The Age Divide and political interests.

[Rustin Cohle]

If I reach the age of 60 and have become a conservative ******* I hope my children/grandchildren put me out of my misery.

 

[Danger2Jenkins]

It's only the loud opinionated hi vis deadbeats. All your white collar boomers aren't conservative and don't touch alcohol. The lower end of the intelectual scale feels a need to be heard.

 

[This Is Anfield]

All great questions hamohawk1! I wanted to share some thoughts, but bear with me as it will be a long post.

My general advice is to think about a big change in strategy when having conversations about topics like this. As a tool for mapping some of what I mean out, I'll set up a hypothetical discussion between you and someone who is 55+ (let's go with your partner's pop) and the discussion will be about bushfires. In this situation, we can pretend that it's a discussion you have decided to initiate, so you've had the chance to plan a few things out first.

To start with, I'd spend a bit of time working out what the actual argument is about. In the example of bushfires, the argument is NOT whether bushfires were not happening in the past, but now they are happening; of course there have always been bushfires. It seems to me that the argument is that there is something meaningfully different about the bushfires that are happening now compared to the ones that were happening before. What is that something exactly? In other words, what is the point you are hoping to prosecute? Once you narrow that down, you can make it clear in the discussion early so that you both can agree on what you're talking about and what you're not talking about.

More generally, it's worth spending some time early on in the discussion building a shared understanding on the bounds of the topic and what different words mean. An example I've seen where this has gone wrong on BigFooty includes the thread on political correctness - people arguing about the effects of PC without first agreeing on what PC is exactly. Another one is the "Corbyn is anti-semite"/"no he isn't" discussion. In that thread, people are busy arguing about Corbyn, when they've not yet agreed on what anti-semite actually means.

Next, I'd want to invest as much time as possible in the discussion to understanding why your partner's pop thinks the way he thinks, and less on what he thinks. It is useful to ask what he thinks or believes, otherwise there can be no real discussion, but when you do, resist the urge to quickly correct or rebut his beliefs, and instead try to learn where he has got those beliefs from. E.g.,

You: So, with these bushfires, do you think they're worse than the ones we had 20 years ago?
Pop: No, of course not! Australia is a hot country. We've always had fires! This is no different.
You: Okay, to be clear, you think these fires are just like any of the other major ones?
Pop: Yes
You: Thanks for clarifying that. So, if that is true, why do you think that so much is being made of these particular fires? (this might make him stop and think)
Pop: Well, the left-wing media is always looking for a story. Also, Australia has more people than it used to, and so more people today can be threatened by fire of the same size, and so it probably attracts more attention. (the first one is way more complex than the second one, so maybe focus on the second)
You: You're right - there are more people in Aus than ever before. That is an interesting perspective I've not thought of before. Can you tell me why you think that there are more people living in fire prone areas? Like, if I wanted to learn more about this, where should I go to find out?
Pop: Hmm, well, good question. I remember reading about this in the SMH one day and someone on the radio mentioned it.

Here you might also consider asking him how sure he is about a statement, e.g.:
You: Could you give me a sense of how sure you are that this would be a factor? I think we're both 100% sure the sun will rise tomorrow, and we honestly probably have no idea who will with the next AFL grand final, as much as we wish otherwise. Along that spectrum, how sure are you?
If pop says anything other than absolute certainty, you could ask him why he isn't absolutely certain.

There are a few things going on, and all of them are helpful to the discussion:
1. You're not arguing with your counterpart, you're learning from him/her. Learning and teaching are a lot more fun and interesting than arguing!

2. Importantly, you're learning about the way he thinks about the issue. Where he gets his info from, how sure he is about it. If you can learn enough about how and why he thinks the way he does, it unlocks many new avenues.

A recent example appeared in the thread on what must the left do to win again. One poster said something like, "I don't understand why people are more fearful of unions than of [authoritian bodies like corporations, rich people]."
I remember thinking, "yeah that is really strange, and yet it's true", so I clicked 'Like'
Then another person replied "Well, I work in construction, and here is a bunch of stuff I've seen our union do. [description of some pretty dodgy union antics]"

In that moment, a lot of things made sense to me. If I had experienced what the second poster had experienced, then I am also likely to dislike unions too. It seemed completely reasonable, and not strange. It didn't make me start hating unions, but it did make me realise that if I want people to like unions more, then I have to consider perspectives like this one.

The more general key here is, it's never a bad idea to try to understand the other person's motivation. I think most of us fall into the trap of assuming that people who disagree with us are motivated by the 'wrong' things, and so we don't bother asking.

3. Just by asking about the source of his knowledge, you're sowing some seeds of doubt into the validity of knowledge he has assumed as being true. Hmmm, did I really pay close attention to that radio show? I can't even remember when it was. Is it possible that I might have missed something? You don't even need to ask these questions as he might be asking them of himself already. This is a good thing, too, because often we over-rely on our memory, which is hugely flawed.

I think too that it's a good idea to ask the same sorts of questions about your own knowledge. E.g., why is it that I am so sure that bushfires are worse than before? What have I read or seen that is so convincing? Can I trust those sources? Are there any other potential explanations than, say, climate change? This will allow you to test the limits of your own certainty.

