Society/Culture Why are young males now more right wing then older males?

[Majunga]

Toxic American culture and a BS internet world of beyond low grade information.

 

[sr36]

It's been getting worse for a long time and interest rates rising have accelerated the problem

Labor in opposition generally voted for policies that got us here so they still bear some level of blame for what has occurred prior to them taking power

With housing their response has been to further entrench inequality and give even more money to the private sector, exactly what you'd expect the coalition to do

So while you can't say it's solely their fault they sure as shit are a big part of the problem

Regardless of how or why we got here the average person will look at who is in charge now and blame them for the issue if they don't fix it

Like a lot of political trends, it's a global shift to the right though. We can read too much into our countries individual circumstances. US has shifted even harder than us and interest rate rises don't have much of a household level impact there as their mortgages are mainly 30 year fixed interest rates. And thus rate hikes slightly increase interest rates for new mortgages - dampening house price rises. Rate hikes there don't shift workers into economic stress - unless they hit businesses too hard and reduce employment, which hasn't happened - their unemployment rate is at a low level.

I think as we progress forward, we're bad steerers who correct and then over correct with various cultural movements coming to the fore in response to society and each other. We've progressed a couple of steps forward and we're in the process of taking a couple back.

 

[peetoo]

Like a lot of political trends, it's a global shift to the right though. We can read too much into our countries individual circumstances. US has shifted even harder than us and interest rate rises don't have much of a household level impact there as their mortgages are mainly 30 year fixed interest rates. And thus rate hikes slightly increase interest rates for new mortgages - dampening house price rises. Rate hikes there don't shift workers into economic stress - unless they hit businesses too hard and reduce employment, which hasn't happened - their unemployment rate is at a low level.

I think as we progress forward, we're bad steerers who correct and then over correct with various cultural movements coming to the fore in response to society and each other. We've progressed a couple of steps forward and we're in the process of taking a couple back.

Trouble is at the moment, each swerve takes out a guardrail, and appears to be no sign of them being replaced

 

[sr36]

Trouble is at the moment, each swerve takes out a guardrail, and appears to be no sign of them being replaced

Yeah I think it's pretty dangerous. Sameshit that led up to WW2. Nationalism, protectionism and a real growing might is right mentality.

 

Remove this Banner Ad

[skipper kelly]

Change the name of the thread FFS.

 

[sr36]

Change the name of the thread FFS.

I'd call it Jim Bob.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Change the name of the thread FFS.

No, fixing Seeds grammar would be woke

 

[Grumpyshades]

The whole premise of the article was a 'troubling split' of men voting Red. But overall men voted blue comfortable over red with a slant towards red for men under 30

There was a far greater difference in women voting blue with no graph for women under 30 (convenient). Though with the information provided the difference would have to be greater still.

If we accept the premise that blue favours women and ignores men how is this not more troubling ?

Men vote to benefit society while women vote to benefit themselves and don't give a rats about men ?

Its pretty evident which gender has the more bias and been affected by 'scare mongering'

 

[swingdog]

The whole premise of the article was a 'troubling split' of men voting Red. But overall men voted blue comfortable over red with a slant towards red for men under 30

There was a far greater difference in women voting blue with no graph for women under 30 (convenient). Though with the information provided the difference would have to be greater still.

If we accept the premise that blue favours women and ignores men how is this not more troubling ?

Men vote to benefit society while women vote to benefit themselves and don't give a rats about men ?

Its pretty evident which gender has the more bias and been affected by 'scare mongering'

Somewhere in there is a point.

 

[Grumpyshades]

Somewhere in there is a point.

read slower ?

 

[sr36]

If we accept the premise that blue favours women and ignores men how is this not more troubling ?

Men vote to benefit society while women vote to benefit themselves and don't give a rats about men ?

Its pretty evident which gender has the more bias and been affected by 'scare mongering'

Why are we accepting this premise?

 

[Grumpyshades]

Why are we accepting this premise?

The premise is not true ?

 

[CM86]

If we accept the premise that blue favours women and ignores men how is this not more troubling ?

Men vote to benefit society while women vote to benefit themselves and don't give a rats about men ?

If men vote to benefit society, why would it matter if a party ignores them?
Wouldn't it only matter to men if the party ignored benefitting society overall?


Unless your position is that you cannot benefit society while ignoring men. In which case men voting to benefit society are voting to benefit themselves. Right?

 

Remove this Banner Ad

[sr36]

The premise is not true ?

I don't think it's true, but whether it's true or not, your following claims only hold if those voting blue think your premise is true.

Obviously you must know that an enormous number of blue voters don't think it's true.

So it's a debatable premise to begin with and then your claims that follow from it is dodgy.

 

[Grumpyshades]

If men vote to benefit society, why would it matter if a party ignores them?
Wouldn't it only matter to men if the party ignored benefitting society overall?


Unless your position is that you cannot benefit society while ignoring men. In which case men voting to benefit society are voting to benefit themselves. Right?

that's the point..isn't more troubling that the party that ignores men is said party women in Australia would of voted for en mass
The stats (of this survey) paints a different picture than the one the author is trying to sell

 

[sr36]

that's the point..isn't more troubling that the party that ignores men is said party women in Australia would of voted for en mass
The stats (of this survey) paints a different picture than the one the author is trying to sell

Here's an article on the growing divide between women and men in voting age under 30s.

What’s behind the global political divide between young men and women?

Trump’s victory in the US shone a light on the growing political polarisation between young male and female voters happening all over the world

www.theguardian.com

The interesting survey question regarding the point that you are trying to make is whether you agree with this statement:

We have gone so far in promoting women's equality that we are discriminating against men

60% of males under 30 agree, yet only 40% of women agree.

