Introduction
Watching the documentary “Berkeley in the Sixties” comes in very handy, within a context of discussing differences between generations. It portrays Berkley’s students as being utterly passionate about defending their political stance, which happened to be a neo-Liberalism. The neo-Liberalism has its roots in materialism, as the way of perceiving reality and therefore, can be closely linked to Marxism. This explains the fact why the young protesters against Vietnam War, shown in the documentary, often do not hesitate describing themselves as Communists or Marxists.
However, what strikes viewers as very odd is the fact that, while promoting purely materialistic Liberal values, the majority of Berkley’s students in sixties, acted as classical idealists, who thought that their political activity had value in itself. This brings us closer to realization of what constitutes a difference between the generation of “baby boomers” and “generation X”. Apparently, the majority of “baby boomers” felt themselves as being a part of historical process, whereas the lifestyle of most of people associated with “generation X” is being marked with social absenteeism. This paper is aimed at substantiating this thesis.
Main body
In his lecture “The Problem of Generations: Family, Economy, Politics”, Martin Kohli is making a good point when he suggests that: “Human generations lie at the root of social dynamics in all spheres of social life – not only in politics but also in the economy and the family. The sequence of generations is about continuity and conflict” (Kohli, p.4). In other words, the existence of social or political conflict, with which young people can associate themselves, is vital, within a context of these people realizing themselves as belonging to a particular generation.
In her article “Gen (Fill in the Blank): Coming of Age, Seeking and Identity”, Arlie Russell Hochschild provides us with the insight on Karl Mannheim’s definition of generation, which still remains valid: “Generation is a cohort of people who feel the impact of a powerful historical event and develop a shared consciousness about it”(Hochschild). The world in sixties was much different, comparing to what it is now. The economy in America was on the rise, while the power of organized religion was steadily declining.
In its turn, this brought about a situation when young people of the time were slowly realizing that their opinion really does matter. The fact that “baby boomers” often came from families affected by WW2, resulted in them being aware of what the concept of sacrifice for the sake of higher good stands for. This is why “Berkeley in the Sixties” portrays the majority of students as such that are willing to take a risk of being expelled from university, as the ultimate price for making themselves heard.
This is because in sixties, in order for the individual to gain a social prominence, he would have to prove that he is capable of taking risks, he would have to prove its existential uniqueness. In eighties, it was no longer the case. The dogma of political correctness resulted in creating a situation, when the possession of prominent personal qualities, on the part of every particular individual, poses a threat to society’s stability. This is why, the majority of today’s politicians, who belong to “generation X”, can be described as anything, but memorable. They are the embodiments of existential conformism at its worst. Even their physical appearance (grey suits, unrecognizable facial features, standard smile on their faces) emphasizes on it.
Let us describe a typical “baby boomer” of sixties, in order to be able to compare him with the typical representative of “generation X”, which we associate with eighties. The “baby boomer” is a person who truly believes that world can be turned into a better place to live. He is being deeply convinced that human life has an undisputed value and that people must be allowed to lead the lifestyle they want. He believes that it is a duty of every citizen to have a political opinion.
The “real” representative of “flower children” considers pursuing a professional career as something that deprives him or her of its existential freedom. At the same time, the fact that the majority of “baby boomers” had a quick mind, allowed them to gain financial independence, in later stages of their lives, without having to apply much of an effort. Given the fact that they grew up in time when there was no “thought police”, these people now often find themselves being charged with “political incorrectness”, even though that it was them who helped the ideology of neo-Liberalism to attain a status of an undisputable dogma.
Conclusion
People who belong to generation of eighties, on the other hand, are being best characterized by their consumerist attitudes, which can be explained by the fact that, during the course of their upbringing, they were encouraged to consider its own well-being as such that has a foremost value. “Gen-Exers” tend to choose in favor of “security”, in times when “baby boomers” would choose in favor of “freedom”.
The years 1970-1985 are now being commonly referred to as “time between time”, because the old geopolitical concepts began to loose its credibility, during the course of these years. At the same time, the “post-modern” world was not going to become a part of objective reality up until nineties. Hence, “Gen-Exers” split in personality. We can say that people who belong to “generation X” lack the idealism on conscious level, but they still posses it as part of their inner being.
However, the fact that they grew up in the period of economic prosperity, deprived them of many spiritual qualities, which allowed their ancestors to achieve such prosperity in the first place. “Gen-Exers” are generally being reluctant, when it comes to exploring their existential potential, because they know that it will prevent them from fitting into the “corporate world”, where the concept of existential uniformity is being promoted by Medias and by social institutions.
Given the fact that most of people who belong to “generation X” had never experienced any real challenges in their lives, makes them more susceptible to depression. “Gen-Exers” subconsciously understand that many aspects of their lives have artificial nature. Yet, they lack the courage of admitting it to themselves. In its turn, this often results in them becoming dissatisfied with objective reality, which often transforms into social escapism, on their part. For example, today’s philosophy of “New Age” derives of “Generation X” collective subconsciousness. It is being designed to help people of my generation to deal with various life challenges, without experiencing the sensation of existential impotency.
Bibliography
- Hochschild, Russell Arlie “Gen (Fill in the Blank): Coming of Age, Seeking and Identity”. 2000. Generations. New York Times.
- Kohli, Martin “The Problem of Generations: Family, Economy, Politics”. 1997. Collegium Budapest. Web.