• Stern@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    3 months ago

    You can only get more conservative when you have things to protect like a house and a pension.

    Most millennials retirement plan atm is die of heatstroke in 150 degree weather in a 8 person shared apartment in Alaska.

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      3 months ago

      Or you’ll get more communist when you have people to protect, like children or friends who start getting sick now that they’re not young anymore

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I became a socialist because I was an “essential employee” during the height of the pandemic. I was treated like shit by my company, the customers, and the government while they sung my praise. I watched my grandpa get good cancer treatment with the VA (shocker, I know, but it happens) while my sister and grandma had to fight insurance for cancer treatment.

        We can’t make a perfect world, but we can make a better one. And it starts with a socialist economy.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I became much more progressive after living in a “blue state” for much of my adult life. It’s hard to miss that the most successful economies in the us are also the ones who pay most attention to quality of life. We can look at the contrast in our neighboring states, and see the advantages brought by near universal healthcare, investments in an excellent education system, care about the environment, higher minimum wage, support for unions, and so much more

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            If you’re referring to Nordic Social Democracies, they fund their safety nets via Imperialism, they can’t exist without impoverishing and exploiting the Global South. It’s the epitome of the Labor Aristocracy.

            • AA5B@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              No, sorry,I was being us-centric - it seemed like that’s where the thread was.

              As one very specific example, when COViD funding for school lunches ended, some us states decided to no longer provide free school lunches. Massachusetts passed a “millionaire tax” and funded free school lunches out of that

              As a slightly older example, Massachusetts passed effectively universal healthcare coverage, signed into law by governor Mitt Romney, and later served as the model for the Affordable Care Act

              Looking at school system ratings by us state, I see what looks like a strong correlation between excellent schools and a stronger economy.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                It’s the same issue as the Nordics, the US is a de-industrialized nation that makes the bulk of its profits off of Imperialism.

    • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      You can only get more conservative when you have things to protect like a house and a pension.

      In aggragate, that’s the more reliable way to make a population more conservative, but remember that a reasonable portion of fascists in a society that is going in that direction are going to be people who either lost that or never had it and, in either case, blame some minority for that fact. (The majority are still people like you describe, though, the petite bourgeois, etc., who feel insecure in their holdings)

      I agree if you mean neoliberal-conservative

    • untorquer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Statement unclear whether increased conservatism is the natural result of property/capital or if property/capital are merely requisite.

  • pjwestin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    3 months ago

    Whenever people say that you grow more conservative when you get older, they’re working from the premise that you’ll grow more affluent and comfortable later in life. For Americans, that just isn’t true anymore. Wages are mostly stagnant, home ownership is much less attainable, and cost of living is at an all time high. Yet for some reason, pundits just can’t figure out why millenials aren’t getting more conservative as they age, or why zoomers appear to be following this trend.

    • bountygiver [any]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      yup it applies only to the privileged class, and of course only people in that class would think that is the general experience.

    • Herding Llamas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      All of that is the same here in Germany. Check out the stats on home ownership here… But oh man are the kids flipping to the AfD (far right nazi party) quick and in huge numbers. It’s scary to see.

      • pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        Honestly, that makes sense to me. It seems like when economic systems start breaking down for people, they turn to populism. It’s either left-wing populism, which argues for reigning in the excesses of capitalism, or right-wing populism, which scapegoats minority or immigrant groups. Right now, the youth in the U.S. are interested in left-wing populism, but right-wing populism (AKA Trumpism) is the only thing making it into the political mainstream.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          left-wing populism, which argues for reigning in the excesses of capitalism

          Left wing means ending Capitalism, not just “reigning it in,” which never works long-term.

          • pjwestin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            “Left-wing,” is a very broad term. In the Weimar Republic, yes, the left-wing alternative to right-wing populism was communism. In America today, Democratic Socialists like Bernie Sanders are the left-wing alternative. If that doesn’t fall in line with your definition of, "left-wing,’ that’s fine, but it most people wouldn’t define it as exclusively anti-capitalist ideologies.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              The Overton Window is relative, sure, but that’s only useful in defined constraints, and only for one point in time. Leftism is socialist, rightism is Capitalist.

              Bernie is a Social Democrat as well.

              • pjwestin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                …and Sanders himself defines Democratic Socialism as the completion of the New Deal reforms, not a gradual transition to a socialist economic system. There’s a difference between the Overton Window shifting and a gradual change in definition over generations, but if you want definitions to remain entirely static, then we’re both using left-wing incorrectly, as it’s, “real,” definition is opposing monarchy’s veto power over parliament.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Yes, he calls himself a Democratic Socialist while being a Social Democrat, I’m aware.

