Oh, Grow Up! But How?
Just as an apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, we need to see the members of “Generation Z”—now in their teens and twenties—as products of generations that came before. Our young people are making news in ways that deserve our understanding and compassion, as well as our humility, in the assessments we conjure.
Older folks have seen reports, most recently centered on college-campus and big-city reactions to the Israel-Gaza war, which suggest we have raised a paradoxical generation. They combine empathy and intolerance, idealism and frustration, pragmatism and confusion.
In other words, as Harry Chapin foresaw in the 1974 song Cat’s in the Cradle, they have grown up just like us.
Reflection on this drives me back to generational theory, a description of different age groups outlined most recently in Neil Howe’s book, The Fourth Turning Is Here. The analysis, which I have supplemented with various sources, is neither comprehensive nor fully convincing, but it’s a start.
I decided to sum up for myself the points Howe and others make about the four generations which are center-stage in today’s America. May they offer some illumination for us because we theoretically face dark times ahead—that’s the “fourth turning” from his cyclical perspective.
The goal is to discern a timeline that moves onward from the “Baby Boom” and gives us wisdom we can share with Gen Z in their (our) moment of need.
Baby Boomers (born 1946 –1964): “Any dream will do”
According to Howe, who debuted his innovative overview in the 1992 book Generations: The History of America’s Future, my age cohort is the Baby Boom—about 69 million people now ambulating through our 60s, 70s, and beyond.
We tend to be gloomy about how this nation has developed during our lives. But we need to be keepers of traditional and/or idealistic American values.
We began our journey in the cultural safe space that followed World War II, which Howe posits was the most recent fourth turning, 80 years ago. This opened the door for a 1960s “love generation” of rebellious, idealistic hipsters who later proved to love themselves.
As recounted in Jackson Brown’s song, The Pretender, we converted to believe in “the dreams that money can buy.” We populated the suburbs, as well as the ranks of today’s economic, governance, and entertainment elites.
Howe believes many younger people will appreciate Boomers’ motivations, efforts, and lessons learned as America’s devil-may-care season withers. He’s an optimist.
Senior citizens will welcome the role of sages, he predicts, and willingly share in the sacrifices of the new “fourth turning.”
I wonder how much of the sacrifice will be self-denial and how much will be denial imposed upon the Boomers by financial and policy exigencies. Which of our dreams will prove inspiring, to us or to others?
Remember, plenty of today’s elders were never elites. Many simply will aspire to stretch their Social Security and retirement savings into an eighth decade of life, with questions of long-term care and mortality looming.
A PBS report early this year cited “a ballooning population of older homeless people.” Boomers are carrying their accumulated wealth into retirement, but, as with all the generations, the sense of security is distributed unevenly.
Generation X (born 1965 – 1980): “Just do it”
These 65 million adults grew up with hurdles in their personal lives. Many were “latchkey” kids of the Boom and its preceding “Silent Generation”—note the birth-years of President Biden (1942) and son Hunter (1970), for example.
Many Gen-Xers endured distracted or mediocre parenting or were children of divorce. They developed low self-esteem and a tough-minded, practical “take care of yourself” or “trust your own instincts” mind frame, says Howe.
Gen X has grown up to include entrepreneurial, individualistic antiheroes. This means a smaller stake in the established order that grew up around them. They are ready to protect their family but less invested in community institutions, national politics, and religious affiliations.
The best-selling motivational book, Looking Out for Number One (1977), may have served as inspiration for many in this generation.
Regarding religion, authors Jim Davis and Michael Graham of the new book The Great Dechurching write that the phenomenon of exits from regular participation in the Catholic, Mainline Protestant, and Evangelical churches surged between the late 1980s and the late 1990s, among people aged about 13-30.
In any event, Howe seems to say Gen X will approach the tough times ahead like bold, resilient contestants on the “Survivor” reality-TV series, launched in 2000.
The latest news from that series provides an ironic caveat: In the current season, two Millennial contestants have already voluntarily quit the island. That has prompted some critics to perceive a “coddled,” whining cadre with low levels of stick-to-itiveness.
Millennials (born 1981 – 1996): “Precarity, so charity”
The 72 million people in this cohort have grown up with hurdles seen less in their families than in society at large. The world appeared increasingly risky, but they found sources of support. They saw parents as heroes, and a meritocratic culture of diligence offered them a path to thrive amid difficulties.
Millennials’ trudge uphill led them early on to do well on tests, to pursue credentials and contributory achievements valued by family and friends, according to Howe. Community and kindness are important to this generation, which watched charming Disney movies, as well as “Friends” and “The Big Bang Theory.”
But anxiety, boosted by events like the 9-11 terror attacks, made Millennials adopt traits of rationalism, objectivity, systematized thinking, “effective altruism,” avoidance of controversy, affirmation of others, and achievement of goals. They came to see dating and marriage as desirable but dodgy territory.
The World Wide Web introduced this generation to massive waves of information and distraction, even as the quality of K-12 education and personal attention spans were starting to slip.
The current state of society appears fragile to these individuals, and they generally want to help and serve. But they are concerned about their economic prospects, says Howe, and many see a need for a large government—one which might lean toward socialism and increased power to meet huge challenges.
