The Scapegoat Generation – A Half-Hearted Defense of Boomers

The way people talk about baby boomers being the source of so many problems in our contemporary world, you’d think they were a generation that spanned over hundreds of years. In actuality, boomers are people that were born roughly between 1943 and 1960. That’s right, the boomer generation is comprised of people that were born during an 18 year timespan (give or take.) Yet millennials and my generation (Gen X) often malign them as being responsible for nearly every aspect of society’s decline. So the narrative goes, “Boomers inherited a wealthy white American utopia and grew up with every advantage, and they frivolously pissed it all away, along with their children’s future.” Not so fast, I’m here to tell you that boomers did not have it so easy, and many of the negative actions falsely attributed to them were really perpetrated by other generations (or at the very least..these actions and policies were not unique to boomers.) I should also add that some of these negative developments were implemented against the will of the majority of boomers (elites betraying the will of the people is nothing new, but it often gets lost down the historical memory hole how when things get implemented they may have been unpopular.) Here are some claims about boomers which I will address, one at a time:

1. Boomers had it easy growing up.

This one might seem true on its face, if all you did was watch the first few seasons of The Wonder Years on Netflix and completely ignored the fact that more than 2 million of them were drafted to go fight in the jungles of Vietnam. Nearly 60,000 US troops were killed in Vietnam and more than 150,000 were wounded and maimed…many of them boomers. Unlike the people who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, many young people that fought in Vietnam were forcibly conscripted to fight in a pointless war. Even for those that managed to avoid the draft, it was a real concern that they had to actively confront. Think about it for a second, while your millennial fatass is eating pizza, drinking some shitty energy drink and playing Call of Duty, this is what many “boomer cucks” were doing at the same age.  US involvement in The Vietnam War was initiated and subsequently sustained under the administrations of Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon (none of whom were boomers.)

2. Boomers spent us into debt and sold us out to globalization

One could say this is true, but it is nothing unique to the boomer generation. The first boomer president wasn’t until Bill Clinton in 1992, well after our national debt had already become massive and well after “debt culture” had become the norm in American society. National Debt greatly increased during the Reagan era (Reagan was about 70 years old when he took office in 1981.) Boomers only recently entered retirement age a few years ago, so all that Medicare and Social Security money that has been going to elderly people for the last 40 years has not been going to boomers. The rest of the money has gone to the military, largely in relation to commitments leftover from foreign conflicts and entanglements dating back well before the boomers’ ascendance to power, including many they did not even support being involved in in the first place. It’s correct that Clinton signed NAFTA and promoted other globalist free trade initiatives, however these same policies were supported by Reagan, the first president Bush, and Nixon, none of whom were boomers. In fact, the boomer left, independents and right wing working class overwhelmingly opposed NAFTA and other similar deals. This was one of the reasons for the success of Ross Perot’s candidacy,(whom many working class boomers voted for.) Most of these types of policies were imposed on Americans by elites against their will and politicians who betrayed their trust, just as they are today. The millennial criticism of boomers as having spent them into debt is somewhat bizarre, given that millennials want the government to spend even more money on even more frivolous endeavors. They enthusiastically supported Obama, who added nearly 8 trillion to the national debt (which they will someday have to pay,) and even he was only offering them a fraction of what they wanted. Millennials seem to be just fine with outsourcing jobs, importing cheap labor and foreign competition. Boomers may have used shortsighted thinking to make and save money, but millennials seem to be willing to sacrifice their current education and job prospects just to virtue signal about how “inclusive” they are or whatever.

