Decay of Civilization - Generation by Generation

[sixtyandaquarter]

We've all heard it. At one time or another, be it as a child listening to our older relatives gossip back and forth like a bunch of hens, or on the TV as our sitcom childhood resemblence gets blamed for something that seems so ordinary but somehow flustered all the adults. At the hairdresser, at school, and just about anywhere else more mature people, then us at the time, would say - and quite possibly about us.

"Kids these days" and it's ilk. How "this generation" -reguardless of which of those the speaker is referring to- will be the death of things. How "this generation" has no respect, no morals, no values. How "this generation" is nothing but hoodlums, sexual devients, and all sorts of apparently negative people. It's a wonder that I'm alive, given how someone probably said this about my great grandfather during when it was his generation...

Is it true?
Is each passing generation somehow far worse off than the one that came before. Is my generation, for example, worse off in behavior and ill burdens than, let's say, my aunts? Is this upcoming generation of children being birthed going to be any more deviant than my generation?

Or is it just, perhaps, that people forget how they acted in the heat of their youth? That what they endulged in, the fashion they wore, the way they speak, and how they presented themselves taboo to their elders - just as how my generation seemed taboo to ours?

Perhaps the media now has garnard so much attention to the youth of America, while constantly idolizing the past generations to a point of sheer admiracion that things have been forgotten? Glazed over? Over simplified and thrown out of proportion?

My generation is full of people with shaved heads, tattoos, fishnet shirts, and normal people that would fit in with just about any generation. My generation has grills, gold teeth, earings, noserings, prince alberts, and all sorts of bodily modification - but then again so did my parents. And theres.

I'm sure the way I may sometimes speak when comfortable with peers, would cause an older person from the generation prior to believe that I am an example of the lose of literarry and vocabulary skills (thank god they don't look at my spelling!), but weren't they such an example?

Long hair has been around forever. At one time it was exceptable. At others, considered dangerous. Jeans were once to be the "bad boy" clothes, now the most innocent kid in classes across America wears them. Leather jackets too. Earings were once bad, look at them now. Is it that our latter tabboos have become complacent in the norm? Are we excepting once-exceptional ways of self pride and expression?

Pretty much, is each generation somehow of a shorter stock than the previous. Is it spiraling down a road of debauchery? Were the 90's worse off than the 80's? The 70's? Are were all the sex, drugs, rock n' roll really all the same? Were the -often drug induced- love n' peice free love of the hippies any different than the -often drug induced- freak on of the disco era? The 80's large hair and unconventional attire any different than the beatnik's unconventional attire and weird hair? From the pompadore to the mullet. From the "daddio" to the "dawg".

Are we, in whatever generation we find ourselves clumped in, any better, worse or different than any other generation? Are things worse off? Really? Sure we can pick one example... but is the entire generation, generally and in the majority, any worse in behavior, or anything tangible such as our CD/record/MP3 collection to our friday night dress.

Or is it that the lacuna between generations, along with the nostalgea of our own pasts and the natural inability to connect with our own young what attributes to this thought that our generation would be, is, or has been, better off, better behaved, and in better taste?

I rambled, sorry. I just got insulted by someone three times my age and I'm hyped on energy drink (hey, jolt cola is an energy drink!). And if you wanna figure out what three times my age is, it's 36.25 below my handle.

 

[Zodiac]

My generation is full of people with shaved heads, tattoos...

Which is very sexy.

To be on topic, what some oldies may consider degenerate and deviant, we may consider normal in our increasingly open-minded society. Whether or not this is Sodom '07, is subjective.

I'd just rather not waste my time talking to bitter old people who are an inch away from being 6-feet under.

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

True, but I've seen people my age (technically I guess I'm mid 20s) who talk the same way about young children... And parents who are the same age as mine (late 40's - mid 50's) as well. Few would consider mid 20 or 50 year olds, in this age, to be an inch away from the grave (though 50 is closer but still).

 

[lunarhiro2002]

For me the decay just reinforces my belief that humanity is degernerating instead of evolving (not to change subjects, lol)

But then again things really haven't changed in 2000 or 3000 years

The Romans sought almost global conquest, same with the Mongols, people still tried to knock the Jews off the planet, (the Babylonions, Assyrians, Canannites, Philistines, to name a few incase you guys were wondering.)