A couple of other tips:
1. Just forget about bringing up facts, except in certain situations. Facts are only useful when they are wanted. E.g., you and pop might agree that you neither of you know whether a particular claim is true or false. A quick Google could resolve it, and might be welcome as this point. But before hitting up Google, spend a bit of time working out with pop how you're going to agree on what is a good source of information, and reach agreement on that first.

Most people think facts will be persuasive, but more often, unsolicited facts are just interpreted as signals of elitism. If you truly think pop is factually wrong about something, then rather than just showing him the fact, you want to set things up so that, one day (no doubt not the same day as the discussion), he will discover for himself that he was wrong. If you have planted seeds of doubt about his knowledge (as per above), then this is likely to happen.

2. Always assume that your counterpart is a good person, who wants many of the same things as you want. It's almost certainly a valid assumption because most people fundamentally want to do the right thing. Your partner's pop wants you and your partner to have good productive, healthy, happy lives. He probably doesn't hate all black people, doesn't want Australia to burn down, probably wants fewer people to be unemployed or homeless, and so forth. If your counterpart says something that seems to contradict this assumption, rather than biting back, try to think of a way to explain how both things can be true (e.g., what could possibly explain how a good person who believes in equality of opportunity, also believes that transgender M-->F should not have access the ladies' bathroom?). Ask questions that get at understanding the motive, rather than getting outraged and making moral arguments (as often happens here).

3. You can also test the boundaries of the motive by throwing hypotheticals at him (e.g., what an M-->F person, who is dressed like a woman, but it's clear that she is transgender, was making a pit stop in a very conservative country town. The only toilets nearby are at the pub, and this person doesn't feel safe going into the men's room. Should she still have to use the men's room here?). Don't judge his responses; use them to work out what he thinks is okay and not okay. From doing this, you can often get a better sense of what a person's guiding principle or motive is. From there, it's far easier to have better discussions.

4. Avoid discussing the person (you think, I think) and instead talk about the statements, positions, and arguments ("The statement you made was XXXX").

5. If you're not sure what they are saying, ask for permission to restate to them what you think their position is. e.g., "So, I think you're saying that these fires are just like any other one. Is that an accurate description?" If they say no, then ask for more clarification. So many arguments get out of control on here because people accidentally straw-man their counterpart! Straw-manning is an easy mistake to avoid.

6. Never use value-laden labels like 'sexist', 'racist', 'snowflake', 'cuck', 'incel', 'SJW', 'Marxist', 'Nazi'. It's hard to come back from that in a conversation. If one is used on you, decide whether you want to continue the conversation. If so, take a deep breath, and maybe some time away, and try again later. If no, then walk away, don't fight back.

Anyway, I've been trying out some of these principles in the 'where to for the left' thread, and I think the response has been quite positive! I've left some stuff out because this post is already getting out of control. On that note, thanks for bearing with me here!

Correct... it was long!

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

If I reach the age of 60 and have become a conservative ******* I hope my children/grandchildren put me out of my misery.

Yep. I'd want to be euthanised before that point.

 

[This Is Anfield]

If I reach the age of 60 and have become a conservative ******* I hope my children/grandchildren put me out of my misery.

Yep. I'd want to be euthanised before that point.

Nah, you won't.

 

[Pessimistic]

Retirees are nowhere near as influential as they could be if they organized properly.

Take Brexit. They achieved that but what material gain did they get? not much

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

Nah, you won't.

Yes, I will.

 

[Ok Boomer]

Retirees are easily manipulated rather than organised in this country. The one problem is they have strength in numbers, with growing ranks.

 

[its free real estate]

If I reach the age of 60 and have become a conservative ******* I hope my children/grandchildren put me out of my misery.

Yep. I'd want to be euthanised before that point.

Nah, you won't.

What they'll find is that what they previously thought was progressive is now conservative, and like Germaine Greer or Slavoj Zizek find they quickly go from being right on and insightful to left wingers, to that old bigot who won't let kids consent at age 6.

 

[Pessimistic]

Retirees are easily manipulated rather than organised in this country. The one problem is they have strength in numbers, with growing ranks.

Lets just say the points system for boomer immigrants was less rigorous than more recent arrivals

 

[Andrew Birch]

Just finished Christmas lunch with the family (Happy holiday period to all).

Being the character i am i thought i would test the 2 topics of Scotty taking a holiday and Climate Change during conversation. The outcome included anyone under the age of 35-40 having major issue with the politician being on holiday at the time of a major natural disaster, and the total lack of action on Climate change, whilst parents, grandparents and other relatives within the 55+ bracket took no issue with Scottys holiday, and think as 'Summer has always been hot', 'Bushfires have always happened, like ash wednesday and black saturday (which iirc occurred in February)'.

Whilst older people can often be more conservative than younger individuals, it highlights the massive uphill battle for a progressive party to get into power, and any action to occur on Climate Change within this Country.

Is it post Christmas food cynicism?, or is Australia in for years of conservative policy and leadership while this population demographic reigns suprem?

