Re: Activism and generational outlooks

karensky@concentric.net
Sun, 06 Sep 1998 21:53:03 -0700

Ted,
You are right that a sense of fatalism is at work. We (college-people in
the 90's) don't feel like anything we do will make enough difference to
make it worth our time, and besides, acting up can make us look foolish.

I'm having a hell of a time just trying to get fellow students to take a
flyer from me. I don't have much time for handing them out, either. They
look at me as if I were very odd, and some will take one from me and
drop it in the garbage, right in front of my eyes. If I were
petitioning, I'd probably get one signature or listening ear for a
thousand rejections. They are in such a hurry, and they look so bitter.

I'm the only student I know who is protesting the proposed merger of my
University's library with the city's public library. I have many reasons
for believing the merger would be a disaster, and for distrusting the
motives and operational philosophies of the powerful folks trying to
make it happen. We, and the public, won't even have a chance to vote on
it-- planning is well underway, and no one was asked how they felt. It's
the City's re-development baby, and plans have been going on rapidly and
undercover.

I think there is an institutional, conservative wash over youth today,
and it's very stifling and imposed. I suspect it may often be the cause
of many youth suicides--though i haven't looked up suicide statistics
from the 60's & the 90's, to compare.

thanks for your thoughtful remarks. Wish I'd seen them sooner.

karen

TED MORGAN wrote:
>
> A while back Anne Marie Ellison posted a thoughtful piece about attitudes
> towards activism among folks of her age group (graduating from college)
> compared to that of her parents' (60s/our) generation. I wished I had
> responded right away, and would like to see some discussion of these themes on
> the list if others are so inclined. Clearly we live in different times --the
> global economy, the pervasive media/consumer culture of entertainment, the
> 15-20 years of "Right Turn" (Reaganism/Thatcherism), and the various sectarian
> splinters from the 60s.....
>
> I'm always asking my students how their world view is different from/similar to
> those expressed in 60s movements, and how/why their behavior is different.
> Anne's post suggested several familiar themes...
>
> > Among my age group, though,I think activism has taken on a
> >different lilt than in my parents' generation. <snip> "Activism" has moved
> >closer to "volunteerism" these days and you have folks from the Points of Light
> >Foundation on C-SPAN talking about what good people we all are for doing what we
> >should do, as citizens. I think anything much beyond that, and people are
> >afraid.
>
> The ideology of "individualism," of the market as "most efficient" distributor
> of goods. That's one big thing that undermines collective action. I think
> Anne's making the crucial distinction between "volunteerism" (a good thing,
> but not activism) and "political action" which after all is all that will
> CHANGE the conditions that cause the problems (oppression, poverty,
> destruction of the environment, 3rd world exploitation, wars/invasions...).
> But political action requires awareness of the idea of "acting-with-others"
> and I'm not sure how much younger folks have ever experienced this as
> something meaningful? The consumer society teaches that one "acts" or "is
> empowered" by selecting among already-produced commodities ON ONE'S OWN.
>
> The other piece in here Anne mentions is fear --an interesting one. Fear
> about careers? Stepping off the ladder or treadmill (or as Paul Goodman put it
> years ago, escaping the "apparently closed room"). An ideological piece
> thoroughly taught by our schools and political and economic "respected
> leaders." ANd a reality to this one: the economy is being wrung out by
> globalization, so the competition is keener.
>
> Anne mentions the difficulty in getting students involved on protests --a
> familiar experience for anyone involved in student (or other) organizing, I'm
> sure; sure rings true at Lehigh. She mentions the lack of a central
> mobilization issue like vietnam, which I think is relevant. But there is
> something deeper, in her comments about the kinds of "politics" her generation
> has experienced (scandals galore, political ineptitude, empty promises,
> etc.)... which, in my view, adds up to a kind of powerlessness/ inability to
> envision effective political action of virtually any kind.... Political
> leaders have something to do with this. With all their horrific warts, it
> strikes me that there's some intangible difference between Kennedy, Johnson,
> Nixon and the likes of Bush & Clinton (& Carter & Reagan) --or is it just the
> structure within which they operate. Perhaps more to the point, there were
> highly visible leaders who could inspire people with the belief in acting to
> change things --King, Malcolm, RFK.... Re there likes anywhere around, or do
> the media just destroy them before they get too big (or scare the good ones
> off)?
>
> Anyway, I'd be very interested in how others explain these obvious big
> differences, the enormous difficulty in getting any kind of significant
> mobilization going. Especially (?) among the young? And I know there are a
> host of grass-roots things going on out there; it's just that there optimal
> effect is a kind of rear-guard defense of something threatened by huge forces.
> I might also add, that in my participation in a local chapter of the Labor
> Party, we seem to tap into a strong DESIRE among quite a few people (I suspect
> it's a majority) to somehow right this train-heading-for-a-wreck and make this
> a better world. But there's a powerful lot of fatalism, too. MUCH different
> from the early 60s.
>
> Ted Morgan