected in stuff like record sales. I was much too young to pay attention to this kind of stuff in the the mid seventies. The first time I noticed punks was in the early 80s when visiting Toronto and New York.

    there was a visceral loathing for hippie culture and an overwhelming desire to disassociate themselves from everything connected to hippiedom.

    Yeah, we had that in the 80s. There were songs about killing hippies at the time.

    Disco and glam rock were just as self-indulgent as hippie culture but it was a different kind of self-indulgence. Instead of being filthy and smelly and sitting round smoking dope the disco/glam rock crowd wanted to be clean, to make some effort about their appearance, and do a few lines of speed and go out and dance and party.

    Punk was very much a matter of a new cohort seeking to sweep away hippiedom and establish themselves as the dominant youth culture.

    I agree with this. It’s interesting to see how Gen X evolved in its tastes in a way that can be analogous to that of the Boomers. Classic punk is much too simple and primitive for my taste, the various post-punk stuff is more complex and more competently made while retaining a similar spirit, just as just as Queen or Bowie or disco are more complex and well-made, relative to 60s stuff, while still being all about empty self-indulgence.

    So I think it’s reasonable to place the beginning of Gen X around 1956.

    I think that proto-Gen Xers like you existed from your age group but that the wide generational shift caught up a few years later. In that sense you might be like the beatniks from the 50s who were proto-Boomers.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @AP


    That’s interesting. Maybe you were from an advanced region?
     
    Actually I think that in the 70s the US was often two or three years behind Britain and Australia when it came to musical trends becoming mainstream. Bowie and the glam rock thing was big in Britain and Australia before Bowie was known at all in the US. Blondie were huge in Australia several years before they made it big in the US. It's possible that the larger US market took longer to pick up on trends.

    Yeah, we had that in the 80s. There were songs about killing hippies at the time.
     
    Songs about killing hippies. Good times!

    I think that proto-Gen Xers like you existed from your age group but that the wide generational shift caught up a few years later. In that sense you might be like the beatniks from the 50s who were proto-Boomers.
     
    I guess it's just not possible to draw anything approaching rigid generational boundaries at all. There are always sub-generations within each generation and there are transitional periods.

    The late 50s was definitely a transitional period. Lots of social and cultural changes bubbling under the surface that didn't really surface in a major way until the late 60s.

    The 70s was interesting because youth culture was starting to fragment. This seemed to start in Britain. There were multiple youth subcultures - hippies, skinheads, glam rockers, disco people, punks, proto-goths at the end of the decade. In Australia there was a neo-rockabilly subculture (and they took it really seriously). Musically there were the fans of the mainstream stadium rock bands but there were also the prog-rock fans, the reggae fans, the pub rock fans, disco fans, glam rock fans, punks, even the jazz-rock fusion fans (remember jazz-rock fusion?).

    The different subcultures didn't just like different kinds of music - they wore different fashions, had wildly divergent political views and social attitudes. That fragmentation into subcultures continued into the 80s. Depending on which subculture you belonged to you might be a Trotskyist or a Thatcherite or anywhere in between. In Australia there were even different lesbian subcultures (who despised each other).

    So anyone born between the mid-50s and the late-60s is difficult to classify culturally or politically or socially. Those born from the late 30s to the early 50s seemed to form a bit more of a coherent cultural/social/political bloc.
  91. AP says:
    @Ano4
    @AP


    It seems that these were a small minority of people though – it didn’t get widespread until the very end of the 70s.
     
    Punk was never about trying to become mainstream.

    It was a fringe movement.

    As soon as they become mainstream, punk rockers lost their punk rock attitude and become just pop musicians (I specifically thought about the Clash here).

    Even in the UK where it was promoted a lot during the Thatcher era (a distraction for the British youth?) punk has never become a mass movement.

    When the Offspring and Green Day started filling up stadiums real Punk was already dead for some twenty years.

