Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Generation Z is the most conservative since WW2 Watch

    Offline

    20
    (Original post by Unistudent77)
    They aren't the young though. Look at evidence for Brexit re age.
    But then look at the youth in France, with greater support for the Front National than any other age group. Hungarian youth with Jobbik. The youth support for far-right parties isn't far behind other age groups either for Italy, Greece, Poland, Are the British youth really so different from their continental cohort, or was Brexit not necessarily a conservative-liberal split?
    • TSR Support Team
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    But then look at the youth in France, with greater support for the Front National than any other age group. Hungarian youth with Jobbik. The youth support for far-right parties isn't far behind other age groups either for Italy, Greece, Poland, Are the British youth really so different from their continental cohort, or was Brexit not necessarily a conservative-liberal split?
    Unemployment for the young in those aforementioned countries is incredibly high. No wonder they've gone to the extremes.

    Yes, our youth are different.
    Our youth are not more liberal than the youth of the 60s/70s say imo but it's hard to judge.

    The young did not vote for Brexit. In Scotland the greatest votes for YES were in the younger age groups, voting yes was not the conservative choice.

    So since we don't have very high levels of youth unemployment, certainly nothing compared with Spain, France and Greece, then our youth have nit turned authoritarian.


    As i've said before, there is no policy evidence that we are less liberal.
    Abortion, Gay marriage, Drugs, attitudes to alcohol consumption (which is a drug but society seems to see it differently) etc.
    Offline

    20
    (Original post by Unistudent77)
    Unemployment for the young in those aforementioned countries is incredibly high. No wonder they've gone to the extremes.
    No. Unemployment is not so high in Poland or Hungary (long term youth unemployment is similar or lower level to the UK). It is the quality of jobs that is bad. Remember, real wages have fallen almost as much in the UK as Greece; the quality of our youths' jobs deteriorated hugely. So why didn't our youth also turn towards fascism?

    So since we don't have very high levels of youth unemployment, certainly nothing compared with Spain, France and Greece, then our youth have nit turned authoritarian.
    Spanish youth haven't turned towards fascists, afaik, they turned towards Podemos, a populist left-wing party.

    Here's some polling data for France: http://www.lemonde.fr/campus/article...1_4401467.html

    Now where is your polling data that shows the UK youth is so much more liberal than the French youth?
    • TSR Support Team
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    No. Unemployment is not so high in Poland or Hungary (long term youth unemployment is similar or lower level to the UK). It is the quality of jobs that is bad. Remember, real wages have fallen almost as much in the UK as Greece; the quality of our youths' jobs deteriorated hugely. So why didn't our youth also turn towards fascism?



    Spanish youth haven't turned towards fascists, afaik, they turned towards Podemos, a populist left-wing party.

    Do you have polling data that shows that say Austria's youth (under 25s) were voting strongly for the far-right candidate?

    Same question for Poland and Hungary.

    Our youth hasn't turned to the right because it doesn't reflect our values. Pro EU, liberal, Democracy, tolerance etc.

    I said authoritarian, not fascist. Although perhaps i meant extreme rather than authoritarian.

    You're putting up many straw men here but the point stands that the UK youth are not conservative. It's the over 40s and particularly over 50s that voted for Brexit. The over 50s were the only age group to vote NO in the Scottish referendum according to polling also.
    Not slating NO here and national identity was extremely important too but conservatives votes NO by huge majority and that was the older generation.


    Even under the present increasingly right-wing Tory government...

    Are there any plans to illegalise abortion? No.
    Repeal Gay marriage? No.
    Reduce LGBT rights? No.
    Some pressure to legalise cannabis? Yes but it'll be unsuccessful but medical marijuana is now legal in Germany and Ireland recently passed a bill.

    Mental health - we have seen big strides forward in attitude etc.

    Religion has fallen here and this has led to these improvements.

    The rise of the right generally is a result of the right very successfully creating scapegoats and playing on people's fears. 'Immigrants are taking your jobs' etc. It isn't traditional 'conservatism' per se.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    If you want to see some plausible statistics, here's a start.

    http://www.people-press.org/2015/06/...-sex-marriage/

    Those born after 1980 overwhelmingly favour gay marriage (73%). In fact, in the millenial age bracket even a majority of Republicans support gay marriage. There is a clear relationship between age demographic and likelihood of supporting gay marriage; the generations who largely opposed it tooth and nail are dying off, and those who largely support it are now coming into positions of power.

    Increasingly, people who oppose it are considered weird and eccentric (at best, and crackpot bigots at worst). It goes to show how badly triggered Christian conservatives are by their devastating defeat on this issue that some of them are still trying to fight this issue even as the fact of fighting it ensures they become ever more discredited in the public eye and the churches continue to decline in membership.

