|[click image for full size]|
Reading Vox Day’s latest post, I found myself wondering if our old chap had recently fallen victim to the ring-and-run prank or some other form of youth-induced obnoxiousness:
These results from a recent Pew Survey [pictured] are precisely why I am so often amused when atheists point to the lower percentage of religious belief among the young compared to the elderly as a sign of anything but the inexperience and ignorance of youth. While it is true that a few of the idiot teens of today will be the influential decision makers of tomorrow, they are as unlikely to retain their political, religious, and philosophical attitudes as they are to retain their hairstyles and drinking habits.
There is, after all, something that will happen to these 18-29 cretins. It is called experience of the real world. The opinions of maleducated ignoramuses who have been purposefully sheltered from not only real economics, real decision making, real independence, and real work, but from the benefit of the experience of the best minds in human history as well, are no more relevant than the opinions of the millions of hamsters kept as pets in America's households.
I admit, I don’t have much of a detailed response to the above. I just quoted it because I’m always amused when cantankerous “old people” so ignorantly and ham-fistedly tar a certain easily-targeted age demographic in a way that reveals not only how out-of-touch they are with these very youths they so love to rail against, but also how easily offended they seem to be at the apparent notion that young people think differently than they do and may just carry these new ideals and beliefs into the future of society. (To put it briefly.)
Regarding the survey results themselves, they’re nothing remotely new or surprising to anyone who’s even minimally aware of current societal and cultural trends amongst different age groups. Naturally, I find myself most in agreement with the younger demographic (at least I finally meet the minimum age requirement to even fit into it): socialism works well on paper but is fucked by plain ol’ human nature in practice; progressivism is the default good; civil liberties and rights (which I see as the same, whatever the minor distinction, if any, may be) are, well, a good thing (unless generalized bigotry and oppression are things you fancy); libertarianism is a healthy mindset in moderation (same as with any others); states’ rights are important, but must defer to federal powers to resolve conflicts; family values are a bullshit conservative fantasy; militias are generally both unwanted and unneeded (not to mention how most of them seem to be comprised of anti-government whackjobs); and capitalism, though heavily flawed, is still the best we’ve come up with (which isn’t necessarily saying much).
All in all, pretty standard stuff.
Vox had one last thing to say, though:
It's not just the youth who are fools, though. The general dichotomy between the dislike for militias and the support for state and civil rights underlines what everyone here already knows. Most people are idiots.
So supporting equal socio-legal rights for all regardless of minority status somehow mandates the approval of fringe groups mainly comprised of paranoid gun-nuts?
I’m not even sure if that’s supposed to make logical sense, much less how it might do so.