    Mike Muir from Suicidal Tendencies joked about it by saying something along the lines that when he was young parents could send you to a shrink if you listened to Punk Rock, but that end of 90ies parents would send you to a shrink if you didn't want to go to a Green Day show with them.

    The Stooges and Yggy, MC5 are protopunk both in form and spirit.

    Ramones, Patti Smith, Television and even early Blondie are early NY Punk.

    Buzzcocks, Sex Pistols, the Damned, Stranglers and the Clash are the secondary UK Punk embodiment that has been mistakenly taken for the real thing.

    And the "massive movement " with the clothing/style/haircuts was the "Punk Not Dead" revival of early 1980-ies (the Exploited, GBH etc.)

    I could go on classifying all these things until we reach industrial postpunk and gothic new wave, but it is not as satisfying anymore to talk about it as when I was in my late teen years.

    Which was a long time ago.

    🙂

    Replies: @dfordoom, @AP, @Bartholomew

    Punk was never about trying to become mainstream.

    It was a fringe movement.

    As soon as they become mainstream, punk rockers lost their punk rock attitude and become just pop musicians (I specifically thought about the Clash here).

    The attitude persisted and became widespread though, all through Gen X until the end. Popular musicians such as Cobain struggled with being “mainstream” or becoming a “sellout”, that was a generational thing that seems to have become important with the punks.

    I could go on classifying all these things until we reach industrial postpunk and gothic new wave, but it is not as satisfying anymore to talk about it as when I was in my late teen years.

    Caring about this sort of stuff also seems to be a generational marker 🙂

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @AP


    Caring about this sort of stuff also seems to be a generational marker
     
    Good point.
  92. Ano4 says:
    @Blinky Bill
    You guys were lucky, I grew up listening to this when young.



    https://youtu.be/NrBtOTstM-4

    Replies: @Ano4

    Funked up East has many rare Soviet and Eastern Block music gems on YouTube.

    https://www.youtube.com/user/mishapanfilov

    But I think the majority of USSR kids in 70ies were subjected to a heavy dose of Vyssotsky and Okudzhava (possibly leading to a permanent psychological damage that manifested itself in Perestroika times).

    To be fair, there were also some soft “Rock” bands in USSR at the time (late 70ies).

    Some of them were more or less worth listening to.

    Although what came later was way more interesting:

    😁

    • Thanks: Blinky Bill
  93. @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Long rant? What else can you do these days, epecially if you're all couped up sitting around the house?

    I can see that you're another fount of pop music information. If you read my original comment when entering this discussion, you'll see that my real interest at the moment is to become more acquainted with "club music", that started, I think, sometime in the 90's and is still going strong? #60:


    Somehow magically, I recently got interested in “club music” of the 2000’s and started listening to DJ’ productions like “Dimitri from Paris”and “Cassius”. Some of this stuff is boring, recycled rap music, but some of it is passable and bright if not delightful disco ear candy. If you’re familiar with this genre of music and could recommend anybody, I’d be grateful.
     
    https://is4-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Music128/v4/7f/2b/5a/7f2b5ab7-8e4c-5c08-48ed-8daf2d57bb8f/00602547813145.rgb.jpg/300x300bb.jpg

    This stuff is Okay.

    Replies: @Mr. Hack, @Ano4

    Seems early Ibiza club music is an influence for this Cassius album.

    This kind of thing:

  94. “Ibifornia” and “Ibiza” share a common root word? The newer incarnation seems more layered and lush in its presentation. I will indeed check out the newer ’18, ’19 & ’20’ mixes on Youtube for Ibiza -youthful frolicking in the sun, will it ever return? The sun will, so might the frolicking – not the youthful though. 🙁

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    @Mr. Hack

    No tattoos among these clubing devotees? Whassup with that?