                  Left wing in the modern context refers to anti-Capitalism.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Where are those youth in the US? While they seem loud online, why hasn’t that translated into votes?

          • pjwestin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Actually, youth turnout is pretty high right now, with record turnout being set recently for both midterms and presidential elections. In 2020, turnout for the under thirty crowd was 50%, a possible new record, and it was 30% and 27% in 2018 and 2022 respectively, which are 30 year highs. Unfortunately, the Democratic Party leadership prefers centrist candidates, and frequently puts its thumb on the scale to ensure that moderate candidates win, so that turnout isn’t translating into progressive politics.

            Funny enough, just after I made the original comment, I read an article about how the youngest U.S. voters are starting to lean further right than before, so it’s possible the ship has sailed on this all together. Given how aggressively the right wing has been to trying to indoctrinate young voters, who are watching Democrats successfully suppress left-wing populism while Republicans embrace right-wing populism, it’s possible the youth are deciding that the far-right offers them only chance for change. I hope not, though, because then we’re screwed.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      What if you start to become better off, but realize so many other parents are unable to provide for their kids like you can, and you can’t hope to provide for your kids like the wealthy can? What if paying exorbitant amounts of money for your kids education drives home the point that we need to make that investment for all kids futures? What if you are more often on the hiring side and realize your well being depends on the next generation having opportunities and the means to successfully achieve them?

      • pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Then you’re a good person, which is a statistical minority. Most people will never intentionally vote against their economic self-interests by raising their own taxes (although you can trick them into voting against their economic self interests; Republicans have been doing that for years by using racist dog-whistles to attack entitlement programs and pushing discredited trickle-down economic theories).

  • beebarfbadger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    3 months ago

    Honestly, if your goals include conserving an inhabitable environment for the human race in the future, conserving a semblance of wealth for everyone but the top, like, dozen people on Earth, conserving the rights of workers and consumers against an overwhelming opposition, conserving democracy for future generations (and all that against the best efforts of a supposedly “conservative” party), your parents may have been right.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      What if my goals include family values, such as opportunity for my kids to earn a good living, live a long and healthy life, enjoy the environment, in a world better than the one I had?

      • Juice@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Then you have to join in the fight for those things and educate yourself. This world is not getting better, and the reason for that is the productive political economic system in which we live.

        I have the same values and I am a Marxist communist. That means I work for political struggle with the systems that oppress and exploit to for improving conditions for all, and also work to try and educate workers about the class dynamics of this struggle, and the revolutionary potential of the working class.

  • ericbomb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 months ago

    Straight up I was conservative as a young teen, because that’s what EVERYONE was here in Utah when I was in the LDS church.

    Now I just keep floating more and more left as time goes on.

    • kofe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      I went from “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” in high school to liberal to communist to anarchist back to communist now I think I’m democratic socialist in my 30s? Just basic safety nets and unions, please.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      When I was a teen, I was definitely fiscally conservative. Paying better attention to how you use money is easy to understand and a central pillar of politics. But it was a sheltered life in a town with all well-paying jobs, no diversity, and an excellent education system.

      Now I keep floating left the more I realize how many people missed out of that picture.

      But it was my kids that really did it. Fighting for better opportunities for them easily turns into wanting a better world for them to live in. I’m more worried than ever about my government’s poor money habits and when it will eventually come due, but we’re in the middle of a rolling disaster of short term and misplaced spending, our politicians more concerned with scapegoats and spite than actually benefitting their constituents

      • The Stoned Hacker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        My brother in Christ, im sorry to inform you but the upcoming fiscal crisis are gonna be some of the least of your kids worries. I’m still probably closer in age to you rather than them, but i grew up knowing that money is gonna mean jack shit once the water starts boiling (metaphorically, but hyperbolically realistic). We’re the frogs in the pot and the economy is gonna be the least of our troubles. We’re seeing a global rise in fascism, climate disasters, war, inequity, and yes financial instability. If you wanna help your kids, get involved in the community and organize. Start unions at your work places and march in protests for a better future. I’m not talking about a stronger or more fashy future, but one where we work together. Join or make mutual aid networks where you live. The best thing you can do for your children (imo, coming from a young person) is help set up the future you want for them. I would hope that’s one of community and mutual aid where we help each other not because we expect a reward or are paid to, but because together we stand taller and can hoist up those who cannot stand on their own. I hope i don’t sound too preachy, but it sounds like you love your kids so I implore you to get involved further. The future did not look kind to me when I was a child, and it looks even less hospitable now. We can change that. Direct action and mutual aid are the way forward to a better future imo.