Or to put it in your language, 60% of women don't agree with your suggestion that men are being "ignored." So to assume that they are more in favour of Democrats for selfish reasons in this respect is silly.

 

[CM86]

that's the point..isn't more troubling that the party that ignores men is said party women in Australia would of voted for en mass
The stats (of this survey) paints a different picture than the one the author is trying to sell

Are you saying that there is a party that ignores men, or more that takes men for granted?
And are you talking about all men, or more specifically 'white' men?

What party do you feel that I wouldn't be able to find had proposed some kind of policy/program/initiative benefiting men?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Wait, there's a party made entirely of women?

I did an image search, it looks like they are having a great time! I'd certainly vote for them.

 

[CM86]

Wait, there's a party made entirely of women?

I did an image search, it looks like they are having a great time! I'd certainly vote for them.

I'm trying to find out more about the Lemon Tea coalition.

 

Join Bigfooty for Free

[SeaOfFire]

I've read through much of this thread, and I think we need to first understand that almost everyone is approaching this as a zero sum proposition - ie, the idea that if X gains something, it must therefore mean that Y has to lose something.

The fault begins at that point - exactly where in history that occurred, I couldn't say.

If we remove that concept from the discussion initially, perhaps we can make some headway.

Let's start with the initial premise Young men are more right wing than older men.

But we can substitute another phrase for "right wing" and not change the subsequent discussion, namely: Young men hold some values that are opposed (or markedly different) to the values of old men.

The 'some values' we are discussing is that of equality, both perceived and realised as the individual and perceived and realised in society.

Someone's personal perception of self occurs, mostly, through the prism of the society in which they live. There are problems with this of course, but we needn't diverge to those as it is beyond the scope of the discussion. In general however, when the person assesses their capacity, entitlements, endowments and rewards through a societal prism, they can come to a vast number of conclusions. Perhaps they are valued only because they are attractive, or smart. Perhaps they valued because they are companionable or funny. Perhaps they have value because of their caring and nurturing nature....the list is endless.

Society's perception of the individual is a whole different kettle of fish. Once it is broadened in that fashion, then where the person sits in the hierarchy will be modified by that society's belief systems. The individual will, initially, have little say in the matter. If a society heavily values someone who can cook a fine meal, then having that attribute will be of value. Likewise, if that is not valued, then the place in that hierarchy will be lower.

The differences in the thinking of young men vs old men can then be viewed in a new light.

Young men are interpreting the world they see, without the benefit of the life experience of someone older. As not all old men have the same life experience, then it stands to reason some old men will form differing views. And because they view it as zero-sum equation, this causes them to feel they have lost something. But they don't know what they have lost.

Older men, with life experience, will be more inclined to see what has been gained, without resorting to equate it with what has been lost.They have the benefit of perspective.

But that isn't the whole issue.

Young men, in the way of masculine biology, feel more need to express, prove and succeed than older men. The older man, having lived longer and achieved more, will feel less inclined to prove and succeed, as that has already occurred (to a greater or lesser extent, individual to individual).

When that need to prove themselves is equated with the zero-sum approach, then you have the perfect conditions for the lurch to the ideology of gender-based conservatism.

The zero-sum mentality is heavily reinforced by economics. We are conditioned to believe there isn't a limitless supply of everything, be that land (housing and food), money (income) or other resources. So when an announcement is made to institute parity of income regardless of gender, the young male will feel that there will therefore be LESS income available for him, solely as a consequence of his gender. What he fails to understand is how good it is for society that such things exist - he has no personal experience of a life when that wasn't the case.

Whilst it is true to say the supply of land is finite, when we consider what we need it for it appears far less restrictive than simply looking at available land mass. Likewise money....there is more money now than there has ever been and that amount continues to grow (whether that money has the same value is again a different conversation).

We are using the wrong metrics to educate people.

 

[Gralin]

I don't think it's true, but whether it's true or not, your following claims only hold if those voting blue think your premise is true.

Obviously you must know that an enormous number of blue voters don't think it's true.

So it's a debatable premise to begin with and then your claims that follow from it is dodgy.

then there's the fact that voting blue in Australia is the libs

but don't worry people that get pilled online think everything is about America

 

[peetoo]

More confirmation

Could Elon Musk's unpopularity in Australia impact the federal election?

New data shows Australians are making it clear they want answers to their economic malaise and that the obsessions of super-rich Americans are not the same as theirs.

www.abc.net.au

 

[mrherman]

Yeah I think it's pretty dangerous. Sameshit that led up to WW2. Nationalism, protectionism and a real growing might is right mentality.

China, India, Japan to name a few are very nationalistic countries.

the larger the influence the left has in western countries the bigger the basket case the west have become, debt levels crime, weak leaders, homeless ness, wars, drug problems, medical systems over loaded and education systems have become a joke

 

[Blue1980]

China, India, Japan to name a few are very nationalistic countries.

the larger the influence the left has in western countries the bigger the basket case the west have become, debt levels crime, weak leaders, homeless ness, wars, drug problems, medical systems over loaded and education systems have become a joke

Fascinated by how you point to China, India, and Japan as nationalist examples… while glossing over the fact that, outside of Japan, none of them offer the general population a higher standard of living than most Western countries — especially in Europe, Canada, Australia, or even large chunks of the U.S. (though they are working on getting worse currently). And Japan? They’ve got universal healthcare, strong unions, and a culture of civic responsibility — hardly a blueprint for the libertarian fever dream you're hinting at.

If you’re saying the West is crumbling because of “leftist influence,” maybe ask why most people in the world would still rather live in a Western democracy than your nationalist role models. Spoiler: it ain’t because they love long queues and collapsing infrastructure.

 

[Seeds]

No, fixing Seeds grammar would be woke

Why? You can fix my grammar. Im an ideas person. I let others do the editing. Go nuts.