    Replies: @Ano4

  95. @Mr. Hack
    "Ibifornia" and "Ibiza" share a common root word? The newer incarnation seems more layered and lush in its presentation. I will indeed check out the newer '18, '19 & '20' mixes on Youtube for Ibiza -youthful frolicking in the sun, will it ever return? The sun will, so might the frolicking - not the youthful though. :-(

    https://youtu.be/IIkHYL7c3tM

    Replies: @Mr. Hack

    No tattoos among these clubing devotees? Whassup with that?

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack

    Ibiza was the place to be around mid nineties.

    That, Goa and May Day / Love Parade raves in Berlin.

    Ibiza must be quite empty today:

    https://nypost.com/2020/05/25/ibiza-invaded-by-asian-tiger-mosquitoes-with-pools-untreated/

    Probably even a little depressing.

    The massive obsession with tattoo is a marker for millenials.

    It was rare in the PLUR movement halcyon days.

    What I miss most is small underground Psy Trance raves.

    Especially the ones outdoors in some remote forest.

    Dancing all night on some shamanic drone/beat/vibe was quite endorphin inducing.

    It still exists as a subculture, although on a much smaller scale.

    https://youtu.be/_6B9tBRFEeE

    And I now prefer going to bed early.

    🙂

    Replies: @AP, @Mr. Hack

  96. @Mr. Hack
    @Mr. Hack

    No tattoos among these clubing devotees? Whassup with that?

    Replies: @Ano4

    Ibiza was the place to be around mid nineties.

    That, Goa and May Day / Love Parade raves in Berlin.

    Ibiza must be quite empty today:

    https://nypost.com/2020/05/25/ibiza-invaded-by-asian-tiger-mosquitoes-with-pools-untreated/

    Probably even a little depressing.

    The massive obsession with tattoo is a marker for millenials.

    It was rare in the PLUR movement halcyon days.

    What I miss most is small underground Psy Trance raves.

    Especially the ones outdoors in some remote forest.

    Dancing all night on some shamanic drone/beat/vibe was quite endorphin inducing.

    It still exists as a subculture, although on a much smaller scale.

    And I now prefer going to bed early.

    🙂

    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @AP
    @Ano4


    Ibiza was the place to be around mid nineties.
     
    It was the place to be long before that too, from the late 80s:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JHGAlZlv-A

    New Order's best album was recorded IMO there in 1989.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXbe_PXSoCI

    Replies: @Ano4

    , @Mr. Hack
    @Ano4

    Looks rather melancholic, dark and depressing. I left the monkeys behind long ago; I'm a devotee of the white dove - no drugs necessary to fly now. :-) .

    https://youtu.be/ScFBqyAN8Bw

  97. @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack

    Ibiza was the place to be around mid nineties.

    That, Goa and May Day / Love Parade raves in Berlin.

    Ibiza must be quite empty today:

    https://nypost.com/2020/05/25/ibiza-invaded-by-asian-tiger-mosquitoes-with-pools-untreated/

    Probably even a little depressing.

    The massive obsession with tattoo is a marker for millenials.

    It was rare in the PLUR movement halcyon days.

    What I miss most is small underground Psy Trance raves.

    Especially the ones outdoors in some remote forest.

    Dancing all night on some shamanic drone/beat/vibe was quite endorphin inducing.

    It still exists as a subculture, although on a much smaller scale.

    https://youtu.be/_6B9tBRFEeE

    And I now prefer going to bed early.

    🙂

    Replies: @AP, @Mr. Hack

    Ibiza was the place to be around mid nineties.

    It was the place to be long before that too, from the late 80s:

    New Order’s best album was recorded IMO there in 1989.

    • Replies: @Ano4
    @AP


    New Order’s best album was recorded IMO there in 1989.
     
    Interesting.

    Didn't know that.

    Thanks for the video, brings back memories.

    Be well!
  98. @AP
    @Ano4


    Ibiza was the place to be around mid nineties.
     