  • Floon@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 months ago

    I have become aggressively more anti-capitalist as I’ve grown older. At 56, with a nice professional career mostly behind me, I am vigorously ANTIFA EAT THE RICH ACAB.

  • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I grew up in a rightwing household, and unquestioningly drank the koolaid until my late teens. The right’s bullshit eventually became impossible to ignore, so I dove right into the ‘both sides!’ trap and rode the Libertarian train for a while.

    It became really easy to articulate what I didn’t like about the right; describing what was bad about the left was just echoes of Fox bitching about things like them voting on emotion instead of logic… but no real examples.

    Around my mid-twenties I finally realized ^that was projection; then 2016 happened and holy shit they’re running Trump and Hillary?? Easily the two most hated candidates in my lifetime… against Gary Johnson - an admittedly goofy personality but likeable and most importantly not crazy, THIS IS THE LP’S TIME TO SHINE! …yeah they got 3% of the vote. We won’t ever see better conditions for a 3rd victory, so, pipedream shattered.

    Guess I’ll have to just pick a lesser evil, so let’s see what we have to work with…

    • there’s the red team. Burn through our fossil resources with reckless abandon. War, war, war, and more war. Shave social services down to nothing so we can claim ‘fiscal responsibility’ which is good I guess (hey! eyes down here, we’re done talking about the war part), a blatant integration of religion and politics, and they want to make life as miserable as possible for my gay/colored/female/nonchristian friends. Fuck, that’s pretty bad…

    • Alright, next we have the blue team, which is the opposite of all those things, at the exceedingly high cost of… getting cockblocked by the red team when they try to implement those things… and… well there was that time Bill lied about getting a blowjob- outrageous! Surely the red team does a better job of keeping it in their pants… *checks* …uhh, nope! Fuck, I’m starting to become aware of my own cognitive dissonance and it feels like absolute shit.

    So I start voting one issue at a time, crunching both options against eachother and choosing the one that’s best for the US. That way there’s no bias and I won’t be part of this tribal bullshit plagueing our politics… Weird, when I ignore affiliation and vote on policy alone, my ballot becomes solid blue. What are the odds of that?! Next election, solid blue again. And again.

    My desire to be ‘independent’ on label alone is pretty much gone at this point, and I’m being more and more vocal about supporting leftwing policies. Family isn’t a fan, but they hit me with the shit OP is poking fun at - I only shifted blue because I’m poor! Once I make more money, just you wait and see, I’ll come crawling right back.

    Now, I’m not rich or anything, but I’m (finally!) not living paycheck to paycheck. During all ^that I wandered into the military which gave me access to all kinds of socialized resources which have enabled me to get where I’m at now and have made a pretty significant improvement on my life. The thing that pisses me off about those socialized services is WHY THE FUCK DOESN’T EVERYONE HAVE THIS?! So wearing camo for 4 years for some reason got me this VIP tour of what we should should be doing for everyone.

    I was a late bloomer, I got there. I haven’t missed a single election since 2016, big or small. Solid blue. I’ve gotten to the point where I’ll even look up the voter registration of candidates for nonpolitical positions like judges, and red is a deal breaker.

    The better off I become, the more blue I get. The notion of red-shift with income is trash.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Alright, next we have the blue team, which is the opposite of all those things, at the exceedingly high cost of… getting cockblocked by the red team when they try to implement those things… and… well there was that time Bill lied about getting a blowjob- outrageous! Surely the red team does a better job of keeping it in their pants… *checks* …uhh, nope! Fuck, I’m starting to become aware of my own cognitive dissonance and it feels like absolute shit.

      The DNC isn’t to the opposite of the GOP, they are aligned on the vast majority of issues and use the rest to yap loudly in disagreement. Dems aren’t left.

      During all ^that I wandered into the military which gave me access to all kinds of socialized resources which have enabled me to get where I’m at now and have made a pretty significant improvement on my life.

      Social programs aren’t socialized, that’s a bit of a misnomer.

      • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        However US Corporations that exploit US Workers and Workers abroad are subsidized, even for their losses. Us Taxpayers pay them while they exploit us further and Social Services get gutted and crumble. Gotta love neoliberalism, where socialized welfare is bad for workers, but good for corporations.

        Edit: not actual socialism like worker owned, just socialized losses, as in the working class paying taxes foot the bill for the corporations benefit and privatized gains

          • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            No, I have not. I’ve only touched on the book Consequences of Capitalism so far. Thanks for the req, I’ll check it out.

            Socialism isn’t the right word, it’s not like they are worker owned in any regard. It’s just that the subsidies they receive for the benefit of their private business and profits for shareholders come from taxpayer money. Further redistributing weather to the wealthy at the expense of the working class Americans, and further enabling them to exploit us more. Their gains are privatized and their losses are socialized by the working class.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              No problem! Lenin’s writing is very eye-opening as it’s Marxism applied to more modern, international Capitalism, but he may not make the most sense if you aren’t already familiar with Marxism.

              • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                3 months ago

                I’m somewhat familiar with the principals, but not enough to thoroughly explain them in a casual conversation.

                It’s definitely eye-opening to contextualize things like Nationalism, Fascism, Colonialism, and Imperialism within the Capitalist mode of production

                Edited my comment to distinguish between genuine socialism and the welfare of corporations being socialized thru taxpayer money for their benefit and our expense.

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Thanks for sharing! I feel like this is representative of a small but important political group recently.

  • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 months ago

    “You will be more conservative as you grow older” is not a truth, but a threat. If you don’t become a conservative under their regime, you won’t become old.

  • zeppo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 months ago

    The people who told me that were 100% boomers. There’s that idiotic saying “if you’re not liberal* when you’re 20, you have no heart. If you’re not conservative when you’re 40 you have no brains” ok boomer.

    Note this is using the US meaning of liberal, not to mean “capitalist”.

  • BilboBargains@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Maybe we become more extreme in our existing beliefs. My political compass position drifted right from bottom left as I hit my thirties. After the Iraq invasion of 2003 and recessions following 2008 it swung back towards Ghandi. I became convinced that conservative politics isn’t working in my late forties and that has only been reinforced as I try to access the creaking UK healthcare system.

      • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        It’s definitely a terrible system, and there are better ones out there like 10Groups. But astrology is completely meaningless. The PCT at least tells you a vague (terrible, yes), but somewhat meaningful direction in which you believe.

        For example, I know that since I’m libertarian left on the PCT, that I’m going to disagree with 90% of the things somebody who’s authoritarian right on the PCT believes.

        Astrology doesn’t have that ability to reliably compare, since it is literally and completely meaningless.

        But again, shit like 10Groups is better and everybody should switch to measures that have more than 2 axis.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              It really doesn’t, though. Two people with wildly different views can occupy the same space, what matters is literal positions and stances.

              • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Two people with wildly different views can occupy the same space

                Not completely. If two people occupy a similar space, it means they agreed on something. That is meaningful. It’s vague, sure. But it isn’t completely random nonsense like astrology.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  It doesn’t. Someone with a “left” view and a “right” view can cancel each other out, occupying the same space as someone with a “neutral” view. It’s worthless.

                  Plus, someone can say they are for something, but actually not support it in reality.

  • Mac@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    How is it that some of us get further left and some people go right? Even poors and immigrants go right and vote against their own interests. I really don’t get it.

    • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Immigrants being on the right is also implicit. Almost nobody is gonna migrate to some place new because things like recent changes are going well for them in their country of origin. They instead leave and migrate to some place that is relatively more stable & predictable. Host countries don’t like it when people migrate over and start agitating for change. As a result conservatism is built into the process.

      –Consider the Cuban Communist. The Cubans that are happy with Communism have no major incentive to leave and resettle in Miami. The Cuban Capitalists OTOH flee to Miami where they espouse the evils of Communism while advocating for our government to continue the trade embargo, ensuring they can spread their pain to their fellow Cubans back in Cuba. It’s the same exact story with Falun Gong

  • linkhidalgogato@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    really If anything i have become more communist as i have aged, when the daydreams of becoming a millionaire or whatever fade away all thats left is the reality of life as the 99% and it kinda sucks, also the older i grow the more i learn about history, about the world, just about everything really and the more i realize how fucked up capitalism is and how much i was lied to thru out my life. Putting that aside tho, people generally do become more reactionary as they age for the simple fact that what was revolutionary in our youth becomes standard and then reactionary over time while many people dont change their views much.