The old and the young

Why do some people hate that many communist orgs are mostly comprised of young (16-20) and old (50s-90s) people? Generation wise it makes sense, two generations that aren't as enthralled by the capitalist propaganda and ideology, As well one generation that faced hard times and had a strong union history and one facing hard times and are looking for ideas from the past further than their parents or grandparents generation.

Other urls found in this thread:

i don't think its so much 'comprised of old/young' so much as the fact that they exist to begin with. these people are idealists and likely counterrevolutionaries. there is no "ok" party or scenario for them that allows us to build socialism here and now

also, i don't really trust old people that don't explicitly identify as communists.

boomers i have realized are the most selfish assholes on this earth. they really are mind bogglingly greedy and don't give a fuck about the future of their kids and grand kids. all they care about are the things that directly affect them, and they'll sell your shit down the river for $3 if it allows them to protect 'what's rightfully theirs' yadda yadda yadda…

Millennial/Silent Generation United Front to topple Boomer Imperialism when?

How do you expect to start a general strike with students and senior citizens? I'm glad they're in it (though student-run orgs are universally terrible) but they're not enough.

The majority of the youth is not communist, but they are against the actual system just because it is deeply corrupted, the communist orgs have to appeal at this feeling to spread class conciousness. Or else we'll lose the youth to reformist liberalism or the nationalist propaganda that is getting stronger and stronger

because everyone in between those age demographics are too busy earning a living to organize i.e. are the most wagecucked. their material situation determines the coherence of their ideology, or lack thereof

Do we?

yeah, you can't exactly overthrow capitalism with 10 people. Every singnificant movement that whishes to bring about drastic changes requires popular support.

Because the actual working class despises orgs that are composed of demographics that don't work.

Parties should only be composed of people in the 25-65 bracket. Then they might actually start to become attractive instead of repellent.

Look at this guy who thinks that the working class start work at 25 and not 16/18, laugh at him.

well doesn't communism fight for the well being of the majority? socialist changes needs to be popular

Workers have to…you know…DO SOME ACTUAL WORK. Get a job you hippies, or get BOD.
Also, if workers actually try to strike I'll just fire them for being racists or misogonists or some other bullshit.

It's almost like that's when people actually get started in careers and grow out of any "phases" they had in college. And let's be very clear, the under 25s are in fact going through a phase.


Under 25's =/= Students

Lenin was exiled when he was 24. Just because some toffee nosed middle class "socialists" turn into conservatives when they get older doesn't mean you can discount some of the most dedicated and head strong members of the movement, it's elitist.


You don't know what "working class" is

They might not even be going through a phase. I met so many dudes in socialist circles in college who just straight up didn't give a shit about politics and just wanted to get laid or fit in. It's a ritual, college politics are worthless today.

And he was minor nobility, and Engels was the son of a factory owner. Should we also open ourselves to the bourgeois and the aristocracy as a class entirely because of a few individual exceptions? Dipshit.

Student and youth organizations are worthless.

I unironically feel bad about saying I'm a socialist due to my fairly young age even though I've been working a full time job for over 2 years. I can kinda understand why the stigma exists though as it's not the best look for a "workers" movement to be full of kids but you can't really ignore them all the same. Someone smarter than me could probably figure out what to do.

Working class is the second lowest class in the current socio-economic climate and is made up of people who's profession is based around manual or industrial labour eg: builers, factory workers, carpenters, and smiths. Now lad what do you think "working class" means?

Student organisations are fucking stupid but that's because of the environment that they're in.
Well then what about the proles who are younger than 25? Because you've got Alexei Rykov (17), Vyacheslav Molotov (16), Nikolai Bulganin (23). 3 Premiers who had joined politics before they were 25 all from prole families.

Statistically, they increasingly don't. Stay with the times.

forgot pic

Interesting chart. I'm curious at to why more women have higher education recently as well as whether we're going to hit a point where it levels out or begins to go down.

t. had a nice cushy childhood

It's called Uni and the world isn't just the USA so unless you have statistics for the entire world then I would still have to say that the vast majority still have to start work at 16/18 or even younger. Plus 35% is still a minority meaning the majority of people still don't have degrees

I want to know why there was such a massive dip for 10 years in the men, what in God's green earth happened!?

Pretty easy explanation tbh

*Kermit the frog voice*
"You see society today teaches young men not to get educated, and that's a bad thing"


You might pretend to be unamused but actually you be amused a little bit.

Effect of the Vietnam war? Not so much in people killed, as in people who would otherwise go to college not bothering anymore after all that, and spending their college years away at war. You can also see that kind of drop from 1940 - 1946, where there was also no lady drop.

Except it's the college kids going through a cushy life by definition.

It's almost like you're making an apples to oranges comparison between two totally different time periods.

This would be anything other than a modern student group.

Again, Under 25's =/= Students

Except the ones in orgs tend be students. Otherwise they wouldn't be repelling middle aged people.

Left wing politics is something you have to study to really understand so no wonder less educated people are on average less left wing. So when an under 25 (Non student) is a devout socialist they normally had the drive to learn about it themselves thus making them more dedicated to the movement. Unlike students who use it as a form of socialising they are shunned for their political view in the workplace due to the education system. On top of the fact that under 25's are more radical in whatever they partake in due to the nature of youth so why turn them away and say they can't join orgs because of some Bollinger Bolshevik students?

Except they're not devout socialists. They'll hang out in the orgs for the social aspects, and to get laid, but once a person enters their late 20s they start aging out. It's no coincidence that the devotion of these so called "devout socialists" doesn't last into their 30s.

The Hell do you think those 30 year old Union men came from? Do you think they just popped out of the ground like some weird Communist Dwarfs? How is saying that anyone under 25 can't be socialist going to help anything? You're an idiot to think that turning away the young people instead educating them if they're misinformed and just kicking out the people who aren't devout enough out.

You have 30 year old union men because even the shittiest unions actually offer something tangible and relevant, unlike the modern day org which literally has nothing on tap except being a social club and hosting a LARP during protests. The biggest challenge, as it always has been, is to fuse socialism with the working class, and most of the working class just happens to be middle aged. If you want them to listen to you, you need people who are the same age as them and have the same experience in life. Having college aged kids lecturing them does not further that cause and is on the contrary a liability. And liabilities should be removed.

What fucking trash are you talking?

I know you're empirically challenged, but could you at least try to keep up?

Maybe you should brush up on your reading lad because labour force is the stats for ALL jobs, no just manual/industrial.

Who's talking about manual/industrial jobs? Don't try to move the goalposts.

Working class jobs are manual or industrial jobs

Read Marx.

Proletariat =/= working class, learn the socioeconomic difference lad it's pretty simple and Marx himself laid it out quite well so take your own advice.

No, it's generally understood they're used interchangeably in Marx's work.

No they aren't. Read Marx and lay off the Jacobin.

Surely you got sources?

Is it the same way in Russia and other formerly communist countries? I feel like most of the communists there would have grown up in the 50s-70s and most of the younger people would support the regimes that replaced it.

Gen X is classcucked by choice.


Your education doesn't prevent you from being working class.

If each of those students got their first shitty fast food job at 16…

lol it's Vietnam

People went to college en masse to avoid the draft. College admittance tanked when the draft ended

And we're done.

Seriously stop proving that you have a cushy life. Stop projecting.

It's not me you need to convince, it's the working class. And they've already decided that they're repellent.

And don't tell others that they're projecting when you're the one doing it. Most of the world doesn't even have the slightest chance of ever going to college and must literally slave away in drudgery for the rest of their life. College kids do have it easy.