Definitely nothing to do with the climate apocalypse and the fact the kids were told that going outside was dangerous for the last 2 years.
work is not paying for us, we dont see a future where we gain from our labour.
​
Politics is a shit show, which outwardly favours the old, and people who have had far better lives, and careers than we ever will.
​
Sure social media, and “bubbles” is a probelm, but there are far bigger issues, that no one will seriously address facing young people.
Young people correctly realising that democracy is a spook and produces a dominant cohort of insane pensioners who live lives of unearned luxury by consuming the lifeblood of the young in every country where it is tried.
Really makes you think, don’t it.
Supporters of political party that has consistently ignored, isolated and disadvantaged younger voters think that young people aren’t engaged.
Solution – force them to do stuff rather than improving the factors that led to this.
Who designed that website? The orange part in the middle has two separate areas that scroll independently of the main page. Who does that?
The UX is like one of those trash sites with hundreds of adverts, except in this case they have deliberately made it work like that for no reason.
We don’t have democracy. We have an oligarchy dressed up in the clothes of democracy. Wolf dressed in sheep’s clothes. The people in power don’t do what the people want. They serve their donors and their elites.
The article identifies four “problems” and then recommends four solutions.
1. Narrow social networks
2. Overprotective parenting.
3. The treadmill of modern work.
4. “Always online” culture.
The recommended solution to 1 amplifies the problem of 4 by making “always online” more expensive which then amplifies the problem of 3 and, vicariously, 2. The solution to 2 amplifies the problem of 3 and that amplifies 2. The solution to 3 amplifies 1, 3, and 4. The solution to 4 amplifies the problem of 1, 2, and 3. The entire proposal is all about having age verification on social media which then narrows social networks online to match the poverty of social networks in the real world. It is nothing more than an attempt to claw back the genie of the Internet while pretending to not be an attempt to claw back the genie of the Internet.
The article is a press release from Onward (Company Registration no. 11326052) which is an “Independent” Charity funded by
* BAE Systems PLC
* British Private Equity & Venture Capital Association
* City of London Corporation
* Diageo Great Britain Ltd
* Imperial College London
* Juul Labs, Inc.
* KPMG
* Lloyds Banking Group
* Seqirus
* Shell International Limited
* The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry
* Uber Eats UK Ltd
Largely all of the recommendations have appeared before in recommendations for preventing the formation of Unions and ways to reduce Union Membership from Employer Organisations in the Past. The problem they are actually setting out to solve is “why are people under 40 not interested in becoming cash cows for Employers?” Which is probably why solution 3 is so central to the recommendations.
WTF is with the support for
> having a strong leader who does not have to bother with Parliament or elections
amongst the younger age groups. What is driving. What is the example of good well functioning “strong man” government? China? Very bizarre.
In Britain, politics is like bingo, a game for the old. Parties govern accordingly, young people are de facto disenfranchised accordingly. Because politicians are indifferent to them at best, and overwhelmingly being over 50 themselves, openly engaged in ageist hostility towards them at worst.
Even people like Starmer. I still remember photos of him totally blanking some young activists who were trying to talk to him. The shutting of people like that out of the political discussion entirely absolutely rubs me up the wrong way.
Britain is, by and large, a country that glorifies the old and demonises the young and the new. And our political system is a microcosm of that.
9 comments
Definitely nothing to do with the climate apocalypse and the fact the kids were told that going outside was dangerous for the last 2 years.
work is not paying for us, we dont see a future where we gain from our labour.
​
Politics is a shit show, which outwardly favours the old, and people who have had far better lives, and careers than we ever will.
​
Sure social media, and “bubbles” is a probelm, but there are far bigger issues, that no one will seriously address facing young people.
Young people correctly realising that democracy is a spook and produces a dominant cohort of insane pensioners who live lives of unearned luxury by consuming the lifeblood of the young in every country where it is tried.
Really makes you think, don’t it.
Supporters of political party that has consistently ignored, isolated and disadvantaged younger voters think that young people aren’t engaged.
Solution – force them to do stuff rather than improving the factors that led to this.
Who designed that website? The orange part in the middle has two separate areas that scroll independently of the main page. Who does that?
The UX is like one of those trash sites with hundreds of adverts, except in this case they have deliberately made it work like that for no reason.
We don’t have democracy. We have an oligarchy dressed up in the clothes of democracy. Wolf dressed in sheep’s clothes. The people in power don’t do what the people want. They serve their donors and their elites.
The article identifies four “problems” and then recommends four solutions.
1. Narrow social networks
2. Overprotective parenting.
3. The treadmill of modern work.
4. “Always online” culture.
The recommended solution to 1 amplifies the problem of 4 by making “always online” more expensive which then amplifies the problem of 3 and, vicariously, 2. The solution to 2 amplifies the problem of 3 and that amplifies 2. The solution to 3 amplifies 1, 3, and 4. The solution to 4 amplifies the problem of 1, 2, and 3. The entire proposal is all about having age verification on social media which then narrows social networks online to match the poverty of social networks in the real world. It is nothing more than an attempt to claw back the genie of the Internet while pretending to not be an attempt to claw back the genie of the Internet.
The article is a press release from Onward (Company Registration no. 11326052) which is an “Independent” Charity funded by
* BAE Systems PLC
* British Private Equity & Venture Capital Association
* City of London Corporation
* Diageo Great Britain Ltd
* Imperial College London
* Juul Labs, Inc.
* KPMG
* Lloyds Banking Group
* Seqirus
* Shell International Limited
* The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry
* Uber Eats UK Ltd
Largely all of the recommendations have appeared before in recommendations for preventing the formation of Unions and ways to reduce Union Membership from Employer Organisations in the Past. The problem they are actually setting out to solve is “why are people under 40 not interested in becoming cash cows for Employers?” Which is probably why solution 3 is so central to the recommendations.
WTF is with the support for
> having a strong leader who does not have to bother with Parliament or elections
amongst the younger age groups. What is driving. What is the example of good well functioning “strong man” government? China? Very bizarre.
In Britain, politics is like bingo, a game for the old. Parties govern accordingly, young people are de facto disenfranchised accordingly. Because politicians are indifferent to them at best, and overwhelmingly being over 50 themselves, openly engaged in ageist hostility towards them at worst.
Even people like Starmer. I still remember photos of him totally blanking some young activists who were trying to talk to him. The shutting of people like that out of the political discussion entirely absolutely rubs me up the wrong way.
Britain is, by and large, a country that glorifies the old and demonises the young and the new. And our political system is a microcosm of that.