Millennial Madness: What Happens If Young Voters Bolt Both Parties?

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

That's funny because eventually we will be all of the voters.

a reply to: TrueBrit

As an analytical tool it helps to create separation between things and label them for their respective qualities.

Bad for community and politics but good for analytical purposes.

The ability to be able to see the clear difference between the two is important. Look at them for what they are but not use them as a tool for division or judgement.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I don't think the majority of the people over 40 are going to change their ways easily. I'm sure some would, but don't think it would be enough. Not until there is some balance with campaign financing. Too many people are swayed by 30 second commercials payed for by those who hold different interests than your average person.

Also before people start jumping on BH progressive doesn't automatically = right or left.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Seriously! Why am I not surprised that this thread is full of people bashing millennials with the SAME old stereotypes of us being lazy and spoiled? It's such a distraction and frankly isn't true. Even millennials are buying into the lies and promoting these inaccuracies. Thank you for being someone not of our generation who sees past the deception and knows better.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Oh but it's helping isn't it?

Being dismissive condescending and arrogant is good for who exactly?

Nobody.

That's who it's good for.

originally posted by: onequestion
That's funny because eventually we will be all of the voters.

Yes, that's how it works. Old people die and new people are born.

originally posted by: Domo1
I don't think the majority of the people over 40 are going to change their ways easily.

I know, but 1/2 the people over 40, plus a majority of people under 40 is a majority in the voting pool.

Also before people start jumping on BH progressive doesn't automatically = right or left.

True. I am neither. Or both, however you want to state it.

I think millennials are considered lazy and apathetic because they do not want to play the same games as previous generations. They do not want to live under this worlds banking system. They do not want to pretend their is big differences between republicans and democrats at the highest level. They understand technology and are not afraid of what future tech will bring. Its not that they do not care about anything. Its just they do not want to participate in the systems that are currently in place.

They do not rely on the news or just a handful of points of view. They take in thousands of points of view. They are out there debating and strategizing about the future. They just do it in ways that baffle the older generations. They use things like apps to talk to each other and to coordinate and meet up. They do not take part in society in the same ways as previous generations because they do not want to. Not because they are lazy. They are trying to come up with new systems and realities. Things that could not be possible until now. We have reached a technological point were many things that were once only dreamed of, are now possible. Are now reality.

They are smart. They are tech savvy. They steer clear of propaganda. They are the future. Whether anyone likes it or not. Its only a matter of time before there is more of them than anyone else. Time does not lie. As long as the older generations do not destroy the world before then. Change is scary.

a reply to: karmicecstasy
No we are literally the most educated generation ever on the planet as far as we know. But that doesn't count towards hard work.

Also the most unemployed since the Great Depression.

Interesting coincidence.

Being a little sarcastic lol. I agree with your points.

Participation in a broken system?

For what

a reply to: onequestion

Not gonna lie...I'd be totally fine with absolution or reduction of existing student loans. I never was able to even finish due to them coming out of deferment, so now I'm stuck with a near-mortgage sized debt load and 3 degrees that are 90% complete, none of which I'll ever be able to afford to finish. Did I learn a lot? Absolutely. Was it due to the books I read or the classes I took? I'd say "partially at best".

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: karmicecstasy
No we are literally the most educated generation ever on the planet as far as we know. But that doesn't count towards hard work.

Also the most unemployed since the Great Depression.

Interesting coincidence.

Being a little sarcastic lol. I agree with your points.

Participation in a broken system?

For what

The millennials are getting smarter by the second. They struggle to find jobs, they can't get more than min wage and 30 hours a week. They are getting real smart about food stamps.

When the only way to survive is to be on food stamps you know something is wrong. The quality of living has gone done so far for the minimum wage worker the kids just don't care anymore.

The future looks worse, not better. Kids are realizing quickly that technology is not being used to benefit anyone but the elite and they are starting to wake up.

Give a millennial 15 min on banking and why their is no money and they wake up even faster. They will take over because they have to.

The main problem is most "young voters" don't vote at all. Not just the current generation of young adults, but in general.

a reply to: onequestion

We will see much more of this as time moves forward. The greatest generation believed everything the government ever told them, the boomers started questioning what the government told them, the younger generations don't believe much of what the government tells us.

The greatest generation is almost all gone and the boomers will most likely mostly be gone by 2020-2030 so we have awhile to put up with both parties.

After the boomers I think the republicans and democrats will still be around but much more weaker than they are today. There sin is that they cater to there ideology and not the people.