    It was the place to be long before that too, from the late 80s:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JHGAlZlv-A

    New Order's best album was recorded IMO there in 1989.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXbe_PXSoCI

    Replies: @Ano4

    New Order’s best album was recorded IMO there in 1989.

    Interesting.

    Didn’t know that.

    Thanks for the video, brings back memories.

    Be well!

  99. @Ano4
    @Mr. Hack

    Ibiza was the place to be around mid nineties.

    That, Goa and May Day / Love Parade raves in Berlin.

    Ibiza must be quite empty today:

    https://nypost.com/2020/05/25/ibiza-invaded-by-asian-tiger-mosquitoes-with-pools-untreated/

    Probably even a little depressing.

    The massive obsession with tattoo is a marker for millenials.

    It was rare in the PLUR movement halcyon days.

    What I miss most is small underground Psy Trance raves.

    Especially the ones outdoors in some remote forest.

    Dancing all night on some shamanic drone/beat/vibe was quite endorphin inducing.

    It still exists as a subculture, although on a much smaller scale.

    https://youtu.be/_6B9tBRFEeE

    And I now prefer going to bed early.

    🙂

    Replies: @AP, @Mr. Hack

    Looks rather melancholic, dark and depressing. I left the monkeys behind long ago; I’m a devotee of the white dove – no drugs necessary to fly now. 🙂 .

  100. @RadicalCenter
    @Bartholomew

    At one time, that may have been true to some degree. But Africans mostly migrated from the South to the North and California long ago, half a century ago or much more. The alleged similarity of non-Southern African-“Americans” to Lower-income Southern whites doesn’t fly nowadays. It doesn’t make sense as an explanation of systematically — really nonstop — violent, vulgar, and anti-social behavior by africans in the non-South USA, in our experience.

    I don’t associate “lower class”, which i take to mean “low-income”, Southern whites with saying the word “motherf—-er”, throwing trash and food on the ground on a town sidewalk, putting their hands on their crotch or even down the front of their pants in public in front of women and children, constantly muttering or “singing” violent lyrics “to themselves” to intimidate passersby, or assaulting and permanently injuring me for no reason.

    Yet I and my wife and children have seen, heard, and suffered everything i just described by the hand of African-“Americans” here in Los Angeles, in Philadelphia, in Chicago, in Baltimore, and in many other U.S. Cities.

    African-“Americans” are a uniquely dimwitted, obnoxious, physically dangerous, socially destructive force in the usa, matched by no other group — and most of them far divorced in time and experience from any traditional Southern cultural roots, “lower class” or otherwise.

    Replies: @Bartholomew

    I’m not using it as an excuse for their behavior. Just as an explanation of their culture overall. There has been some divergence between southern and northern blacks, but not all that much. And it is still derived from southern white culture overall.

    • Thanks: RadicalCenter
  101. @AP
    @dfordoom


    Well I was there at the time (born in ’57) and I’m simply reporting what I observed. Hippie culture was the creation of people born in the 1935 to 1955 period. Among my peer group (and I don’t just mean myself and a few nerdy friends, I mean every single person I encountered in my age bracket) there was a visceral loathing for hippie culture and an overwhelming desire to disassociate themselves from everything connected to hippiedom.
     
    That's interesting. Maybe you were from an advanced region? I'm just going by what was popular as reflected in stuff like record sales. I was much too young to pay attention to this kind of stuff in the the mid seventies. The first time I noticed punks was in the early 80s when visiting Toronto and New York.

    there was a visceral loathing for hippie culture and an overwhelming desire to disassociate themselves from everything connected to hippiedom.
     
    Yeah, we had that in the 80s. There were songs about killing hippies at the time.

    Disco and glam rock were just as self-indulgent as hippie culture but it was a different kind of self-indulgence. Instead of being filthy and smelly and sitting round smoking dope the disco/glam rock crowd wanted to be clean, to make some effort about their appearance, and do a few lines of speed and go out and dance and party.

