What causes a younger generation to become more reactionary and conservative than its predecessor?

L'internet

I really think there's a conservatism that's beginning to boil among people born around the late 80s to early 90s that's going to surprise most people when it eventually emerges as some sort of significant counterculture.

A large population tends to become like that when people who are at the bottom of the hierarchy fail to succeed in it.

So they turn to some ideal whereby they can restore their social status, and it usually takes the form of some heroic masculine role for men, such as the aesthetic embodied in fascistic or reactionary movements.

These people are actually so lost that they latch on to the nearest and most rationalistic frame of reference they can find, which usually has a eerily mythological character to it. You see the same thing with Islamic jihadis whose only wish is to be the perfect embodiment of the Prophet Muhammad.

the previous generation in power going too much in the opposite direction.

>Great Generation: awesome
How can they be when they made the fucking Boomers.

They're the last generation that managed to win a war without creating a gorillion sob stories about how traumatized it made them.

Instead they just internalized their trauma and let it influence their raising the Boomers.

That doesn't make any sense at all. If they aren't succeeding in the hierarchy why would they advocate for even stricter hierarchy. I think you're just trying to vaguely describe your /pol/ bogeyman.

They didn't suffer any trauma.

I hope you're actually mentally retarded because otherwise you have no excuse for saying something so fucking stupid.

>If they aren't succeeding in the hierarchy why would they advocate for even stricter hierarchy.

Because it's a new, different hierarchy which has different rules and norms in which they can possibly succeed.

I mean, humans can create new social hierarchies on the drop of a hat just by playing a Monopoly game, and the reason humans do this is because it is an efficient way of arbitrating goals and the highest value when you're more than 1 person.

t. millennial

Historically, younger generations never type reactionary or conservative positions.

Reactionary movements as the name suggests are usually the result of a progressive/liberal movement. Sometimes the left really fucks up, sometimes the conservatives dont want to lose their power. But they are typically heavily represented in the military, religious authority and economic elite, rarely young.

Oh sure you can nit pick and show a "youth wing" of any reactionary movement but any liberal/progressive side will have overwhelmingly more young people on its side.

Young people love to rebel against the previous generation's orthodoxys.

If the generation before them is largely liberal the one after them will be more conservative and visa versa.

I'd argue we are living in the transition period to a more conservative generation in the West, it probably would have happened naturally but the problems the West is facing is speeding up the process.

>People actually believe this

Not all gen Xers are your edgy political discord friends. Their brand of reactionary ideology and conservatism is entirely resuited for multiethnic agendas, rather than the millennial and older white ethnic national agenda

People who are in the 18-30 age bracket are the last of the liberal generation, the one just coming into voting age in the next ten years will be significantly more conservative than the last.

this.

Autism.

not true, here the young are the ones who vote fn the most by far, meanwhile you look at the socialist/conservative party meetings it's 99% old people

It's a natural cycle. Conservative > Liberal > Conservative > Ultra Liberal > Reactionary

Essentially people just say "fuck" whatever their parents are.

That implies reactionary > conservative which I don't think is quite true.

I managed to cuck my arabs friends into voting FN by playing with their hatred of the kikes

>Extremes it hasn't seen for hundreds of years

You are fucking retarded pal

t. a certain mister alain s.

good work
The west can be safed

A lot of Kabyle also vote for her for no reason other than a delusion than she will invade Algeria lol

Liberals have gone nuts, young men see their internet idols mocking liberals, and that's how you get a more conservative younger generation.

kabyles confirmed white

>thinking it's all a zero sum game of progressive values vs conservative values

You need to ascend to the next plane

By being more fucking intelligent

You're retarded, FN has been friends with Arabs for a long time. Its only recently that his whore daughter cucked him out of his own party because he offended her Jewish boyfriend.

FN previously was pro-Arab and anti-jewish. Now its pro-israel and anti-arab because Marine Le Pen has a Jewish boyfriend and wants the Jew power money.

Most of FN's money comes from Israel and Saudi Arabia anyway, have fun.

you're talking out of your ass. Do you really think Nazis were a bunch of old people? They were mostly people in their late 20's, early 30's. The SPD and Centre was the geriatric generation.

And look at Trump, he has lots of support from young people.

...

That tends to be how it goes, though.

I'll bow to your experience.

I know you're just taking the piss, but look at it historically. Alexander II (Ultra liberal by Russian standards of the time) > Nicholas I (reactionary) > Alexander III (conservative) > Nicholas II (pretty liberal by Russian standards of the time).