    In fact, the number of people who go to church on Sunday is miniscule. 1.4% of the population go to Anglican services on sundays on a regular basis. A similar (though likely smaller) proportion go to Catholic services. I would be surprised if it's more than one-in-twenty, or 5%, who go to any kind of Christian service on a sunday.

    The Christian conservatives like ladbants who desperately want to believe that there is some kind of conservative backlash coming (they've predicted this for every generation since the 1960s) are increasingly like those Japanese soldiers who were still hiding out in the jungles "fighting" the Americans in the 1970s, thirty years after World War 2 ended. The war is over, we won, you lost. Try to get to grips with it. Though either way, we don't really care what you think; we don't live by your warrant and your permission anymore, and your approval is irrelevant to us.

    Unistudent77 (thought you might appreciate this viewpoint)
    One doesn't need to attend weekly church services in order to be a Christian. Over 40% of the country still identifies as Christian. The war is not over, and we don't need to 'get to grips with it'. This country has been Christian for generations, we want to keep it that way.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unistudent77)

    Our youth hasn't turned to the right because it doesn't reflect our values. Pro EU, liberal, Democracy, tolerance etc.

    Even under the present increasingly right-wing Tory government...

    Are there any plans to illegalise abortion? No.
    Repeal Gay marriage? No.
    Reduce LGBT rights? No.
    Some pressure to legalise cannabis? Yes but it'll be unsuccessful but medical marijuana is now legal in Germany and Ireland recently passed a bill.

    Mental health - we have seen big strides forward in attitude etc.

    Religion has fallen here and this has led to these improvements.
    Too many people think the right's policies are only banning abortions and homosexuality while starting wars with brown people.
    Generation Z will be by far the most fiscally conservative in a while because the previous generations are going to give them the bill for all the money they've borrowed to give themselves pensions and healthcare. Not only are they not going to get all that free stuff but they're going to have to pay for it as well. They get a raw deal from the irresponsible left and won't be able to afford to live under the same delusions of the previous generations.
    • TSR Support Team
    Online

    15
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by asdfg323)
    Too many people think the right's policies are only banning abortions and homosexuality while starting wars with brown people.
    Generation Z will be by far the most fiscally conservative in a while because the previous generations are going to give them the bill for all the money they've borrowed to give themselves pensions and healthcare. Not only are they not going to get all that free stuff but they're going to have to pay for it as well. They get a raw deal from the irresponsible left and won't be able to afford to live under the same delusions of the previous generations.
    The doscussion was moved towards socially conservative policies and issues by previous posters.

    I do actually agree with what you say economically and i'm not a left-winger. The 'baby boomers' have screwed us over and have enjoyed the most. As a result, my generation and those younger than me ie generation Z will probably not have those same luxuries and we may well be more economically conservative as a result
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Generation rebelling against the previous shocker.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vesniep)
    It's sad, but true
    Liberalism is dying
    Absolute nonsense. If you knew the first thing about politics, you'd realise it.

    Liberalism isn't dying; liberalism hasn't existed in this country. Classical Liberalism, of a variety you've never been exposed to, advocates individual rights; progressivism, the ideology you subscribe to, advocates collective rights, technocracy, statism, the erosion of social power (in favour of state power) and what it nefariously deems 'the common good.'

    It was the progressives who advocated, in the 1920s, in favour of pro-white eugenics. They were the same people - feminists, academics, legal professionals, journalists, etc. - who claim to be 'progressive' in the modern age; they deemed certain people (non-white) were too 'unfit', 'uneducated' and 'imbecilic' to participate in the democratic process. They sterilised them.

    How did they justify this? They invoked Darwinism and natural selection. Their policies served as a direct blueprint for National Socialist policies on eugenics during WW2.

    This was in America, against a 'progressive' backdrop in the UK where men like H.G. Wells, of the progressive variety people like you subscribe to, advocating, I quote, 'liberal fascism.'

    The same dynamic exists today, except the 'scientific' progressives deem it's the white man who is 'genetically inferior' and should be 'diversified' owed to his predisposition to warfare.

    Progressivism doesn't believe in anything (except cultural and moral relativism); you're just too politically naive to see it, largely because you, like many of your in-group, deem the political process exists merely to signal your virtue and advance your social status ('look how right-on I am').

    Progressivism's opposition to sexism stops at the border of female perpetrators and male victims, its opposition to racism stops at the border of white victims or non-white perpetrators, its opposition to homophobia stops at the border of its political objectives (particularly communist tyrants), its opposition to xenophobia stops at the border of hating western nation-states and its advocacy of women's rights stops at the border of Islam.