So I think that with each generation something that was considered bad from a pervious generation because accepted in the new generation adding to a "worse and worse" effect...

 

[Roman Candle]

'Decaying' is a bad way to put the changes in social climate. Our moral outlook on the world is shifting - not neccessarily negatively - but noticably, and in a clear direction. Wheras our rights used be based around the community, we are now thinking of the individual more.

For instance, most communities would be joined together at some kind of common point where all classes would intersect - like the Church used to be in England. This was good for those who conformed and were accepted into that community. It helped with social cohesion; it brought people together. But at the same time, it was pretty miserable for the individuals who didn't want to/couldn't join those communities; for existence, gays did not do terribly well in that church based community.

Now, we've shifted so that there's very little common ground which brings everyone together. For instance, for us in London the resentment from the lower at upper-middle classes has probably never been higher; and neither has the fear in the upper-middle been so great for the working classes. That's because the two don't mix. However, the rights of individuals to be 'deviant' are much stronger. It seems as if individual rights come at the cost of a more fragmented society. Those silly rules about how can fuck who and who can wear what somehow did help, in a way. It set those in the community apart from those who were different. Again, bad for the minority who weren't in that community, but good for those who were.

As a background to this is the fact that whatever the previous generation hold as arbitrarily bad, the next will probably gravitate to. When long hair shocked people's parents, for no particular reason, those people grew their hair. When wearing leather and gluing safty pins to your trousers scared those people, that's what their children did. That's just another natural shift, to set yourself apart from your parents. It's not a decay at all, since there was nothing bad about having long hair in the first place.

 

[Jonathan]

What about people who used to be able to leave doors open, and welcome people into there homes? Now we have all of the locks we can lay our hands on. You would have to be mad to leave a door wide open in almost any place in england!

I reckon sort of the same as lunahiro. People are (on a whole) rejecting God as their moral compass, which leaves morality down to the individual, or the society. Everyone seems now be doing "what's right in their own eyes."

Whether it is just be or not, i seem to see a direct correlation between godlessness and the moral outlook shifting towards the bad end of the scale (gun crime soaring etc.)

@Zodiac: That is harsh! some old people are awesome! they have lived their whole lives and we have stuff to learn from them!

 

[Roman Candle]

That doesn't make sense. There is no (mainstream) value system on earth which considers shooting someone less awful than Christianity. It's not like Christians are the only people saying "don't shoot people". Even if you ditch Christianity and follow the morals of some other system, you're never going to end up with one that says "Hey, go into someone's house and steal all their stuff. It's fine". In fact, there are ranks and ranks of Christians, who actively support gun rights, military excusions etc.

No one's ever robbed a shop because they thought it was the right thing to do - or if they did, being a Christian wouldn't have changed that in the first place, seeing as how no matter whether they are religious or not, there will still be someone to tell them it's wrong.

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

What about people who used to be able to leave doors open, and welcome people into there homes? Now we have all of the locks we can lay our hands on. You would have to be mad to leave a door wide open in almost any place in england!

I have yet to hear of any time where, in any sort of city, someone was ever able to leave there door open, and unlocked, and welcome people into there homes without a negative influence.
Sure, I know people who do it - but they also happen to be known for brutality when it comes to revenge. The only actual places I know that do these things, are places with lots of crime rates, and with someone who is willing to look out for there own, in return for the same, reguardless of the consequence, or in areas where 5 newspapers being stolen is news (seen that make the news in my mothers old neighborhood).

@Zodiac: That is harsh! some old people are awesome! they have lived their whole lives and we have stuff to learn from them!

Reguardless of me disagreeing with the first quote, I quite agree with this one.

No one's ever robbed a shop because they thought it was the right thing to do - or if they did, being a Christian wouldn't have changed that in the first place, seeing as how no matter whether they are religious or not, there will still be someone to tell them it's wrong.