From pewresearch.org
>Young adults preferred Clinton over Trump by a wide 55%-37% margin; by comparison, Obama had a 60%-36% advantage over Romney in 2012 and a 66%-32% advantage over McCain in 2008
Do you have any data to back up your claims?

>Great Generation
>awesome
They literally ruined the chance of the West saving itself

The defining part of the Nazi following was the young not because they were young, but because many were military veterans straight from WW1. Pre-Hitler, many young men were communist, so Hitler was able to rally the military youth along with older generations to gain power and cause the rise of Nazism.

Compare that to:
pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/behind-trumps-victory-divisions-by-race-gender-education/
"In terms of demographics, Trump's supporters are a bit older, less educated and earn less than the average Republican. Slightly over half are women. About half are between 45 and 64 years of age, with another 34 percent over 65 years old and less than 2 percent younger than 30."
And see the difference. Most of the youth of this generation is liberal and left, or at the very least libertarian.

They don't. Unless you're specifically referring to people over at /pol/

Dialectics.
They literally wrote a gorillion sob stories about it.

Gen Z will be edgy. On the one hand you will have /pol/ack shitters, and on the other you'll have /r/socialism fucknuggets. Trust me; I'm gen z. The gaggle of fourteen year old ultrafags congratulating each other about their enlightened rationalism in the face of the SJW menace will never escape the confines of my memory.

That shows that the gap is shrinking as young people become of voting age, I hope you realize this.

That's always been the case though. Democrats largely appeal to the young, working class, minorities (more the incapability of Republicans than the attractiveness of Democrats), urban people, and the college educated (barely).

Republicans appeal to older people, rural communities, Christians, (funnily enough) the unemployed, and the uneducated.

The trick is, there is usually more younger people than older people, because older people tend to die more often.

In what sense would this loser of the modern day, succeed in a fascist state?

Allow me to clarify: the gap is shrinking as our younger people are becoming more conservative. Young people still outnumber the old (and at a growing rate might I add) and as such you should see the gap widen, not shrink. Thus, the conservative gap between young and old is shrinking as the younger generations become of voting age.

tl;dr
Your own statistics don't play in your favor the way you think they do there.

Monarchies do not represent the trends among a democratic society.

>I'm so much smarter than my peers, I'm the one who sees the real truth
You must be 18 to post here.

>Johnson
>Nixon
>Carter
>Reagan
>Bush
>Clinton
>Bush
>Obama
>Trump
Follows the list to a T.

The percent picked up by Trump in the young voter category was likely independents, not new conservatives. This is only raw data, something you shouldn't take as a definite change, especially on an election year as unusual as this one. That coupled with:

people-press.org/2015/04/30/a-different-look-at-generations-and-partisanship/

shows that the Democrats still hold a tangebile advantage with the youth.
tl;dr
Don't hold your breath, there is no indication as to why younger generations would be more conservative, inb4 /pol/ memes.

I am 18. Couldn't you tell?

I'm not smarter. I'm better than that. Much, much better than that. See, it's not that I'm more intelligent. I'm just better.

Better morally, better personally, better in all ways. I've got the drive. I've got the power. I've got autism.

And that autism has lead me on a long and ceaseless road. A road through Veeky Forums and Veeky Forums and, for a time I now regret, through /leftypol/. It has let me see through the empty indulgence of the normies; it has let me consume the strange and divers foods of strange and divers thinkers. I am not constrained by convention, nor by what is "acceptable". I am free. I am autistic.

> he has lots of support from young people.
lolno. The only reason Trump won was because of angry white baby-boomers in rural counties of swing states and a rule in our government originally designed to protect the rights of slave-owners against the march of progress

>B
>O
>T
Oh shit they're making their move

It shrank between 2008 and 2012 as well. It's a pretty obvious demographics shift that's being willfully ignored.

In fairness, you also have to look at the content of the parties themselves. They can shift to the left or right as the population does, so (to use an example I am more acquainted with) seeing more youngfags vote Labour doesn't mean they're keeping left if Labour has significantly shifted to the right.

Yes, because Millennials are getting older.

>California and New York should run the country

Correct. We need a strong leader, not these dying squishy dustbowl states.

And yet the gap between young and old shrinks despite the young outnumbering the old. Stop being retarded.

Did you look at the key there champ?

My guess would be it's a reaction to just how far liberalism has gone in terms of new social paradigms and structures. With the rise of gender politics, promotion of racism against a perceived ruling ethnicity, and destruction of traditional structures such as the nuclear family, you have a growing number of youth who feel alienated by a new power bloc that's began to largely supplant an older one.