    It's why women like Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, a regular on the BBC's political programming, can get away with making the following comment about white men: 'I dislike them. I hope they're a lost species in one hundred years.'

    It's why the Independent can get away with publishing posts entitled 'white men should never hold elected position in British Universities again.' It's why the BBC can get away with writing articles entitled 'do we need men?'

    It's why Lena Dunham, a woman who was prominent on Hillary Clinton's campaign trail, can get away with tweets calling for the extinction of white men. It's why Harvard professors can get away with calling to, I quote, 'abolish the white race.'

    Of course, shift the identity in any of this and it would be met by their own calls of a 'return to fascism.'

    It has NOTHING to do with liberalism, a simple glance at their rhetoric and their history (they always re-brand, eg, if they aren't progressive they are communist, if they aren't communist they are 'liberal', if they aren't liberal they are 'social democrats'; they just screw everything up and re-brand for the next generation) would tell you that; it has everything to do with exploiting identity as a proxy for class warfare.

    It started predominantly around the time of second-wave feminism, where the women who were fighting for what they deemed to be 'women's rights' determined women were the new proletariat and men were the new bourgeoisie.

    Of course, the woman who spearheaded the transition of feminism to a second-wave (Betty Friedan), and pioneered the notion of the 'personal is political', was a communist. From this, identity, not individuality, was prioritised. You aren't an individual who happens to be a woman, you are a woman. We don't talk about human rights, we talk about 'minority rights'; we don't talk about equality, we talk about 'equality for women.'

    The 'new proletariat' (non-white, non-British/American, non-heterosexual, women, non-Christian, etc.) was born, and it would be employed to divide classical liberals along identity lines (by pitting them against the 'new bourgeoisie', eg, white men). Why? The same reason communists do anything - power, internationalism and global government. A communist will always have far more in common with a communist on the other side of the world than they do with their own citizens.

    In this framework, all in-group unity (eg, the nation-state) is deemed 'oppressive' and all weakness is deemed a virtue. It defies any biological imperative to protect one's own group, and will eventually result in societal deconstruction. The worst part is, you deem it 'liberal.'

    The distinction between these perspectives (eg, human rights vs. minority rights) is the distinction between liberalism and anti-liberalism. 90% of Trump voters are classical liberals who are sick to death of the accentuation and repetition of social misdemeanours when perpetrated by 'white men', but the complete omission, or contextualisation or rationalisation of the precise equivalent or worse behaviours perpetrated by the 'new proletariat.'

    All of it is one giant proxy for usurpation of power, and those who ape the progressive rhetoric know very little about what they do, particularly the ramification of a culturally relativist approach. As far as the progressives are concerned, it's 'racist' or 'ethnocentric' to judge another's culture; this same framework is one which, when extended, would refuse to interfere with a National Socialist's right to perpetrate the holocaust.

    Is that the moral framework you want to live by?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    I agree somewhat.

    However, you are ignoring the existence of conservative (or anti-Islamic) atheists; just compare Richard Dawkins to the pope, Dawkins is far more islamophobic.

    Science can be conservative. For example, there was an article in the New Scientist that showed that there was a correlation between seeing humans as just another type of animal evolved through evolution, and disregard for human rights.

    Also, while the article hasn't convinced me, I do believe that "generation z" is much more conservative than other generations were when they were the same age, when it comes to many issues, such as drug use, war, islam, international cooperation, and perhaps is less open to trans-rights than the 'millenials'.

    Look across the channel to France, where the proto-fascist Front National has the strongest support from the youth out of any age group (according to surveys). There is similarly high levels of support for far-right parties all across Europe amongst the youth, not necessarily higher than other generations, but higher than the previous generations would have been at that age.

    My point is that while over 50s generally vote more right-wing, when they were young themselves, they voted a lot more left-wing than the current generation of youths are, suggesting that the current generation is indeed more right-wing. There was an interesting survey by Pew research institute which showed this for white youths in the US (although the generation was more liberal overall, it was because of minorities), let me see if I can find it.
    Dawkins is not conservative.He is very much a liberal.He just sees Islam for the illiberal ideology that it is and so he opposes it.Just because sexism or homophobia or anti-Semitism is ingrained within a religion does not mean the religion should get a free pass.Islam is all those things and should be opposed completely. Islamophobe is just a word made up to stifle criticism of Islam.There is already a perfectly good way to describe hatred against Muslims which is anti-missile bigotry.FYI the pope is not nearly as liberal as people think he is.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ladbants)
    One doesn't need to attend weekly church services in order to be a Christian. Over 40% of the country still identifies as Christian.
    So a minority, and even within that 40%, most are "cultural Christians" at most (which even I might identify myself with to some degree); they do not accept Christian doctrine on sexuality and cosmology
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Huh? Conservatives are the ones who have lost and aren't coming to grips with it?
    Yes. Precisely. The conservatives got absolutely steamrolled in the gay marriage debate. Every evolution and progression in our society, which has come in the teeth of violent opposition from conservatives, has proceeded and they've never succeeded in turning back the clock even one second.