Gotta say I don't agree with this statement RC, not because I think it happens all the time, just because of one series of incidents that sparked a few copy cats. And all in all it was only 3 delis, and one fruit stand, but still. After 9/11 a large small group of latinos (I believe 7) caused alot of damage, and stole all the "ethnic" articles of the said stores. They also beat the store owners, who were all "middle eastern" and spray painted crosses on the door. This caused a huge "positive" motion that had copycats of all races doing like behaviors, some not as harsh. One of the kids, when arrested, was told by a priest he had "done God's will".
Now I know peopel get crazy when bad things happen, specially if its in there neighborhoods, and it's no excuse, but people get there minds all twisted and perversed (no I don't mean sexually), but to this day that same priest (who no longer is a member of the same perish do to eventual public outcry over the incident) still visits the man in jail, and prays that our "legal system of sins" will one day see the error of it's ways... But then again, I'm sure that kind of thing happens in all, and every, generaion.

And as an early comment, since I was the one to originally say "decay", and was meant as more of a pull-ploy, I still have to say you're right, it's not the proper word to use.

I don't actually know what a "generation" is, some say it's from "event to event", or 30 years. Others nulled that down to 20. But I do know that when I get older, I'll have to check myself, most likely. I happen to think that I'll end up saying whatever equivelent to "kids these days" I'll say, and have to remind myslef that I was a "kid" in my day being judged on the same way, by someone disconected to the younger associations, movements, and trends. I'll probably laugh then, and go about my merry way.

 

[Roman Candle]

I was reffering to the rising levels of crime that Jonathan was talking about. Even if people justify robbery/shootings (not the unusual kind of cases you mentioned) to themselves, there's no differece between doing that when you subscribe to a Christian belief system and when you subscribe to another set of morals.

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

@RC,
I was rambling and ranting when I originally posted my comment, however I edited heavily because of that. I tend to rant as anyone whose read any of my posts would clearly see. My normal post would be twice the size, average, of my longest post on the forums if it wasn't for my constent editing and retyping, however I lose alot of what I meant to say initially.

I meant to agree with you, though it seems I tried to make an exception and lable that a reason to disprove you're statement.

EDIT: See I just posted it and already I'm editing it...
The "unusual kind of case" I had typed was meant to be shown as a reacuring theme about history, not as an exception to the behavior of an otherwise normal society.

 

[Minkoff]

I reckon sort of the same as lunahiro. People are (on a whole) rejecting God as their moral compass, which leaves morality down to the individual, or the society. Everyone seems now be doing "what's right in their own eyes."

Do you need God to tell you that it isn't right to kill? Do you need God to tell you that it isn't right to steal? We have a word for people who do. It's "sociopath."

Whether it is just be or not, i seem to see a direct correlation between godlessness and the moral outlook shifting towards the bad end of the scale (gun crime soaring etc.)

Fun fact: on average, more religious people are criminals. It's not because religion is bad though. It's because poor, uneducated people are more often religious than rich, educated people. Crime exists more because of the class divide than religion. Close the gap and there goes most of your crime. And you can do it without forcing your religious beliefs on people, too!

Also, things really aren't all bad. Because of how mainstream porn has become, there's less sexual frustration (and in turn rape) than ever! So, even though we're more sexed up nowadays, more of it is consentual!

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

Fun fact: on average, more religious people are criminals. It's not because religion is bad though. It's because poor, uneducated people are more often religious than rich, educated people. Crime exists more because of the class divide than religion. Close the gap and there goes most of your crime. And you can do it without forcing your religious beliefs on people, too!

Which is why I see no correlation. Now, education is something else entirely. Uneducation, ignorance, all of the ways you can put it, are what I'd say has a factor - but not religion. Social standing, nearly as much. Your political views... I see that with religion. Religion and politics, in my mind, never hurt people. They were just used by people who had the need to do so, to do good and bad things.

 

[FlippyD]

Fun fact: on average, more religious people are criminals. It's not because religion is bad though. It's because poor, uneducated people are more often religious than rich, educated people. Crime exists more because of the class divide than religion. Close the gap and there goes most of your crime. And you can do it without forcing your religious beliefs on people, too!

That's of little consequence, besides; Fun fact: there's more uneducated people than educated people, and a LOT more poor people than rich people.

 

[Minkoff]

How is that of little consequence? Unless I didn't understand correctly what Jonathan meant when he said "Godless," I'd say that's pretty relevant. I was saying that taking social status into account, there probably isn't much correlation between a person's religious views and crime. In other words, I don't think that religion has much of an effect on morality. Positively or negatively.