Thankfully, most young people will develop common sense as they grow older and leave things like Socialism "progressive" or otherwise in the 'silly things I liked when I was young' pile.

Also, people are having less children and are living longer and we don't have an open border policy. If this trend continues conservative governments will be the norm for the foreseeable future, Federally at least.

 

[hamohawk1]

Has anyone been on the Herald Sun (or associated Murdoch media), or Channel 7, 9 etc Facebook posts regarding these fires. Did they not teach basic literacy at schools from 1970's to 2000's? or the slightest bit of critical thinking. Its painfully bad.

 

[Pessimistic]

Thankfully, most young people will develop common sense as they grow older and leave things like Socialism "progressive" or otherwise in the 'silly things I liked when I was young' pile.

Also, people are having less children and are living longer and we don't have an open border policy. If this trend continues conservative governments will be the norm for the foreseeable future, Federally at least.

sillythings I liked when I was young? thatcher

 

[Andrew Birch]

sillythings I liked when I was young? thatcher

It does sound like something she might have said.

 

[Gough]

Thankfully, most young people will develop common sense as they grow older and leave things like Socialism "progressive" or otherwise in the 'silly things I liked when I was young' pile.

Also, people are having less children and are living longer and we don't have an open border policy. If this trend continues conservative governments will be the norm for the foreseeable future, Federally at least.

You could at least try to misquote Churchill when peddling this bullshit theory.

 

[Andrew Birch]

You could at least try to misquote Churchill when peddling this bullshit theory.

I was quoting myself, but cool if Churchill said it originally. Good to know I was somehow influenced by such a great man.

 

[Pessimistic]

I was quoting myself, but cool if Churchill said it originally. Good to know I was somehow influenced by such a great man.

would the right him if he were alive today? He had his eccentricities but nowhere near batshit crazy enough to be their leader today

PS he was no friend of Australia

 

[TBellicious]

This exact topic was perfectly displayed in the recent UK election

The age demographic and which side they voted on almost perfectly matched up.

The stance of conservative politicians all around the world on climate change has alienated the younger generation of voters because they know it will impact them when they get older.

 

[Andrew Birch]

This exact topic was perfectly displayed in the recent UK election

The age demographic and which side they voted on almost perfectly matched up.

The stance of conservative politicians all around the world on climate change has alienated the younger generation of voters because they know it will impact them when they get older.

What I found really terrifying is that so many Millennials (36%) that approve of Communism. I worry for my young children that some day they may well be enslaved by this insidious, failed ideology.

 

[medusala]

just like the computer nerds infiltrated during Y2K?

ssshhh Chief, he of unmatched wisdom still maintains it was a real thing

 

[medusala]

The stance of conservative politicians all around the world on climate change has alienated the younger generation of voters because they know it will impact them when they get older.

Or more like Arts grads wanted someone to foot the bill for their worthless degree and labour appeased them.

 

[Dry Rot]

What I found really terrifying is that so many Millennials (36%) that approve of Communism. I worry for my young children that some day they may well be enslaved by this insidious, failed ideology.

What if your young children grow up to be Extinction Rebellion, gay, Commies?

I'd hide the carving knives at the family dinner, for your sake, when your kids realise what an out of touch, right wing campaigner you are.

 

[TimmeT]

What if your young children grow up to be Extinction Rebellion, gay, Commies?

I'd hide the carving knives at the family dinner, for your sake, when your kids realise what an out of touch, right wing campaigner you are.

so because someone doesnt want to have their kids become leftist loons it makes him a far right campaigner? i guess if you are willing to support this philospohy and wouldnt care if your kids end up beinf commie extinction rebellion morons it must make you a far left campaigner.

 

[Andrew Birch]

What if your young children grow up to be Extinction Rebellion, gay, Commies?

I'd hide the carving knives at the family dinner, for your sake, when your kids realise what an out of touch, right wing campaigner you are.

When my kids are of age, they can be whatever they want to be. Until then, Mrs Birch and I will raise them to have traditional Christian family values. The vast majority of people eventually outgrow Socialism, so I'm not too concerned about them being indoctrinated by communists once they get to Uni age.

As you can see from this graph which is from the recent UK elections (also rings true in Aus) Once the human brain has fully formed at 25yrs+ of age, they start coming to their senses and vote Conservative. With controlled migration, Millennials having fewer children and people living much longer than previous generations you should get used to conservative governments being in power for the foreseeable future.

 

[Power Raid]

When my kids are of age, they can be whatever they want to be. Until then, Mrs Birch and I will raise them to have traditional Christian family values. The vast majority of people eventually outgrow Socialism, so I'm not too concerned about them being indoctrinated by communists once they get to Uni age.

As you can see from this graph which is from the recent UK elections (also rings true in Aus) Once the human brain has fully formed at 25yrs+ of age, they start coming to their senses and vote Conservative. With controlled migration, Millennials having fewer children and people living much longer than previous generations you should get used to conservative governments being in power for the foreseeable future.

View attachment 806562

it's quite scary that there is a radical fringe who don't seem to improve their decision making as they mature