    So who elected Trump?
    A minority of people who voted; he didn't even get a majority. In winning, Trump got less votes than Romney did losing in 2012.

    Why did we leave the EU?
    You want to claim that everyone who voted Leave was expressing their support for conservatism? Okayyyy. :lol:

    Why are the conservatives with Thatcher-wannabe leading the UK again with huge poll leads above Corbyn?
    If you think May is a Thatcher wannabe then you really are clueless about her. May is extremely emphatic that government intervention in the market is a force for good, and that income inequality must be dealt with by way of such interventions. Furthermore, the fact that socialised healthcare and gay marriage are accepted without question by a conservative Prime Minister shows that the left-wing is winning.

    The fact that she leads the incompetent idiot Corbyn is neither here nor there; Theresa May accepts things that 50 years ago even the Labour Party would view as too left-wing and radical. The left is clearly winning.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robby2312)
    Dawkins is not conservative.He is very much a liberal.He just sees Islam for the illiberal ideology that it is and so he opposes it.Just because sexism or homophobia or anti-Semitism is ingrained within a religion does not mean the religion should get a free pass.Islam is all those things and should be opposed completely. Islamophobe is just a word made up to stifle criticism of Islam.There is already a perfectly good way to describe hatred against Muslims which is anti-missile bigotry.FYI the pope is not nearly as liberal as people think he is.
    Well said, dude. In fact, it's unclear why the alt-rightists dislike Islam so much; surely they should get along quite well given their shared hatred of gay rights, gender equality and suchlike. They both share a reactionary worldview that sexual freedom, homosexual rights, allowing women into the workforce, are destructive forces in society. Steve Bannon actually has quite a lot in common with Islamic conservatives.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    Well said, dude. In fact, it's unclear why the alt-rightists dislike Islam so much; surely they should get along quite well given their shared hatred of gay rights, gender equality and suchlike. They both share a reactionary worldview that sexual freedom, homosexual rights, allowing women into the workforce, are destructive forces in society. Steve Bannon actually has quite a lot in common with Islamic conservatives.


    You're right.But it's two sides of the same coin I think.This country was founded on Christian values.And even though it's no longer that Christian,the right still likes to promote "traditional values". So it's christian values as opposed to Islamic values but they still share the same dislike of homosexuals and have a very particular view of women.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry for the slight necro.I'm 16 and will be 17 in a few days. I know and have known my political stance since I was about 13. I am right wing politically and economically, support Donald Trump and Ukip and was very pleased when Brexit was announced. One thing that pushed me to this line of thinking was the relentless force feeding of feminist and SJW ideals.Just my thoughts.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laurus)
    Sorry for the slight necro.I'm 16 and will be 17 in a few days. I know and have known my political stance since I was about 13. I am right wing politically and economically, support Donald Trump and Ukip and was very pleased when Brexit was announced. One thing that pushed me to this line of thinking was the relentless force feeding of feminist and SJW ideals.Just my thoughts.
    Fantastic, we're proud to have you aboard the Trump and UKIP train.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Unsurprising given: 1) Failure of cultural Marxism to deliver unequivocal human progress; 2) All the (conservative) immigrant kids
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Foo.mp3)
    Unsurprising given: 1) Failure of cultural Marxism to deliver unequivocal human progress; 2) All the (conservative) immigrant kids
    3) Success of right wing conspiracy theories in propagating themselves.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    3) Success of right wing conspiracy theories facts in propagating themselves.
    Amended for accuracy :yy:

    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Not sure how much muslims are radicalised over the internet. But the internet certainly does radicalise whites.
    In exactly the same way as white people are except the content they look at is different. What a facile argument. Also white and muslim are not mutually exclusive so does a white Muslim get 1/2 radicalised or become a nationalist against themselves?

    I'll let people more versed in statistics press that point but I will say that it wouldn't surprise me, with the airheaded stuff that comes out of academia (which is predominantly left leaning) is it any surprise people want no part and veer to the other side?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.