What’s going on here? We’re not suffering through a generational war. We’re continuing to live through a clash of economic classes…
Baby boomers just happened to have had the good fortune to come along at one of those rare moments in history when the richest among us were not doing so well in that clash of classes. These boomers found themselves born into a postwar America that average people — after years of struggle — had fundamentally transformed.
"just happend" does a lot of work there, for sure, but nevertheless...
I can’t afford to pay rent so will have to move back home with my dad and stepmom #2 and their 3 kids, don’t think I can get ahead in life without getting a higher paying job but my parole officer says I shouldn’t expect anyone to hire me anytime soon. Will the government make a new budget and give me money under international fairness?
It’s our hope that this substack community will be a place for active dialogue. In pursuit of this goal, we initially welcomed your regular participation – and hoped that it might inspire others to do the same.
Sadly, I now think your style of participation impedes this goal, because you are no longer participating in a way that models a readiness to “disagree” without being “disagreeable.” Labeling most in younger generations as “individualistic whiners” is inappropriate for the Gen Squeeze substack community, and I ask that you apologize for this name-calling. Going forward, I also ask that you revise your tone of participation so that you communicate disagreement without being disagreeable.
I appreciate your enthusiasm for organizing policy influence through rallies on the street. You seem to presume that we’ve never led rallies – but you would be wrong. They were a bigger part of our earlier years of mobilization. In the light of that experience, especially the scale of engagement we achieved via those efforts relative to the resources they required to host the in-person events, we’ve since shifted our approach.
At Gen Squeeze, we are guided by several theories of policy change, including the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), which has decades of scholarship behind it. The punchline of that theory of policy change is one I’m sure you will agree with: Politics responds to those who organize and show up.
Your comments suggest a very narrow understanding of what it means to “organize and show up.” We agree rallies are one form of power to build. And we will be pleased to help harness such power you manage to create via any rallies you choose to organize.
In the meantime, the ACF also identifies other activities that contribute to “organizing and showing up,” including:
- Framing people’s beliefs about policy problems and solutions
- Shaping public opinion
- Setting policy agenda
- Building coalitions around those agenda
- Bringing that framing, public opinion, policy agenda and person-power to governments in ways that create new incentives for politicians to disrupt the status quo.
I take a lot of pride in the fact that our “Think and Change” contributed directly to the federal 2024 budget organizing entirely around the theme of “fairness for every generation” – a cause that had not been on the political radar in this country to nearly the same degree before our organizing work. And I take pride in the fact that the BC budget’s strategic plan also includes a similar commitment to “keep the province working for all generations.”
I certainly would like our organization to have more influence over government policy, because it grieves me that we are harming younger generations to the degree we are as a result of intergenerationally unjust climate, housing and fiscal policy. But I also know many other groups that applaud and seek to model the influence Gen Squeeze has created.
So, in sum, thanks for encouraging us to be better at building power in the world of politics. But please be careful with your tone of engagement in the future, because you are not modeling a style of non-judgmental and inclusive engagement that will motivate participation from a wider range of people in our community.
You have not responded to our request that you apologize for calling younger generations “individualistic whiners.”
We are creating our Substack community to be a place where ideas can be shared without name-calling. A place where younger and older folks can gather, share and disagree in solidarity and support, without condescension. For this reason, we will be removing you from our substack community.
We will be happy to engage with your ideas on Twitter/X where a more derisive tone is part of that social channel’s online culture.
https://inequality.org/great-divide/to-best-understand-inequality-think-class-not-generation/
What’s going on here? We’re not suffering through a generational war. We’re continuing to live through a clash of economic classes…
Baby boomers just happened to have had the good fortune to come along at one of those rare moments in history when the richest among us were not doing so well in that clash of classes. These boomers found themselves born into a postwar America that average people — after years of struggle — had fundamentally transformed.
"just happend" does a lot of work there, for sure, but nevertheless...
I can’t afford to pay rent so will have to move back home with my dad and stepmom #2 and their 3 kids, don’t think I can get ahead in life without getting a higher paying job but my parole officer says I shouldn’t expect anyone to hire me anytime soon. Will the government make a new budget and give me money under international fairness?
Dear Glen,
It’s our hope that this substack community will be a place for active dialogue. In pursuit of this goal, we initially welcomed your regular participation – and hoped that it might inspire others to do the same.
Sadly, I now think your style of participation impedes this goal, because you are no longer participating in a way that models a readiness to “disagree” without being “disagreeable.” Labeling most in younger generations as “individualistic whiners” is inappropriate for the Gen Squeeze substack community, and I ask that you apologize for this name-calling. Going forward, I also ask that you revise your tone of participation so that you communicate disagreement without being disagreeable.
I appreciate your enthusiasm for organizing policy influence through rallies on the street. You seem to presume that we’ve never led rallies – but you would be wrong. They were a bigger part of our earlier years of mobilization. In the light of that experience, especially the scale of engagement we achieved via those efforts relative to the resources they required to host the in-person events, we’ve since shifted our approach.
At Gen Squeeze, we are guided by several theories of policy change, including the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), which has decades of scholarship behind it. The punchline of that theory of policy change is one I’m sure you will agree with: Politics responds to those who organize and show up.
Your comments suggest a very narrow understanding of what it means to “organize and show up.” We agree rallies are one form of power to build. And we will be pleased to help harness such power you manage to create via any rallies you choose to organize.
In the meantime, the ACF also identifies other activities that contribute to “organizing and showing up,” including:
- Framing people’s beliefs about policy problems and solutions
- Shaping public opinion
- Setting policy agenda
- Building coalitions around those agenda
- Bringing that framing, public opinion, policy agenda and person-power to governments in ways that create new incentives for politicians to disrupt the status quo.
I take a lot of pride in the fact that our “Think and Change” contributed directly to the federal 2024 budget organizing entirely around the theme of “fairness for every generation” – a cause that had not been on the political radar in this country to nearly the same degree before our organizing work. And I take pride in the fact that the BC budget’s strategic plan also includes a similar commitment to “keep the province working for all generations.”
I certainly would like our organization to have more influence over government policy, because it grieves me that we are harming younger generations to the degree we are as a result of intergenerationally unjust climate, housing and fiscal policy. But I also know many other groups that applaud and seek to model the influence Gen Squeeze has created.
So, in sum, thanks for encouraging us to be better at building power in the world of politics. But please be careful with your tone of engagement in the future, because you are not modeling a style of non-judgmental and inclusive engagement that will motivate participation from a wider range of people in our community.
Glen,
You have not responded to our request that you apologize for calling younger generations “individualistic whiners.”
We are creating our Substack community to be a place where ideas can be shared without name-calling. A place where younger and older folks can gather, share and disagree in solidarity and support, without condescension. For this reason, we will be removing you from our substack community.
We will be happy to engage with your ideas on Twitter/X where a more derisive tone is part of that social channel’s online culture.
See you there.
Paul