In short, youth, especially male and white youth, see their world changing in a way that's detrimental to them and are rallying to any cause to try and contain the damage in whatever way they see fit. Some become reactionary and seek to tear down their adversaries completely, others become submissive and attempt to appease the liberal movement at the expense of themselves. This is a battlefield one cannot remain neutral on, and self preservation is more appealing to most people.

>destruction of traditional structures such as the nuclear family
>traditional structures
>nuclear family

In Veeky Forums, we always must be cautious as to when the history stops and the memes begin.
This time is now.

The nuclear family is a traditional structure though.

When your entire life has been formed by such a structure, it is certainly a tradition to the individual, who doesn't know anything else. It's as much as war on the unfamiliar as anything else.

I don't know user, in what sense would an actual racist succeed in a racist state? He could be a useful idiot.

traditional doesn't mean it's that old
sure it isn't
but it's still traditional, it has been traditional for a while now

>less young adults voted Democrat in 2012 than 2008 while young adult votes for Republic remained the same
>the demographics got closer
I wonder if there's a connection there

The family structure is constantly evolving due to economic and social circumstances, this isn't some grand liberal conspiracy.

online.csp.edu/blog/family-science/the-evolution-of-american-family-structure

I'll concede there.
I wouldn't call a 50 year old structure traditional on the scale of a society. In the grand scheme of things, it's something of an anomaly.

>write it's not tradition using strawman logic while conceding it is tradition in the same post
Are you retarded or just pretending?

I conceded it is tradition in the mind of an individual, but stated it won't be considered a longstanding tradition on the scale of society.

Tradition is beholden to the society in which it exists, something you conceded. Ergo, In our society, the nuclear family would be a tradition. Now fuck off.

i'm sure most americans wouldn't be too happy about letting jungle bunnies and wetbacks decide the future of their country.

They did and look who some of them voted for

:)

>"tradition: a long-established custom or belief that has been passed on in this way."
>examples include holidays, religious rituals, celebrations, so on

Yeah no, not old enough to be a tradition, and that is how future historians will see it. That besides, it's change into something else is inevitable, what we argue is meaningless.

The nuclear family is older than MLK day. We still hold MLK day to be a tradition, so which is it? I'll say it again, tradition is beholden to the society in which it exists. It's a social construct. The nuclear family is modern tradition in our society

but barely any of them voted for dolan.

>We still hold MLK day to be a tradition, so which is it?
I don't hold it as a tradition, just as a recognition of a modern figure that shaped the course of a nation. Anyone who says otherwise is short sighted. Now, if we are celebrating it 100 years in the future, we can call it tradition.

Tradition is a social construct. You don't dictate what tradition is. Society does. Society has dictated the nuclear family to be traditional. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong.

History will vindicate what I have said.

Not him, but I'm more worried about the here and now than the long term historical implications. In the sense that it's what the majority of still living people are familiar with, it is a tradition to them. There's no hard and fast rule on what is and what isn't a tradition, it's a conclusion that's arrived at by the individual.

For example, a father might have a "tradition" of taking his sons to his favorite fishing spot once a month. It's a family tradition despite not being particularly old in the grand scheme of things. In the same way, the "traditional" family of a mother and father figure at the head with children being reared is indeed a tradition to the majority of people within the United States.

Semantics on this are a moot point and another topic of discussion entirely; the point is, people perceive these structures as part of their natural order of things, and feel alienated by their destruction or debasement. This alienation is the cause, in my opinion anyway, of the rise of reactionary forces within the nation.

If the left wants to continue courting youth, who they already have some sway with due to the nature of rebellious youth, it needs to stop driving them away in droves with incendiary words and actions.

Economic stagnation. At least that's the case in Japan.

It rises when a society that was recently prosperous but is getting less and less prosperous.

It's a reaction to progressives mismanaging the prosperity they inherited.

so will future nips care more about familz than work,work,work?

Quite simply because the pendulum swung too far to the left

Presidents rotate from repub to dem each election cycle for this very reason

Changes in tech bringing new information to light (happened with television too)
Changes in geopolitics (no longer any need to compete with Gommunist Russia, now need to compete with conservative Russia)
A rise in tribalism if that identity's power is too swiftly challenged (Happened in Fiji with Indians, Singapore with Chinese, Brexit with Asians)
Hardening into unpleasant Orthodoxy of what came before (Repressive speech codes, demonisation of disagreement, demands for firing, defooing etc.)
Natural intergenerational scuffling

This also. Reactionary politics fits the autist's desire for stable, simplified environments

>Brexit with Asians
H-huh

You scientific nihilists are the worst.
>You don't think I'd be dumb enough to actually CARE about anything, do you?!?!?

>2017
>having a coherent belief in anything

Gen Alpha is supposed to be Alpha as Fuck