    Punk was very much a matter of a new cohort seeking to sweep away hippiedom and establish themselves as the dominant youth culture.
     
    I agree with this. It's interesting to see how Gen X evolved in its tastes in a way that can be analogous to that of the Boomers. Classic punk is much too simple and primitive for my taste, the various post-punk stuff is more complex and more competently made while retaining a similar spirit, just as just as Queen or Bowie or disco are more complex and well-made, relative to 60s stuff, while still being all about empty self-indulgence.

    So I think it’s reasonable to place the beginning of Gen X around 1956.
     
    I think that proto-Gen Xers like you existed from your age group but that the wide generational shift caught up a few years later. In that sense you might be like the beatniks from the 50s who were proto-Boomers.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    That’s interesting. Maybe you were from an advanced region?

    Actually I think that in the 70s the US was often two or three years behind Britain and Australia when it came to musical trends becoming mainstream. Bowie and the glam rock thing was big in Britain and Australia before Bowie was known at all in the US. Blondie were huge in Australia several years before they made it big in the US. It’s possible that the larger US market took longer to pick up on trends.

    Yeah, we had that in the 80s. There were songs about killing hippies at the time.

    Songs about killing hippies. Good times!

    I think that proto-Gen Xers like you existed from your age group but that the wide generational shift caught up a few years later. In that sense you might be like the beatniks from the 50s who were proto-Boomers.

    I guess it’s just not possible to draw anything approaching rigid generational boundaries at all. There are always sub-generations within each generation and there are transitional periods.

    The late 50s was definitely a transitional period. Lots of social and cultural changes bubbling under the surface that didn’t really surface in a major way until the late 60s.

    The 70s was interesting because youth culture was starting to fragment. This seemed to start in Britain. There were multiple youth subcultures – hippies, skinheads, glam rockers, disco people, punks, proto-goths at the end of the decade. In Australia there was a neo-rockabilly subculture (and they took it really seriously). Musically there were the fans of the mainstream stadium rock bands but there were also the prog-rock fans, the reggae fans, the pub rock fans, disco fans, glam rock fans, punks, even the jazz-rock fusion fans (remember jazz-rock fusion?).

    The different subcultures didn’t just like different kinds of music – they wore different fashions, had wildly divergent political views and social attitudes. That fragmentation into subcultures continued into the 80s. Depending on which subculture you belonged to you might be a Trotskyist or a Thatcherite or anywhere in between. In Australia there were even different lesbian subcultures (who despised each other).

    So anyone born between the mid-50s and the late-60s is difficult to classify culturally or politically or socially. Those born from the late 30s to the early 50s seemed to form a bit more of a coherent cultural/social/political bloc.

    • Agree: AP
  102. @AP
    @Ano4


    Punk was never about trying to become mainstream.

    It was a fringe movement.

    As soon as they become mainstream, punk rockers lost their punk rock attitude and become just pop musicians (I specifically thought about the Clash here).
     
    The attitude persisted and became widespread though, all through Gen X until the end. Popular musicians such as Cobain struggled with being "mainstream" or becoming a "sellout", that was a generational thing that seems to have become important with the punks.

    I could go on classifying all these things until we reach industrial postpunk and gothic new wave, but it is not as satisfying anymore to talk about it as when I was in my late teen years.
     
    Caring about this sort of stuff also seems to be a generational marker :-)

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Caring about this sort of stuff also seems to be a generational marker

    Good point.

  103. @Ano4
    @AP


    It seems that these were a small minority of people though – it didn’t get widespread until the very end of the 70s.
     
    Punk was never about trying to become mainstream.

    It was a fringe movement.

    As soon as they become mainstream, punk rockers lost their punk rock attitude and become just pop musicians (I specifically thought about the Clash here).

    Even in the UK where it was promoted a lot during the Thatcher era (a distraction for the British youth?) punk has never become a mass movement.