When they have formed families, Millennials’ approach has often been “helicopter parenting” to protect their children.
“Parents shuttle their kids to various activities and help them with their homework because they want them to get ahead,” wrote Allison Schrager in a Bloomberg News commentary this month.
She warned new research suggests “more time spent with parents and less in unstructured, non-supervised play” may correlate with greater risk-aversion, which implies reduced business success and declining mental health among young people.
That leads to the story of Gen Z, which begs an examination of American sensitivities and proclivities on various fronts, among all age groups.
Generation Z (born 1997 – 2012): “Snowflakes and climate change”
Our society monitors the 70 million members of Generation Z up-close through cameras now focused on our classrooms and college campuses, and the work world sees them too. These children of Millennial and Generation X parents have grown up with a praiseworthy sensitivity which inclines them toward empathy for others. That’s partly because the first victims and aid recipients they see are themselves.
Howe says many of them are awkward and self-conscious, having few memories of a confident, united, happy America. They face high costs and big debts. The American dream, even the idea of America, are nebulous.
Have they become “snowflakes”? Many were raised in homes armed with electronic security devices like fortified bunkers. Those shields also have included social media, video games, and any pressure-release valves—real or artificial—which a technocratic, therapeutic imagination can serve up. These cultivate a comfortable boldness, substituting for authentic encounters with the profound presence of heaven and hell, love and hate, good and evil.
We can propose many more attributes, acknowledging that these describe some, certainly not all, in the Gen Z cohort.
In a polarized and violent world, they have learned to watch out for strangers, to avoid arguments, to stick close to allies, and to report when their well-being faces assaults. Elders assure them of their personal qualities and societal freedoms, encouraging them to follow their emotions and instincts.
They lack a strong, inherent sense of identity, especially if their family has itself become fragmented and set adrift without religion, accountability, anchorage in cultural roots, or trust in the good intent of community structures.
In a post-truth cultural climate that questions expertise, excellence, and rigorous judgments, Gen Z members see the value of a good education, but they are not sure they have gotten one or need one.
They have picked up what they need to know through shortcuts and (often virtual) friends. Knowledge of humanity’s ups and downs has flunked as uninteresting or uninspiring. They received history as old data—not as ongoing stories packed with context and principles, reasons to stand tall and bow humbly.
Others have stepped in to provide serviceable stories and agendas, not requiring reflection. Gen Z’s natural instinct to discern who they are and their mimetic desire to “fit in” have led them to groups who offer compelling identities, virtuous-seeming ideas, and support among fellow travelers. Inexperienced people are likely to stick with these allegiances until larger, harsher aspects of reality impose consequences.
For now, they feel intellectually and morally excellent just as they are, and they are in charge of defining those standards. Traditional means of formation like meritocracy, going the extra mile, and walking a mile in someone else’s shoes seem tedious.
Challenges to their excellence constitute existential threats. If they lack the knowledge and communication skills to win debates on complex subjects, they can replace such reality checks with demonstrations of passionate zeal and rejection of their opponents as dangerous “haters.”
In a world without God as a source of eternal truth, merciful love, and human dignity, they cynically whittle purpose down to politics—a game of power, greed, and persuasion waged between the oppressed and oppressors. Lacking balance from a reasoning community, even noble goals of peace, tolerance, and risk-minimization require aggressive acts of enforcement.
Only big government and ideological groups can supplement GenZ’s parents as long-term protectors and fellow crusaders, much as street gangs have become substitutes for families.
The gang motif of action, clout, and camaraderie—a sad distortion of the mythological hero’s journey—may help to explain what journalists now depict as street wars between pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian demonstrators. We have opened the door to collateral violence, mostly waged through words, but who’s there to moderate it?
Conclusion: “Back to Alpha”
Of course, other generations are there to moderate it. But can we do so, given that all the experiences listed above still leave today’s tumultuous public arena mysterious to us? We must not be surprised that the timeline leading up to Gen Z and our post-modern culture is pockmarked with the pragmatism, pretense, self-centeredness, tension, and lack of direction inherent in human nature.
Answers from age-cohort theory are no better than other forms of analysis based on race, sex, and class, each with its own oversimplifications.
By the way, we have not even examined all the age groups deserving our attention. Think of the “Greatest Generation” and the playground kids we must now cherish as “Generation Alpha.” I have overlaid some of my own research and ideas on the analysis of Howe, with thanks to such sources as the Pew Research Center and the Statista website.
But it’s best to return to the surprisingly upbeat tone of Howe’s book. He reminds us that America has been through all of this fractiousness before, and each population segment has shown it’s got what it takes to contribute to victory over a “fourth turning.”
Here’s hoping the timeline I drew can help us by focusing not on segmentation, but on the need to rise above it. The story of overcoming the evil in our hearts will continue in the future, and we must not carelessly divide terroristic hatred into acceptable and unacceptable parts for the sake of politics or performance. Rising to the standards of our democratic freedoms and a sense of national family, virtuous wisdom can still find many voices.
The apples will fall around the tree, but our priority is to keep that tree standing—a strong society informed by values proven to bear good fruit season after season.
Image from ClipSafari.com, a collection of Creative Commons designs.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Phronesis in Pieces to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.