Either way it goes, the boomers are the voters that have given us what we got, its only natural for there children to revolt but in this case they have every right to revolt considering the amount of debt they have burdened the young with.

If our civilization even survives this period.

a reply to: onequestion

Ah. I see what you mean. Nuance is important, but that is why I believe that it is time that the voting public voted on the issues of the day themselves, rather than for whom they trust the most to vote in government for or against a given suggested policy or course of action.

The people must decide their fate much more directly than is currently the case, otherwise there will be no representation for the great multitude. You see, many people, on both "sides" of the political spectrum, have views which run counter to those of their preferred party, on many matters of state. This means that having two parties, three parties or TEN parties in an election race, still leaves out a certain sector of the population from being represented in government. That is not acceptable in this century. It was only barely excusable when all communication was done either by mail or through wires.

These days a person can air a view on the internet from the middle of absolutely no where, as long as they have the right gear. Closer to civilisation, connecting to the internet is as easy as can be, and is getting easier, and will become cheaper in real terms over time, offer better value for money as technologies improve. As time wears on, it will soon become the case that every person in the developed world will have some sort of mobile internet connective device on their person at nearly all times, and be capable of using them to close to their full potential.

This means that sooner than we might think, the whole developed will be full of people who can make their feelings known on any policy, at any time, and formulate alterations and suggestions of their own, about how to remedy problems and settle disputes, how to provide services fairly, how to allocate the importance placed on things, the meaning and applications of their rights as citizens. We see it here at ATS all the time, even now! People sharing their views and coming up with alternatives, some of them very good indeed, to the way certain things are done by the leaders of the "free" world.

Imagine a future where rather than just being beacons in a great darkness, rather than just being the pleas for sense, from a voiceless but sensible few, these suggestions were open to discussion and decision by the mass of the people. Imagine a future where the business of government was decided not by representatives, but by the people themselves. People vote for agendas, and set the priorities. The people decide how to further the aims of the nation. The people having the power.

That is the way forward. What we have now, both over in the US, and here in the UK, and in Europe and Russia and all over the damned place, is a system of government which promotes the interests and agendas of the few, over and above the needs and interests of the many. This is the PAST we are still living in, politically speaking! It must change, the people must seize control of their nations and involve themselves en masse with maintaining and improving it, not leave such things to representatives selected from the filthy pools thus far dredged.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I think we need to stop the idea of government in its tracks. Everyone needs to become their own leader. We need smaller communities and we need to get back to doing right of passage rituals that bring people back to earth.

I know that's impossible right now.

Realistically a direct democracy is a bad idea it is mob rule and we don't want that just as much as we know capitalism and our current system aren't working.

a reply to: onequestion

I simply disagree.

Direct control over the affairs of the state, by the people who pay for its upkeep, and whose literal blood, sweat, and tears are spent to maintain it, is the only legitimate way forward in this increasingly connected age.

No one should have to speak for me, or on anyone else's behalf. We should speak for ourselves, and at least own our own fates, as opposed to having them foisted upon us by persons we KNOW we cannot trust, since they desire power and dominion over the lives of multitudes, and are therefore suspect in character.

To answer the first question: We'd be better off in the long run.

As for the problem, it's a matter of getting wealth or conglomerated power out of politics. It's a major issue when those who have a conflict of interest always vote in a manner that works to their own benefit. If not biased by lobbying and paid campaign contributions, then they are definitely biased by their own holdings on the stockmarket and how their decisions can manipulate the market and regulation to their own personal benefit.

However having everybody vote on everything might not be the best idea either, as most folks don't have the time or interest to take on the task in a fully informed and in-depth manner. Sometimes it doesn't take much to bandwagon and spoonfeed people a pitch which isn't in their best interest if only they knew the details.

Yet a change is called for... The existing setup is broken in how it works out.

I think at least one set of legislative representatives should be chosen from the general voting populace by lottery. It would be a paid full time position for the duration of the term of office, such that it would be possible to focus on and attend to the task of making decisions in regards to government action and law. Then you have a fairly good chance of getting somebody which is representative of the district without regard to who can get the most campaign contributions, buy the most ads, or otherwise put on enough of a show to somehow win a popularity contest regardless of thier standing on what should be important issues. Of course if this person is deemed unfit for whatever reason (by health, or perhaps if unpopular by a petition followed by a vote), then another drawing should be held to choose a representative from the voting pool.

Yes, it sounds a lot like how jury duty works. Not only that, but it's much closer in line to the original Athenian democracy than what we have now. (Unfortunately such details are left out of most textbooks.) And I think this modification would be the best shot to fix what's wrong with the existing republic model as a truely representative system.