David Brooks has kind of a weird column suggesting that the prevailing narcissism of the Boomers is giving way to a service ethic in today's young people.
Really? We aren't narcissistic? As a 27-year-old, I'm a bit offended. Now, let me upload some videos of myself onto youtube, scan the old photos on my facebook page, and stare into a mirror for 45 minutes so that I may recover.
Brooks talks about the Boomers' unwillingness to face their demons, and puts forth W and Clinton being undone by their vices as evidence. He contrasts that to Lincoln's having wrestled with his own ambition and uniqueness at a younger age, so that when he reached the presidency, he was master of what plagued his character. I'm not sure that being laid low by one's flaws has a lot to do with the era. Just ask the Greeks. Or Shakespeare. The United States has certainly been unlucky in having two consecutive presidents singularly unable to overcome their shortcomings, just as it was extremely lucky in 1861 to inaugurate a man who could. Something tells me the next president will be closer to Lincoln than W in that sense, but it won't be because he's not a Boomer.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It was a tad odd.
If you accept Obama:Kennedy, then it'd be like passing judgment on the Boomers & Silents prior to Kennedy's election. Or even based on that Time person of the year (1968?) where it named the Boomers as their object of their affection and laid out a list of what the boomers were going to accomplish...with none of it coming to pass.
I'm not a fan of the Boomers, as you might guess, but I will wait and see what history has to say about the Xers and Millennials.
Thanks for the comment Will. As far as what history as to say about the Xers and Millennials, I think, politically at least, a couple of things leap to mind that seem to bode well for them. First, the relative pragmatism of today's young conservatives, whereas their ideological forefathers were more extreme and combative. Also, I think the pressing and obvious nature of a lot of today's problems could make things easier. Compared to 1975, the challenge of defeating the Soviets probably looked harder than widening health care. Of course, that's a selectively chosen example, so who knows. Do you have a link to the Time story?
I haven't been able to find the article itself, but thtere are several links that talk (briefly) about it. It was the 1966 Time Person of the Year entitled, "Twenty-five and Under"
I did find the cover here.
I'll hunt a tad more for it later.
Post a Comment