3. Boomers are responsible for our problems in The Middle East

There’s no question that boomers have exacerbated many of our problems in the middle east, with the war in Iraq, Afghanistan in particular but also through stubborn and persistent meddling in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and various Arab civil wars. It was Eisenhower and Churchill that chose to overthrow Iran’s democratically elected leader in 1953 and install the Shah, which ultimately laid the groundwork for Iran to become the enemy of ours it is today. Our support in the 1980s for mujihadeen fighters in Iran in the 1980s (including Bin Laden) helped create the Afghanistan of the Taliban. The Soviet Union deserves some blame for the situation in Afghanistan as well, but not baby boomers. US material support and aid for Israel in the 1973 “Yom Kippur” war, and support for Israel in general has also played a large role. The list of pre-boomer interventions goes on and on…US troops stationed in Lebanon, US support for Saddam and Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, Gulf War I, etc. Boomers were not directly responsible for any of these decisions. Boomers were ultimately responsible for the Iraq War and the current war in Afghanistan (and perhaps the uprisings in Egypt and Libya) since they technically were/are in power, but to an extent these wars were misguided attempts to cleanup the messes left by previous generations’ interventions. Boomers do seem to be guilty of being overly attached to supporting Israel though and have forgotten the merits of non-interventionism now that there asses aren’t the ones on the line. I guess there’s no getting around that.

4. Boomers are responsible for mass immigration

The most significant contribution to mass third world immigration to the US was the 1965 Immigration Act. Not a single boomer was involved in the passage of this bill, and none were even old enough to be serving in any branch of government in this period of time. Remember in 1986 when the US gave amnesty to millions of illegal aliens? Well, that wasn’t boomers either. That was Ronald Reagan. It’s also important to remember that boomer voters have attempted to curtail mass immigration, but these were overruled by the courts. Remember Prop 187? SB1070 and a multitude of other laws which were gutted by the courts? What about forced desegregation busing in the 1970s, you know that thing that made your schools “diverse?” Boomers along with just about everyone else overwhelmingly opposed it:

According to Wikipedia:

In a Gallup poll taken in the early 1970s, very low percentages of whites (4 percent) and blacks (9 percent) supported busing outside of local neighborhoods.[3] A 1978 study by the RAND Corporation set out to find why whites were opposed to busing and concluded that it was not because they held racist attitudes, but because they believed it destroyed neighborhood schools and camaraderie and increased discipline problems.[3] It is said that busing eroded the community pride and support that neighborhoods had for their local schools.[3] After busing, 60 percent of Boston parents, both black and white, reported more discipline problems in schools.[3] In the 1968, 1972, and 1976 presidential elections, candidates opposed to busing were elected each time, and Congress voted repeatedly to end court-mandated busing.[13]

It would appear that some boomers in recent years have given up on the idea of restricting immigration, but this is probably because they feel it’s too late to do much at this point after having seen their country radically transformed throughout their lifetime. Many of them have reached a point in life where both financially and physically they are isolated from a lot of the negative effects of mass third world immigration and diversity. It’s a mistake to blame them for the associated policies though, which were largely set in motion long before boomers were put in charge of the wheel, and the attempts they made to resist were thwarted by judicial and corporate forces they had no control over.


Conclusions

Millennials and the younger generation (whatever you want to call it) pride themselves in having accumulated a wealth of useless knowledge of the intricacies of elaborate video game worlds and Harry Potter trivia, how to get the most out of Snapchat, etc, yet how many of them even know how to change a tire on their car or install an electrical outlet? I myself am guilty of some of this. When I was a kid I used to laugh when my dad would get frustrated when I would beat him so easily at Tecmo Bowl for Nintendo by using the same Bo Jackson running play over and over. 30 years later that “skill” seems as worthless as ever. Yet my boomer dad, on his own managed to build a 3 bedroom cabin in the middle of the woods with fully functioning plumbing, heat and electricity…like it was nothing. Meanwhile when I attempted to fix my own toilet once when it was running, the project quickly and farcically denigrated into the equivalent of a Peter Sellers skit. I ended up having to call someone.

If the boomers are guilty of something it is being overly idealistic, and in particular their error has been in gambling away their abundance of idealism by doubling down on the bad ideas handed down to them. Many boomers are not guilty of this though, and were never on board with a lot of this crap. My dad actually used to say to me “Life’s a bitch, and then you die.” Hardly the kind of naive idealism you would expect. Many of them were simply taken along for a ride, (the way many millennials are now with Trump’s betrayals.) Ironically, Trump is a boomer and articulated during the campaign many of the ideas that working class boomers have always wanted to see realized (protectionism, less military intervention, reduced immigration, etc.) Yet, like George W. Bush and Dan Quayle, Trump is a “Fortunate Son,” so his commitment to these issues was always going to be questionable. He still has plenty of time to redeem himself, but as a cynical Generation X dude, I personally have zero expectation that he will, nor do I care. I’ll be at the dying mall drinking an Orange Julius and playing Cruis’n USA in the arcade while it still exists.

