• EvilBit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    26 days ago

    Row 2 would kick in the teeth of Row 3 if they saw them voting for fascists like they keep doing.

    • MissJinx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      26 days ago

      oh yeah fuck women, homosexuals and minorities, those were the good old days full of good honest people

      • EvilBit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        26 days ago

        Good and bad can coexist in a worldview. Teach your kids that they should love their neighbors but your neighbors are all white and straight (-presenting), etc. They were terrible in aggregate in a lot of ways, but there was solid agreement that Nazis could go fuck themselves. If boomers wish their kids would listen to them more, maybe they should remember their own parents’ stances on fascism.

          • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            25 days ago

            Boomer here, the first moon landing happened before I started high school. The same “greatest generation” that fought the nazis also brought them into the space program. Please get your fucking history straight.

      • kestrel7_7@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        26 days ago

        You’re talking about the generation that was literally in charge when American society was desegregated, when women were first allowed to have bank accounts, and when homosexuality was legalized, but go off.

    • apple_train@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      26 days ago

      Probably not actually, the Nazi party was relatively popular in America, they really only entered the war to make some money and essentially takeover the global economy and politics.

      • Lodespawn@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        26 days ago

        The USA was already making money from both sides of the war in Europe. That was mostly the reason they didn’t enter it until Japan bombed them because Japan didn’t like having their fuel supplies cut off by the USA because the USA thought the USA should be the only ones to expand an empire into the Pacific. Following that they wanted support for their retaliation to Japan’s retaliation to their retaliation to Japan’s expansion into the Pacific so they picked a side in Europe (probably the side who owed them the most money) and entered the war against the Nazis.

        • CriticalThought@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          26 days ago

          so they picked a side in Europe (probably the side who owed them the most money)

          Maybe I’m misunderstanding what you’re saying, but it seems Japan was allied with Germany and Italy at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack. Given this is the case, I’m not sure what fight against Japan and with Germany could have possibly looked like.

          • Lodespawn@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            26 days ago

            They had a loose alliance from 1936 and signed the tripartite in 1940 but that really amounted to keeping out of each other way and sharing information. They only mutually declared war on the US a week after Japan bombed pearl harbour. The US was still profiting from both sides of the European theatre up until then so whos to say what backroom negotiations were happening between Germany and the US in that week. The Nazis werent really renown for treating people from different ethnic groups as equals so who’s to say what their first preference of allies were. We can only rely on our written history which is conveniently written by the winners …

      • FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        26 days ago

        You’ll upset a lot of yanks who ignore how 'Murica sat out most of the war, how Henry Ford and others were huge fans of Hitler, and that they didn’t rescue the rest of the world

  • Trex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    26 days ago

    It’s not older generations fucking younger generations. It’s the wealthy people fucking the vulnerable

    • fisch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      26 days ago

      The wealthy don’t care who you hate: the elderly, foreigners, immigrants, muslims, jews, black people, white people, the chinese… They’ll be fine as long as you’re fighting amongst each other.

        • FluorideMind@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          25 days ago

          My grandfather died and his wife sold their 200k lake front cabin to a stranger for 40k. She wastes thousands of his pension at the casino every week. It sickens me he worked his whole life and it’s all just being given to strangers.

        • ummthatguy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          26 days ago

          Oddly, I’m a 13th gen Mayflower. They liked to keep cranking 'em out for a while I guess. Might also explain the offshoot that became Mormon. We don’t associate with them.

          • negativenull@piefed.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            26 days ago

            Strangely, I’m a 13th generation Mayflower baby as well (via John Howland), but unfortunately my whole family has long been Mormon (not me since I graduated high school at least). I don’t associate with them either.

      • gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        26 days ago

        let’s calculate: mayflower in 1618 to today, roughly 2018 is about 400 years. first child was mostly had around age 22 for most of that time, so that makes 400 / 22 ≈ 18 generations if you’re descended from a long row of first-borns.