 

[FlippyD]

How is that of little consequence? Unless I didn't understand correctly what Jonathan meant when he said "Godless," I'd say that's pretty relevant. I was saying that taking social status into account, there probably isn't much correlation between a person's religious views and crime. In other words, I don't think that religion has much of an effect on morality. Positively or negatively.

When I say it's of little consequence I mean that your point is jumping the gun and making broad generalizations based on circumstances. Your reasoning is that religious people are more likely to commit crimes because poor and uneducated people are more likely to commit crimes. Not only this but you're making the generalization that most poor people are uneducated.

Basically you said something along the lines of "Most murderers have two eyes, thus people with only one eye are good." You just through "religious people" in with you claim are more likely to commit crimes to try and prove a point. What you forget to note is that A.) there are more rich people than poor, thus it stands to reason that more poor people commit crimes and that B.) religious people are more likely to commit crimes because poor/uneducated people are mostly religious. You're making claims without proper proof to back them up!

You may argue the role religion has to play in morality, but you have to admit that religion gives people a reason to be nice and civil, it doesn't cause the average citizen to commit to crime. Religion, by itself (and I'm not talking about just Christianity but all religions) very rarely cause people to commit crimes or gross acts of misconduct, and cause positive behavior more often.

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

I didn't personally read any of that in Minkoff's statement.
He even clearly said "it's not because religion is bad though". And I didn't see him point out at any point that religion did anything, infact I saw that he said it has no true effect. Just that you are more likely to perform an act of crime if you are religious.

Let's not forget that it is known that the poorer you are (and the worse your life is) the more likely you will be superstitious/religious. The poorer you are the more likely you'll be to perform a crime act. The more uneducated you are, the more likely you'll perform a crime act.

He could have said that you'll be more likely to be a liberal if you were in a diversed and poorly economic and educated neighborhood with a higher crime rate - but would that mean that polotics was a factor in merit of behavior? No. Only statistically showing what you'd most likely be.

however, I would like to say I agree with the statement that Religion, by itself (and all religions at that)if at the very least, give people a reason to be nice and civil. And it is true, in my eyes, no religion has caused anyone to be hurt.

But religious people have hurt quite a few.

 

[Roman Candle]

Poorer people are more likely to be worse educated :p Without a doubt in this country, for certain.

 

[Jonathan]

Going Back along way, About leaving doors open, In america it was probably different, but in england you could do that and it was fine. obviously america is different.

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

And in Ireland, at one time, it was said a virgin could walk the streets with gold purses in her hands and go unmolested (not meaning sexually, meaning without being the target of greedy actions). It was also stated one could ask any man on the street what a piece of paper read, and they would be able to read it and tell you (at the time these statements are aimed, Ireland was indeed known for libraries and had an estimated highest account of literacy)

At one time it was said that in a region of Iraq (I can't remember the name sorry), that any who walked the streets would not be harmed by thief or bothered by beggar, for there were none.

In Canada, where my relatives live, the neighborhood they live in has never had a murder in there reported (known or simply documented) history.

But likely these are either untrue or simply over exaggerated. I'm sure in England, going back along way, it was a case of township. People would know if, for example, a woman down the lane was wearing the same dress (which wouldn't be manufactured, but hand sewn and have uniqueness) that one's neighbor had recently lost.

Small towns breed less crime, naturally. Small far apart towns, even less, inner town member on time member crime. When I say crime I mean non-violent crimes, such as stealing.

The more people, the higher the rate increases because the more likely one can get away with it - or sell it off. Which is why port towns anywhere are always known for there crime.

Notice I said port towns, here a port town is a town with an active and business sent port. A town with a shipping dock that's barely used would simply be called a ship town, or dock town.

 

[Jonathan]

I'm talking Belfast, capital of Ireland, my grandma remembers being able to do it.

Anyway, without God, one decides morals on their own. If more people are turning to evolution (which unfortunately they are) we are being told that we are merely glorified pond slime, which arose by chance. With no point or purpose people are saying "who says stealing is wrong?" and even "Who says murder is wrong" i.e murdering unborn or born human beings. I know alot of my friends are anyway.

And that religious people are criminals because poor uneducated people are religious is a load of rubbish, frankly. Jumping to conclusions.