An Aversion to Quagmires – A Collective Desertion Toward Our Future

When I wrote Beatnik Fascism a year or so ago, I never anticipated that we would be organizing and participating in actual anti-war demonstrations, but here we are. The book was mostly a quirky attempt to reconcile my own peculiar affinity for 1950’s and 60’s beat culture (and the associated Hollywood caricatures of it) with seemingly paradoxical tendencies toward identitarianism and futurism. I chose to convey these thoughts meditatively through the medium of poetry rather than as academic essays or “manifestos,” because I wanted the book to be abstract and avant-garde, as opposed to yet another one of those McReactionary ebooks railing about “feminists and SJWs” that Alt-Bro hucksters are always marketing. Like most people, I cringe when Paul Joseph Watson or some right wing media figure declares “conservatives are the new punk rock!” or whatever. So, though there are similarities I did not really want to write a book that was like “neo-fascists are the new beatniks.” To do so would be to overstate the activist component of the beat generation, which was in fact minimal compared to what often amounted to vaguely philosophical travelogues, artistic memoirs documenting a lifestyle of exploration, experimentation, heightened consciousness and curiosity. The idea for “Beatnik Fascism” for me began as kind of an inside joke and only accidentally became more genuine as I began to get caught up in the fevered frenzy of late night writing (much like I am now.)

The more idiosyncratic identitarians like myself lead extremely detached lives. Most of us seek a kind of escape from what passes for everyday life for most people. We travel around to meet up with each other, often exploring the world but seeing the sights through our own radically tainted viewfinders. When Robert Stark and I met up and wandered the streets of Las Vegas, admiring broken old signs and seeing majestic beauty in what normies would write off as the dumpiest, tackiest casinos….we traversed the town not strictly as tourists to Vegas from our respective cities, but as visitors from another time and place. We might as well have been from the moon, or maybe even another dimension entirely. When some lonesome, off-color traveler hikes around no man’s land in the mountains of some third world country, vlogging about transhumanism and HBD after being inspired by the sight of some weird looking leaf, it is in this sense that you might understand how so called crypto-fascist, degenerate bards could find themselves identifying with zany yet brutally authentic characters in works like “On The Road” and even the exploitative Hollywood bastardizations of them.

There is also the irresponsibility, or to put it more accurately…the realization that what is advertised as “living responsibly” is often a scam to manipulate us away from that which we sense a greater responsibly towards. To be “responsible” both in post World War 2 America and transnational, post cold war America requires going along with a whole bunch of bullshit and living a lifestyle that for some, isn’t true to one’s self. John Updike once claimed in an interview with Penguin Classics that he wrote “Rabbit, Run” in response to Jack Kerouac’s “On The Road.” Updike said:

Jack Kerouac’s “On the Road” came out in 1957 and, without reading it, I resented its apparent instruction to cut loose; “Rabbit,Run” was meant to be a realistic demonstration of what happens when a young American family man goes on the road – the people left behind get hurt.

Yet, despite Updike’s intentions, while reading Rabbit,Run as a young man, I identified much more with the character of Rabbit. Sure, the people he leaves behind do get hurt, but it didn’t appear to me to be any huge loss for the world. After all, his wife was an alcoholic that made him miserable, and his girlfriend was a prostitute, not exactly the type of people you’d feel like he owes some huge commitment to. There are his young children of course (one of which dies as a result of a careless accident committed by the drunken wife.) Yet, Rabbit would have been unable to prevent this even if he hadn’t ran out. It would have probably happened anyway while he was busy at work one day, in his totally meaningless sales job that Updike implies should have been his duty to remain at. Rabbit meanwhile points out the hypocrisy in all the people who attempt to tell him how to live. “Everybody who tells you how to act has whiskey on their breath.” This is the problem with Updike’s world. He frowns upon the runners, reformers and rockers of the boat for what he perceives as the messes left behind and the plight of the abandoned, the weakening of the church…etc yet beneath the forced facade of cohesion which he insists is imperative that we maintain at all costs, those who look closely still see an outline of the same puddle of puke, obscured only by having been swept partially under the rug.

