10 October 2007

Generation Q

Tom Friedman is, as usual, almost hitting the nail on the head today, talking about this generation of college students and young adults.

He calls them idealistic and optimistic, but quiet--that's the Q. And always the optimist himeslf, he is willing to buy into the idealism as such and not call these kids "deluded" or "hopelessly out of touch." And then he says that if they are not outraged they are not paying attention. And says that they need to stand up for all these things, like the polar ice cap melting, that they just talk about amongst themselves.

Friedman, wake up! This is how smart, powerless people in a closed government behave! Kids these days are not quiet, they are living in a world where asking questions goes nowhere. You want outrage? Be outraged at that.

I want to live in a democracy more than anyone. But I am not going to blame kids-these-days for understanding that we don't.


Okay, so the minute I hit the publish button, I thought about what I said. Maybe Friedman is right. After all, technically people still do walk into voting booths and push buttons or whatever. And just because in certain states you don't have a record of your vote, and just because there is ample evidence of voting "irregularities", that doesn't necessarily mean that democracy is in fact dead. What makes it dead is the fact that nobody gives a shit about the irregularities. What makes it dead is the fact that bringing it up in an appropriately outraged fashion will get you tazed by the campus police, while the student body sits and watches and does nothing. I stand corrected. Tom Friedman, you are awake.


Blogger highlowbetween said...

Friedman shouldn't even have a platform after all of his cheerleading and miscalls. He's got blood on his hands as far as I'm concerned.

10 October, 2007 13:34  
Blogger fisher6000 said...

good to see you, hl.

Can you elaborate?

10 October, 2007 18:54  
Blogger highlowbetween said...

simply -IRAQ ;)

11 October, 2007 10:30  
Blogger highlowbetween said...

Ok, so I'll go further. Hasn't it always bothered you his one sided cheery take on globalization?
All of life is a glorious market and what a wonder the internet is - they even have it in India! I'm being glib of course, but he always seems a corporate shil to me. An apologist and closer to David Brooks than most people want to admit. He cheerleaded Bush and the invasion and gushed over Rumsfeld - until of course it appeared that that was bad for business. See Tom can't be associated with a losing team, bad for book sales.
Like Brooks, Chris Matthews, Kristol, etc. he never has to live with the consequences of his punditry - his readers do unfortunately.

11 October, 2007 10:44  

Post a Comment

<< Home