So, what did happen in 2016?

[PJL]

The Industrial Revolution (in Britain) started in the late 18th Century. Yet it took a generation or so before it's effects really started to erode the lifestyles of the artisans that were badly affected by it. As a result, the 30 years after the Napoleonic Wars were probably the closest Great Britain came to revolution. I suspect we are in a similar position right now with the rise of of electronic computation / mechanisation and the subsequent automation. I reckon the next 20-30 years could be a similarly bumpy ride.

[The Brain]

Yes fear the power of the millennials.

[Syt]

Yes fear the power of the millennials.

Darth Millennial?

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Darth_Millennial

[garbon]

I'm not really going to get into a discussion about the qualities and responsibilities of "generations". I find assigning personalities and collective responsibility to ill-defined cohorts of people fairly uninteresting and unproductive. It could as well be that old people have started finding the lessons less relevant than young people learning different things, or it could be that the historical moments and course of events means the lessons have less resonance altogether. To the extent that what I said could be interpreted as blaming "young people", please consider that retracted.

Yeah the reason I raised it was far from try to blame certain generations but to highlight that I think it might be a weakness to cast eyes at our distance from the lessons and actions of the 20th century. If that was already playing a significant role, I'd think those furthest away would be showing themselves significantly more susceptible to the current movements backward.

I would wonder if there is something more to be said about the discontentment with what they have available, among those who already consider themselves to be established adults. In other words, the frustration being faced by those who think they should already be at the best times in their lives and yet being faced with something less than what they saw their parents had (so those late 30s to late 40s). I guess those individuals were not there to directly learn the lessons of WWII though in the case of Europe, though they certainly were raised by those who had experienced its direct after effects.

edit: actually I thought in the case of Brexit, a great many of leavers were those who were directly affected by post war Britain. Seems a case of those who didn't learn their lessons being doomed to repeat them.

[garbon]

Yes fear the power of the millennials.

I won't cut you.

[Jacob]

Yeah the reason I raised it was far from try to blame certain generations but to highlight that I think it might be a weakness to cast eyes at our distance from the lessons and actions of the 20th century. If that was already playing a significant role, I'd think those furthest away would be showing themselves significantly more susceptible to the current movements backward.

Fair

I honestly haven't got a clue as to whether they are or are not, so I'm not sure how to test that.

I would wonder if there is something more to be said about the discontentment with what they have available, among those who already consider themselves to be established adults. In other words, the frustration being faced by those who think they should already be at the best times in their lives and yet being faced with something less than what they saw their parents had (so those late 30s to late 40s). I guess those individuals were not there to directly learn the lessons of WWII though in the case of Europe, though they certainly were raised by those who had experienced its direct after effects.

Yeah, I think there's something there.

If I were to fit it into my "post-WWII trend" perspective I'd say that the expectations set during the post-WWII period (and implicitly promised to a certain extent) are being fulfilled less and less, and that is causing discontent and a wider search for remedy.

edit: actually I thought in the case of Brexit, a great many of leavers were those who were directly affected by post war Britain. Seems a case of those who didn't learn their lessons being doomed to repeat them.

Or perhaps that the benefits of the post war settlement either started to seem less salient (i.e. they were taking for granted) or they materialized less and less over time.

[Jacob]

The Industrial Revolution (in Britain) started in the late 18th Century. Yet it took a generation or so before it's effects really started to erode the lifestyles of the artisans that were badly affected by it. As a result, the 30 years after the Napoleonic Wars were probably the closest Great Britain came to revolution. I suspect we are in a similar position right now with the rise of of electronic computation / mechanisation and the subsequent automation. I reckon the next 20-30 years could be a similarly bumpy ride.

It seems that we've seen a reaction to this transition from the right-leaning/ nationalist perspective, but has there been any popular responses with a left-leaning bent? It doesn't seem so to me. Are we going to see a resurgence in popularly supported derivative of hard socialism?

[MadImmortalMan]

That's what they are responding to.

[Jacob]

That's what they are responding to.

Could you elaborate? What is the popular leftist response to the rise of electronic computation / mechanisation and subsequent automation?

[MadImmortalMan]

There is no response. It is the mechanism, and thus cannot respond to itself. Those pressures are the result of leftist ideas being dominant in society.

[grumbler]

There is no response. It is the mechanism, and thus cannot respond to itself. Those pressures are the result of leftist ideas being dominant in society.

Can you expand on that?  I would have thought that the pressures were the result of right-wing ideas (the internationalization of capital and the globalization of industries and services).

[MadImmortalMan]

Those are leftist ideas. Internationalization and multiculturalism. This is the mainstream. And that's a good thing. The backlash Jake is talking about is from the right who are not the establishment. The left is the establishment. So there isn't going to be a response from the left against itself.

[Jacob]

There is no response. It is the mechanism, and thus cannot respond to itself. Those pressures are the result of leftist ideas being dominant in society.

As grumbler said, the dominant economical features of this age is the internationalization of capital, free trade (i.e. the globalization of industries and services), increased privatization (energy, telecoms and infrastructure, radio and tv, health care, pensions, trains, airlines, prisons, etc) which tend to be popular on the right side of the political spectrum. The left has, generally speaking, completely ceded the field on economic matters in the last several decades - even ostensibly left-wing governments have been following the economically liberal pattern of the free market.

Where the left has been more dominant when it comes to culture - acceptance of  homosexuality and even movement on transgender issues, making racism and sexism socially unacceptable but while that may be unacceptable to the right it is not a response to economic issues. And it is certainly not hard socialism in any shape of form.

I suppose that makes sense though, technological change combined with the victory of right wing economical models have caused hardship - in response, the right attempts to focus the discontent on leftist progress on social issues.

[Jacob]

Those are leftist ideas. Internationalization and multiculturalism. This is the mainstream. And that's a good thing. The backlash Jake is talking about is from the right who are not the establishment. The left is the establishment. So there isn't going to be a response from the left against itself.

I don't think internationalization of capital is leftist at all. I identify it as a right wing concept, but potentially I am willing to compromise and call it an economist technocrat concept in the service of big capital independent of other political concerns

Multiculturalism is associated with the left, though - and the backlash against it is real, there we agree. It is however (and IMO), not particularly the cause of the economic issues we were discussing (what seems to be an upcoming economic shift due to technological development).

[Valmy]

I don't think internationalization of capital is leftist at all. I identify it as a right wing concept, but potentially I am willing to compromise and call it an economist technocrat concept in the service of big capital independent of other political concerns

I never realized allowing poor nations a chance to lift their people out of poverty was what technocratic big capital was all about. Good to know.