“Staying at your shitty job where you spend the last years of your youth selling meaningless gadgets that people don’t need, and staying with your wife that drinks all day and yells at you constantly are necessary to keep up the appearance of a healthy, functioning society. It’s all in your interests. Just stay put.” Well, no it isn’t, and no I won’t. One can sense when they’re living a life that isn’t in their best interests (though some lack the will or inclination to act on it.)

“Check your privilege, keep your head down and train the overseas replacement we’ve brought in to take over your job at half of what we’re paying you. You might feel boxed in, but it’s in your best interests to import people from ethnic groups that express hostility toward you and openly boast about how disenfranchised you will be once they’re fully in charge. It might cramp your style, but just sit tight.
” Well gee dad, that transnational capitalist diversitopia sounds swell, but I gotta run…I’m off to find an abandoned mall to convert into a retro-futuristic identitarian living space where we conduct wild scientific experiments on ourselves, learning, loving and disinclining in peace.

Brandon Adamson is the author of Beatnik Fascism

Would You Pay a Penny to Save a Woman Who Thinks Differently?

 

ad_datacomp_slideshow_604x500

So, my recent piece, “The Most Dangerous Intersections” turned out to be rather prescient, with the Cologne attacks occurring just a few days later…which ignited a firestorm of discussion about feminism, western women and refugees. Manosphere types are fine with refugees attacking women because they presume those European women must have supported multiculturalist policies.

ac1

It’s good to know that these men would not protect their own sisters, female friends or mothers from rapefugees if these women did not hold conservative or libertarian views. People like Clarey seem oblivious to the role greedy conservative businessmen and libertarians have played in promoting multiculturalism and open borders policies. Almost every big business in the United States promotes mass immigration from impoverished 3rd world countries as a means of acquiring dirt cheap labor. Funny though that people like Clarey doesn’t consider capitalists traitors even though they’d be the first to sell anyone down the river for a buck. Yet naive women and children who’ve been indoctrinated since birth to believe all cultures and people are equally civilized somehow deserve to be raped and assaulted.

I’ve got an idea. Instead of trying to score cheap points against feminists, let’s separate the ones who care about their countries from the ones who don’t. Meanwhile we can focus on the bigger problem, which is the transnational capitalists, media companies and academic institutions that institutionally fuel the promotion of mass immigration at all levels.

These manosphere bros always accuse people of “white knighting” and assume sexual motivation for positive action towards a female…because they themselves are of the capitalist mindset that is basically “what can I get out of this transaction?” Sometimes you just stick up for people because they are part of your tribe, or even if they aren’t…because it’s just empathy for a fellow human. You’re not even expecting or wanting anything in return.

In the 1978 film, Heaven Can Wait, Warren Beatty plays a star football player who ends up dying before his time, and so he gets put into the body of a CEO named Leo Farnsworth. He gives a memorable speech  at the company board meeting that horrifies all the executives:

What if we had a good-guy tuna company that was on the porpoise team? A lot of these guys would buy that, so their kids wouldn’t get mad at them, right? We don’t care how much it costs, just how much it makes. If it costs too much, we charge a penny more. We make it part of the game plan. “Would you pay a penny to save a fish who thinks?”

Now nevermind the fact that a porpoise is not actually a fish(this was intentional to show he was just winging it as an outsider in the meeting) and Farnsworth’s lack of business acumen. The point of the speech was to show that he held values beyond money and put communities above profits. Empathy is a primary component of western civilization and group survival. It’s a shame when it’s naively misdirected toward outgroups who don’t(can’t?) reciprocate and merely exploit it, but indifference to rapefugee culture isn’t the answer.