  • Cypress@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    26 days ago

    You already took everything from me, Mom. I don’t have anything left to take care of you with. Now we’ll both starve. I’m the frog, you’re the scorpion on my back, and these are the consequences of you stinging me.

  • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    25 days ago

    Yeah it’s not like boomers showed up for anti-war marches, anti-racism marches, environmental marches… no, nothing like that, we just said “fuck you entitled brats”. This manufactured hate is as ignorant as criticizing young people for not having kids, or thinking they all sit around eating avocado toast.

    • eestileib@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      25 days ago

      Not my parents. They’re consuming everything they can and are explicit that they don’t worry about after them.

      Born in 1947 and 1952.

      • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        25 days ago

        And yet none of the boomers I know think or act like that. Whaddya know - people are individuals and aren’t defined by the public perception of their generation. It’s almost like people deserve for you to treat them as the individuals they are instead of regurgitating memes about them.

  • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    26 days ago

    Kids have a way of happening.

    A hundred years from now, there will be a small dip on the chart for this time, that’s it.

    • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      26 days ago

      Women have multiple ways to avoid pregnancy. Men have multiple ways to avoid pregnancy. People who are educated about their options exercise those options like all the time, which is why so many of us don’t have kids at all. Myself very much included. Thats why birth rates are declining so drastically.

      Unless you are saying women can’t use birth control or get abortions for some reason…? Or abstain entirely as young people seem to be doing in surprisingly large numbers?

      “Kids have a way of happening” is basically saying other people don’t or shouldn’t have bodily autonomy… kinda fucked up.

      • blarghly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        26 days ago

        I mean, its kinda a boomer take. But what they are saying is that a lot of people reach a certain point in life where they change their minds and decide to have kids even though they didnt want them or thought they werent ready yet. The person who says “ugh, no, there is no way I would ever have kids” and then 3 years later rolls over in bed with their partner and says “yaknow… what if…?”

        Which, really this shouldn’t be surprising. As a biological organism, essentially all your drives are oriented around survival and reproduction.

        Of course, declining birth rates around the world push back against this theory… But with a wider view, we expect evolution to take its course, and for traits that encourage greater reproduction to be selected for.

      • FishFace@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        26 days ago

        Men and women in developed countries have had multiple ways to avoid pregnancy for decades, but it’s only recently that birth rates have fallen below replacement in most of those countries. So there’s something missing from your story, at least.

        • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          26 days ago

          Yeah, so this post is POV North American per title, the problem of selfish boomers is one that afaik only developed countries even have, so while you are correct, its entirely irrelevant to the conversation at hand, which is why I didn’t say anything about it.

            • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              25 days ago

              On re-read I think I may have misread what you wrote but ima leave this up anyway.

              People used to have like… hopes that they could support their kids… we haven’t had that for a while now so birth rates are falling faster than they would otherwise.

              The post title is “point of view: you are a 4th generation North American” thus it’s specifically about North Americans to begin with.

              Baby boomers are a thing that really only exist (at least to my knowledge) in developed/western nations, due to them being a post-war cohort. Basically countries involved in WW2, after the war killed off millions of young men, saw a surge in births to recover population. Baby boomers. Countries not involved in the war didn’t have the baby boom the way western countries did, because why would they? There was no pressure to restore their population numbers.

              Since the meme is about baby boomers, specifically, being selfish, which is inherently a developed-country problem, as well as specifically about being a north American, people in developing countries having less access to family planning is entirely irrelevant, even if it is true.

              Hope that helps :) if not I can try again.

              • FishFace@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                25 days ago

                That helps. I think you misunderstood - what I was trying to say was something quite similar: the person I replied to (who I think wasn’t you) was talking about access to family planning, and I was saying this has been available in developed countries for a long time. So although it did lead to a decrease in birth rate decades ago, it’s only recently that we see sub-replacement rates, so that latter effect specifically is likely not to do with access to family planning.

                Hope that also helps, haha!