    When the Offspring and Green Day started filling up stadiums real Punk was already dead for some twenty years.

    Mike Muir from Suicidal Tendencies joked about it by saying something along the lines that when he was young parents could send you to a shrink if you listened to Punk Rock, but that end of 90ies parents would send you to a shrink if you didn't want to go to a Green Day show with them.

    The Stooges and Yggy, MC5 are protopunk both in form and spirit.

    Ramones, Patti Smith, Television and even early Blondie are early NY Punk.

    Buzzcocks, Sex Pistols, the Damned, Stranglers and the Clash are the secondary UK Punk embodiment that has been mistakenly taken for the real thing.

    And the "massive movement " with the clothing/style/haircuts was the "Punk Not Dead" revival of early 1980-ies (the Exploited, GBH etc.)

    I could go on classifying all these things until we reach industrial postpunk and gothic new wave, but it is not as satisfying anymore to talk about it as when I was in my late teen years.

    Which was a long time ago.

    🙂

    Replies: @dfordoom, @AP, @Bartholomew

    Correction: punk was never meant to *appear* like it was trying to become mainstream. But is was mainstream all along because punk was an astroturf cultural movement, like most of the cultural movements that emerged from the 60s and 70s.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Bartholomew


    Correction: punk was never meant to *appear* like it was trying to become mainstream. But is was mainstream all along because punk was an astroturf cultural movement, like most of the cultural movements that emerged from the 60s and 70s.
     
    No, I don't agree with that. There were all sorts of musical trends happening in the 60s and 70s and all sorts of subcultures arising and most of them do not appear to have been planned or organised in a sinister fashion. Most seem to have arisen spontaneously.

    Of course there were corporations like record companies seeking to take advantage of such trends but even that doesn't seem to me to be particularly sinister.

    Replies: @Ano4

  104. @Bartholomew
    @Ano4

    Correction: punk was never meant to *appear* like it was trying to become mainstream. But is was mainstream all along because punk was an astroturf cultural movement, like most of the cultural movements that emerged from the 60s and 70s.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Correction: punk was never meant to *appear* like it was trying to become mainstream. But is was mainstream all along because punk was an astroturf cultural movement, like most of the cultural movements that emerged from the 60s and 70s.

    No, I don’t agree with that. There were all sorts of musical trends happening in the 60s and 70s and all sorts of subcultures arising and most of them do not appear to have been planned or organised in a sinister fashion. Most seem to have arisen spontaneously.

    Of course there were corporations like record companies seeking to take advantage of such trends but even that doesn’t seem to me to be particularly sinister.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @Ano4
    @dfordoom

    There was a DIY attitude in Punk rock.

    It survived longer in US Hardcore punk.

    It was way much more radical than anything else at the time, with the possible exception of Skinhead Oï music.

    But then Hardcore and Oï were the left and right wings of the same white youth disenfranchisement.

    Two sides of the same coin that really clashed when they met face to face.

    https://youtu.be/GR8acGv0Rzg

  105. @dfordoom
    @Bartholomew


    Correction: punk was never meant to *appear* like it was trying to become mainstream. But is was mainstream all along because punk was an astroturf cultural movement, like most of the cultural movements that emerged from the 60s and 70s.
     
    No, I don't agree with that. There were all sorts of musical trends happening in the 60s and 70s and all sorts of subcultures arising and most of them do not appear to have been planned or organised in a sinister fashion. Most seem to have arisen spontaneously.

    Of course there were corporations like record companies seeking to take advantage of such trends but even that doesn't seem to me to be particularly sinister.

    Replies: @Ano4

    There was a DIY attitude in Punk rock.

    It survived longer in US Hardcore punk.

    It was way much more radical than anything else at the time, with the possible exception of Skinhead Oï music.

    But then Hardcore and Oï were the left and right wings of the same white youth disenfranchisement.

    Two sides of the same coin that really clashed when they met face to face.

    • Agree: dfordoom

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS