Britain's Generation Y Factor and its 'Virtual Reality' Rioting Game (From The Argus)

Perhaps we should mention other relevant factors, Jo. I appreciate you are seeing the youngsters as 'victims' as much as 'culprits' ... but I'm not sure your logic makes that possible in the long run. Placing the blame on the younger generations is not new – classical Greek and Roman historians wrote in similar vein --- and is hardly justified; for starters – or perhaps, closer to home, we need remember the nation-wide outbreaks of looting of private and commercial properties, throughout the UK, during the early years of the second world war; crimes that were regularly blamed on “gangs of juvenile delinquents”. It’s as aspect of the Blitz years that received minimal publicity at the time – in order to maintain public morale. Unfortunately, successful ‘after-raid looters’ don’t publish their memoirs, but much detail of those years is still surfacing; organized gangs systematically pillaged bombed homes (one famous Old Bailey case involved a gang within the auxiliary fire services). Numerous murders in pursuance of theft happened in London, Leeds, Dover and Portsmouth (where the police reported ‘losing control’ of the city for several weeks!). The whole period represented ‘a splendid opportunity for the criminal underworld’, routinely gangs (often of teenagers) kitted themselves out in ARP outfits, so gaining easy access to homes and businesses – stealing food, clothing … often co-ordinating their actions with air raids, for breaking into undamaged properties under cover of the explosions from AA fire and exploding bombs. These occurrences were rampant over the first two years after serious air attacks began. Of course, in many respects, this wartime situation was very different from today’s Britain --- but a common feature is the great ‘economic’ distinction between people, the rich and the poor: it only takes a ‘spark’ to touch the tinder just below the surface.

In today’s situation, the tinder was the killing of a ‘popular’ petty-crook and the stupid refusal of police to talk to peaceful demonstrators asking them for explanation of their actions. Set this in the background of a Britain, where ‘class divide’ is not only as great as ever before … but becoming greater with the passing of every day. Not only do we still inhabit a society where 1% of the population owns 84% of the country’s wealth, but it’s a society where bankers grow richer, big profiteers are wealthier, day by day (top rates of tax are about to be slashed for the wealthy!), while the rank and file population has less to spend on food and heating. People note the relatively minor ‘penalties’ imposed on those who have fiddled their massive expenses (most of them NOT even prosecuted), while they see savage sentences (ensuring life-time criminal records) imposed on youngsters taking a bottle of water from a shop counter. I am NOT justifying rioting nor theft (and to be fair, it’s the looting rather than the alleged ‘rioting’ at issue here) – but I am criticizing the disparity of treatment for the millionaire class represented by Cameron, Clegg and Osbourne (each of them millionaires in their own right) – who continue to laugh all the way to the bank. It’s a situation that was sure to explode; the naïve ignorance displayed by government ministers discussing this situation does nothing to alleviate the situation.

At the time of the second world war, people still assumed ‘the old system’ would endure forever and that the successful outcome would leave a government of Winston Churchill basking in his wartime glories. Few of those who made the parliamentary speeches at the time could envisage anything different – yet BEFORE THE WAR HAD ENDED (!), a general election swept Churchill and his cronies in to the most crippling defeat they could ever have imagined. Already the myths of war time Britain were being pruned by reality---- it would be a great pity if everybody, as you appear to do, imagined that the present day ‘riots’ are just the consequence of a younger generation spending too much time playing with their computer games. If I were still a youngster, I’d be insulted by your implications – and saddened by your apparent inability to look deeper into the problem.

For me, the major problem facing us today, is that whereas in 1945 the majority of the British people who had just elected the first majority labour government were VERY optimistic, they still believed they were building a truly democratic society, where everything was based on the needs of people and NOT on producing profits for those with millions to invest. People’s hopes were ‘let down’ with a vengeance --- the Party that many believed would lead to fair (socialist) society, threw out everything that party’s founders had cherished – and today we have a situation where there are THREE parties all essentially committed to maintaining the ‘status quo’. Voting for Tweedle-dum, Tweedle-de or Tweedle-x will not change anything …. We must clearly move on beyond ‘parliamentary politics’ if we are to address the ‘real causes’ behind the latest unrest – not by making ‘scapegoats’ of society’s victims …. It's much 'deeper' than the excessive involvement with computer games!

Anubis that is interesting info re WW2 - I never knew about that. Thanks.

OK. So it is simplifying matters somewhat to blame it all on computer games and reality TV programmes but I'm sure these have had a massive impact during the last decade. My intention wasn't to insult young people!

That said, my colleague knows of a teenage lad who signed up for the army after extensively playing an electronic game that involved shooting the Taliban. At the time, my colleague remarked that the lad may not be assessing the real potential for death and destruction and may think the war will resemble the game to some extent, and that he'll be able to use some "cool weapons". That is definitely a tad worrying!

Interesting material from Mr Maggot. I'm sure there's a lot of truth in there.

Speaking personally, my upbringing was definitely stricter than than of my own kids. Material possessions were not really encouraged and everything was very routine-based (inflexibly so). I can't argue that a laxer approach is better but can understand how it happened as Generation X kicked back at the rigid approach from its own parents.

Perhaps Generation Z (!?) will grow up to be stricter with its own offspring, as it kicks back against all the liberal parenting it has experienced.

Maybe a second bite at your cherry, Jo – as a reaction to Archer Maggott’s contribution; he seems determined to accept the ‘considered opinion’ of those routinely cited is superficial discussions, taking it ‘as given’ that the behaviour of today’s youngsters is ‘worse’ than that of earlier generations -- and this can be attributed to the ‘lack of discipline’ in today’s environment.

I know of no ‘hard data’ supporting Maggott’s assumption of deteriorating behaviour (as opposed to his selected anecdotal quotations) and would have thought the evidence of the looting during the London Blitz not shows strong similarities with our more current incidents … especially as the youngsters in London, during the early 1940s, grew up with the older ‘family values’ and social disciplines for which Archer M appears to crave.

It is not surprising that much of what I said was ‘new’ to you, Jo, as the myth of Britain during those years has now been ingrained into our culture. Those who remember the blitz, will tell of the bomb that fell on the Café de Paris at Piccadilly in March 1941, where a smart crowd of officers and ‘elegant women’ sipping cocktails became the target – thirty were killed, more were injured. The press made much of the gallantry of servicemen, carrying their escorts from the wreckage. What the press FAILED to report was that ambulances took an hour to arrive – when they did, they discovered looters had got there first, cutting rings from dead fingers with pocket knives, ripping earrings from the flesh, necklaces and cigarette cases from handbags.

In May of 1940, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner reported the increase in juvenile crime, accounting for 48% of all arrests; there had been 4,584 cases of looting reported (most were NOT reported!) since the beginning of the Blitz, a few weeks earlier. New Scotland Yard believed 50% of looters were under twenty-one years of age. A year later, in May 1941, the Metropolitan Police claimed that out of a sample of 228 men prosecuted for looting, ninety-six of them held ‘official’ positions. At one point, a despairing magistrate expostulated, “I’m beginning to wonder if there is an honest demolition worker in London”.

It would be interesting if Archer Maggott could suggest why the ‘discipline’ of those heroic days failed so miserably when it came to the test ….

Dear Archer Maggott! Thanks for your partial clarifications – making it possible to attempt reply to some of your points (with apologies to Jo for temporarily taking over her blog!). You intermingle anecdotes and references to (at least) two surveys, neither of which I have been able to study in detail. My essential argument with you is that while you insist today’s youngsters are less well behaved than their compatriots of earlier generations (AND of contemporary European nations), I argue these ‘differences’ cannot be ‘blamed’ upon the youngsters, but need be seen as a reflection of the society we have created (I contrasted the ‘positive hope’ in the electorate that threw Churchill out of power, with today’s ‘alternative’ -- Cameron, Clegg and Miliband.

Anecdotally, you say that like all youngsters of your day (and mine!) you were NOT taken to pubs by your parents … and instead had earlier bedtimes. You refer to an unspecified survey (maybe by SAGA?) where you report half of grandparents believe today’s kids require more discipline than they get, more parental presence; 10% of them reckon kids spend too much time on computers. You refer to a poll of 2500 adults – my guess is it’s poll of SAGA customers; if I’m correct, hardly evidence of either a representative sample nor of a professionally structured study. You cite the presence of TV and computers in bedrooms, assuming, without question, this being a negative feature – in my day, of course, it was books and comics – was that REALLY so ‘different’? -- today’s world is electronic! Most serious study (certainly at university) relies on the computer …. You report that in this study, nearly half of grandparents were critical of one aspect of their grandchildren’s education – seriously, was it EVER different? -- throughout history, older generations have ALWAYS been critical of young people – read Plato/Socrates on the topic! Apparently, SAGA found 95% of parents believed their parenting and their parents’ parenting of them were both good! – but in spite of this clear statement, YOU refuse to accept what they say, insisting THEY are the problem! Ironically, you then insist that Anubis (as opposed to you yourself!) should follow the ‘considered opinion’ of eminent experts …. !!!

You throw in a partial quote from local (Haywards Heath) boy Mick Brookes, telling us that millions of school children are ‘under performing’. As it happens, I quite agree with Mick on this (as does every intelligent lecturer/teacher).\ I spent many years working as a lecturer in further and higher education – and saw over recent years, for myself, the steady ‘dumbing down’ of education at every level – hence the incredible GCSE and A level results every year – where now, virtually 100% pass with ever higher grades; increasingly employers set up their own exams to ‘test’ job applicants – having many good ‘A’ levels doesn’t mean much, anymore. Why should young students exert themselves? Why bother to really study, in so many subjects, when it’s increasingly difficult to ‘fail’?

Your final post introduces another study, that of the IPPR, four or five years ago. I have no reason to argue with their general observations comparing the behaviour of young Britons at home (and abroad) regarding their drinking, fighting, drug taking and sexual activity. I don’t really wish to open all this up here – and certainly agree the aggressiveness and drunkenness needs to be addressed more seriously than it is. (I agree with our local MPs seeking to de-criminalize drugs, and I’m all in favour of youth’s natural explorations of their own sexuality in advance of settling down and raising families). So, therefore, it is to be expected that I believe the proposals of the IPPR to institute after-school classes of martial arts, girl guides, boy scouts, army cadets etc., etc. as just the sort of return to the ideas of ‘the empire on which the sun never set’ as ABHORRENT. I would solidly support youngsters rejecting the proposals to re-institute a modern version of the Hitler Youth into the UK.

So let’s look at some of the reported findings NOT in dispute between us. Poor behaviour is exclusively exhibited by young people. Britain is full of rude, ill-mannered, aggressive, selfish people who show neither respect nor consideration towards others. This is expressed through many ways …. look at use of the roads: anyone rash enough to obey a speed limit can practically expect to be lynched. Aggressive revving, tailgating, cutting up, are the order of the day - speeding, aggressive driving, not giving way to others -- no wonder kids look around them and think that's how society's supposed to work. Not holding doors open, not acknowledging kind or polite behaviour when it is received, dropping litter, shouting on mobile phones in public places, not saying hello to customers or to shop assistants, not saying please and thank you or sorry, when appropriate, allowing children to be noisy and disruptive in public places, playing music loudly, talking loudly and boorishly in restaurants, parking on pavements, and so it goes on.

Look on the trains, tubes and buses: everywhere, you'll see parents urging their offspring to grab a vacant seat before some little old lady can get to it. You'll see the crowds on the platform idiotically surging forward to get on board and blocking the exit of those getting off. Standing back for a moment would actually get them on board much faster, but no, that would be a concession to the fact that other people exist, and in our "no such thing as society" world only a weakling acknowledges that.

Worst of all, perhaps, is the cult of stupidity. It's OK to be able to recite in intricate detail the history of your favourite football team; but any other kind of knowledge is taboo. People apologize with a sheepish giggle if they let slip some fact they happen to know, and greet with a blank-eyed ("so?") shrug any fact imparted to them. So youth swiftly get the message that intellectual curiosity has no place in the adult world. Why should they bother to learn, or think, or develop any interests beyond the purely animal?

We adults have shaped today's youth. Perhaps if we could all make the effort to remember how civilised adults are supposed to behave, and do it, the young might gain some vague idea of what a half-decent society expects
of them. Who knows, we might even return to being one. What we need to recapture is the social standing we hoped to be building back in the mid-1940s – when it was OUR world we hoped to be creating, NOT a world where we desperately looked for someone to ‘lead’ us – a Cameron, a Clegg, a Miliband. When we manage to do that, we’ll rediscover teenagers today are no different from teenagers of countless past generations. Rather than the re-cycled versions of punks, mods & rockers, rather than the more noticeable, more brash, with more money to spend on drink and drugs (just a warped reflection of the rest of British society, which is becoming equally as rude and obnoxious). The problem doesn’t lie with the teenagers, who are always going to push the boundaries, but with the rest of this society. If we adults were better behaved, consumed less, thought more, cared more and were less selfish in our actions, then our teenagers would moderate in line with this so that their actions were less degenerative.

anubis wrote:
Dear Archer Maggott! Thanks for your partial clarifications – making it possible to attempt reply to some of your points (with apologies to Jo for temporarily taking over her blog!). You intermingle anecdotes and references to (at least) two surveys, neither of which I have been able to study in detail. My essential argument with you is that while you insist today’s youngsters are less well behaved than their compatriots of earlier generations (AND of contemporary European nations), I argue these ‘differences’ cannot be ‘blamed’ upon the youngsters, but need be seen as a reflection of the society we have created (I contrasted the ‘positive hope’ in the electorate that threw Churchill out of power, with today’s ‘alternative’ -- Cameron, Clegg and Miliband.

Anecdotally, you say that like all youngsters of your day (and mine!) you were NOT taken to pubs by your parents … and instead had earlier bedtimes. You refer to an unspecified survey (maybe by SAGA?) where you report half of grandparents believe today’s kids require more discipline than they get, more parental presence; 10% of them reckon kids spend too much time on computers. You refer to a poll of 2500 adults – my guess is it’s poll of SAGA customers; if I’m correct, hardly evidence of either a representative sample nor of a professionally structured study. You cite the presence of TV and computers in bedrooms, assuming, without question, this being a negative feature – in my day, of course, it was books and comics – was that REALLY so ‘different’? -- today’s world is electronic! Most serious study (certainly at university) relies on the computer …. You report that in this study, nearly half of grandparents were critical of one aspect of their grandchildren’s education – seriously, was it EVER different? -- throughout history, older generations have ALWAYS been critical of young people – read Plato/Socrates on the topic! Apparently, SAGA found 95% of parents believed their parenting and their parents’ parenting of them were both good! – but in spite of this clear statement, YOU refuse to accept what they say, insisting THEY are the problem! Ironically, you then insist that Anubis (as opposed to you yourself!) should follow the ‘considered opinion’ of eminent experts …. !!!

You throw in a partial quote from local (Haywards Heath) boy Mick Brookes, telling us that millions of school children are ‘under performing’. As it happens, I quite agree with Mick on this (as does every intelligent lecturer/teacher).\ I spent many years working as a lecturer in further and higher education – and saw over recent years, for myself, the steady ‘dumbing down’ of education at every level – hence the incredible GCSE and A level results every year – where now, virtually 100% pass with ever higher grades; increasingly employers set up their own exams to ‘test’ job applicants – having many good ‘A’ levels doesn’t mean much, anymore. Why should young students exert themselves? Why bother to really study, in so many subjects, when it’s increasingly difficult to ‘fail’?

Your final post introduces another study, that of the IPPR, four or five years ago. I have no reason to argue with their general observations comparing the behaviour of young Britons at home (and abroad) regarding their drinking, fighting, drug taking and sexual activity. I don’t really wish to open all this up here – and certainly agree the aggressiveness and drunkenness needs to be addressed more seriously than it is. (I agree with our local MPs seeking to de-criminalize drugs, and I’m all in favour of youth’s natural explorations of their own sexuality in advance of settling down and raising families). So, therefore, it is to be expected that I believe the proposals of the IPPR to institute after-school classes of martial arts, girl guides, boy scouts, army cadets etc., etc. as just the sort of return to the ideas of ‘the empire on which the sun never set’ as ABHORRENT. I would solidly support youngsters rejecting the proposals to re-institute a modern version of the Hitler Youth into the UK.

So let’s look at some of the reported findings NOT in dispute between us. Poor behaviour is exclusively exhibited by young people. Britain is full of rude, ill-mannered, aggressive, selfish people who show neither respect nor consideration towards others. This is expressed through many ways …. look at use of the roads: anyone rash enough to obey a speed limit can practically expect to be lynched. Aggressive revving, tailgating, cutting up, are the order of the day - speeding, aggressive driving, not giving way to others -- no wonder kids look around them and think that's how society's supposed to work. Not holding doors open, not acknowledging kind or polite behaviour when it is received, dropping litter, shouting on mobile phones in public places, not saying hello to customers or to shop assistants, not saying please and thank you or sorry, when appropriate, allowing children to be noisy and disruptive in public places, playing music loudly, talking loudly and boorishly in restaurants, parking on pavements, and so it goes on.

Look on the trains, tubes and buses: everywhere, you'll see parents urging their offspring to grab a vacant seat before some little old lady can get to it. You'll see the crowds on the platform idiotically surging forward to get on board and blocking the exit of those getting off. Standing back for a moment would actually get them on board much faster, but no, that would be a concession to the fact that other people exist, and in our "no such thing as society" world only a weakling acknowledges that.

Worst of all, perhaps, is the cult of stupidity. It's OK to be able to recite in intricate detail the history of your favourite football team; but any other kind of knowledge is taboo. People apologize with a sheepish giggle if they let slip some fact they happen to know, and greet with a blank-eyed ("so?") shrug any fact imparted to them. So youth swiftly get the message that intellectual curiosity has no place in the adult world. Why should they bother to learn, or think, or develop any interests beyond the purely animal?

We adults have shaped today's youth. Perhaps if we could all make the effort to remember how civilised adults are supposed to behave, and do it, the young might gain some vague idea of what a half-decent society expects
of them. Who knows, we might even return to being one. What we need to recapture is the social standing we hoped to be building back in the mid-1940s – when it was OUR world we hoped to be creating, NOT a world where we desperately looked for someone to ‘lead’ us – a Cameron, a Clegg, a Miliband. When we manage to do that, we’ll rediscover teenagers today are no different from teenagers of countless past generations. Rather than the re-cycled versions of punks, mods & rockers, rather than the more noticeable, more brash, with more money to spend on drink and drugs (just a warped reflection of the rest of British society, which is becoming equally as rude and obnoxious). The problem doesn’t lie with the teenagers, who are always going to push the boundaries, but with the rest of this society. If we adults were better behaved, consumed less, thought more, cared more and were less selfish in our actions, then our teenagers would moderate in line with this so that their actions were less degenerative.

Write your own blog and stop silting up other peoples with this effluent you windbag.

anubis wrote:
Dear Archer Maggott! Thanks for your partial clarifications – making it possible to attempt reply to some of your points (with apologies to Jo for temporarily taking over her blog!). You intermingle anecdotes and references to (at least) two surveys, neither of which I have been able to study in detail. My essential argument with you is that while you insist today’s youngsters are less well behaved than their compatriots of earlier generations (AND of contemporary European nations), I argue these ‘differences’ cannot be ‘blamed’ upon the youngsters, but need be seen as a reflection of the society we have created (I contrasted the ‘positive hope’ in the electorate that threw Churchill out of power, with today’s ‘alternative’ -- Cameron, Clegg and Miliband.

Anecdotally, you say that like all youngsters of your day (and mine!) you were NOT taken to pubs by your parents … and instead had earlier bedtimes. You refer to an unspecified survey (maybe by SAGA?) where you report half of grandparents believe today’s kids require more discipline than they get, more parental presence; 10% of them reckon kids spend too much time on computers. You refer to a poll of 2500 adults – my guess is it’s poll of SAGA customers; if I’m correct, hardly evidence of either a representative sample nor of a professionally structured study. You cite the presence of TV and computers in bedrooms, assuming, without question, this being a negative feature – in my day, of course, it was books and comics – was that REALLY so ‘different’? -- today’s world is electronic! Most serious study (certainly at university) relies on the computer …. You report that in this study, nearly half of grandparents were critical of one aspect of their grandchildren’s education – seriously, was it EVER different? -- throughout history, older generations have ALWAYS been critical of young people – read Plato/Socrates on the topic! Apparently, SAGA found 95% of parents believed their parenting and their parents’ parenting of them were both good! – but in spite of this clear statement, YOU refuse to accept what they say, insisting THEY are the problem! Ironically, you then insist that Anubis (as opposed to you yourself!) should follow the ‘considered opinion’ of eminent experts …. !!!

You throw in a partial quote from local (Haywards Heath) boy Mick Brookes, telling us that millions of school children are ‘under performing’. As it happens, I quite agree with Mick on this (as does every intelligent lecturer/teacher).\ I spent many years working as a lecturer in further and higher education – and saw over recent years, for myself, the steady ‘dumbing down’ of education at every level – hence the incredible GCSE and A level results every year – where now, virtually 100% pass with ever higher grades; increasingly employers set up their own exams to ‘test’ job applicants – having many good ‘A’ levels doesn’t mean much, anymore. Why should young students exert themselves? Why bother to really study, in so many subjects, when it’s increasingly difficult to ‘fail’?

Your final post introduces another study, that of the IPPR, four or five years ago. I have no reason to argue with their general observations comparing the behaviour of young Britons at home (and abroad) regarding their drinking, fighting, drug taking and sexual activity. I don’t really wish to open all this up here – and certainly agree the aggressiveness and drunkenness needs to be addressed more seriously than it is. (I agree with our local MPs seeking to de-criminalize drugs, and I’m all in favour of youth’s natural explorations of their own sexuality in advance of settling down and raising families). So, therefore, it is to be expected that I believe the proposals of the IPPR to institute after-school classes of martial arts, girl guides, boy scouts, army cadets etc., etc. as just the sort of return to the ideas of ‘the empire on which the sun never set’ as ABHORRENT. I would solidly support youngsters rejecting the proposals to re-institute a modern version of the Hitler Youth into the UK.

So let’s look at some of the reported findings NOT in dispute between us. Poor behaviour is exclusively exhibited by young people. Britain is full of rude, ill-mannered, aggressive, selfish people who show neither respect nor consideration towards others. This is expressed through many ways …. look at use of the roads: anyone rash enough to obey a speed limit can practically expect to be lynched. Aggressive revving, tailgating, cutting up, are the order of the day - speeding, aggressive driving, not giving way to others -- no wonder kids look around them and think that's how society's supposed to work. Not holding doors open, not acknowledging kind or polite behaviour when it is received, dropping litter, shouting on mobile phones in public places, not saying hello to customers or to shop assistants, not saying please and thank you or sorry, when appropriate, allowing children to be noisy and disruptive in public places, playing music loudly, talking loudly and boorishly in restaurants, parking on pavements, and so it goes on.

Look on the trains, tubes and buses: everywhere, you'll see parents urging their offspring to grab a vacant seat before some little old lady can get to it. You'll see the crowds on the platform idiotically surging forward to get on board and blocking the exit of those getting off. Standing back for a moment would actually get them on board much faster, but no, that would be a concession to the fact that other people exist, and in our "no such thing as society" world only a weakling acknowledges that.

Worst of all, perhaps, is the cult of stupidity. It's OK to be able to recite in intricate detail the history of your favourite football team; but any other kind of knowledge is taboo. People apologize with a sheepish giggle if they let slip some fact they happen to know, and greet with a blank-eyed ("so?") shrug any fact imparted to them. So youth swiftly get the message that intellectual curiosity has no place in the adult world. Why should they bother to learn, or think, or develop any interests beyond the purely animal?

We adults have shaped today's youth. Perhaps if we could all make the effort to remember how civilised adults are supposed to behave, and do it, the young might gain some vague idea of what a half-decent society expects
of them. Who knows, we might even return to being one. What we need to recapture is the social standing we hoped to be building back in the mid-1940s – when it was OUR world we hoped to be creating, NOT a world where we desperately looked for someone to ‘lead’ us – a Cameron, a Clegg, a Miliband. When we manage to do that, we’ll rediscover teenagers today are no different from teenagers of countless past generations. Rather than the re-cycled versions of punks, mods & rockers, rather than the more noticeable, more brash, with more money to spend on drink and drugs (just a warped reflection of the rest of British society, which is becoming equally as rude and obnoxious). The problem doesn’t lie with the teenagers, who are always going to push the boundaries, but with the rest of this society. If we adults were better behaved, consumed less, thought more, cared more and were less selfish in our actions, then our teenagers would moderate in line with this so that their actions were less degenerative.

Write your own blog and stop silting up other peoples with this effluent you windbag.

Dear Jo!

Do you have an opinion -- it seems it's OK for some to post lengthy replies or, more correctly, 'discussion points' --- then, when THEIR lengthy pieces receive critical comments, they respond by REMOVING what they have written (out of embarrassment?), obviously of necessity leaving just the replies to their flawed comments ... and throw in (twice!) an insult, unrelated to the purpose of the thread.

A remark from you, Jo, would be appreciated ....

I thought wrote:

anubis wrote:
Dear Archer Maggott! Thanks for your partial clarifications – making it possible to attempt reply to some of your points (with apologies to Jo for temporarily taking over her blog!). You intermingle anecdotes and references to (at least) two surveys, neither of which I have been able to study in detail. My essential argument with you is that while you insist today’s youngsters are less well behaved than their compatriots of earlier generations (AND of contemporary European nations), I argue these ‘differences’ cannot be ‘blamed’ upon the youngsters, but need be seen as a reflection of the society we have created (I contrasted the ‘positive hope’ in the electorate that threw Churchill out of power, with today’s ‘alternative’ -- Cameron, Clegg and Miliband.

Anecdotally, you say that like all youngsters of your day (and mine!) you were NOT taken to pubs by your parents … and instead had earlier bedtimes. You refer to an unspecified survey (maybe by SAGA?) where you report half of grandparents believe today’s kids require more discipline than they get, more parental presence; 10% of them reckon kids spend too much time on computers. You refer to a poll of 2500 adults – my guess is it’s poll of SAGA customers; if I’m correct, hardly evidence of either a representative sample nor of a professionally structured study. You cite the presence of TV and computers in bedrooms, assuming, without question, this being a negative feature – in my day, of course, it was books and comics – was that REALLY so ‘different’? -- today’s world is electronic! Most serious study (certainly at university) relies on the computer …. You report that in this study, nearly half of grandparents were critical of one aspect of their grandchildren’s education – seriously, was it EVER different? -- throughout history, older generations have ALWAYS been critical of young people – read Plato/Socrates on the topic! Apparently, SAGA found 95% of parents believed their parenting and their parents’ parenting of them were both good! – but in spite of this clear statement, YOU refuse to accept what they say, insisting THEY are the problem! Ironically, you then insist that Anubis (as opposed to you yourself!) should follow the ‘considered opinion’ of eminent experts …. !!!

You throw in a partial quote from local (Haywards Heath) boy Mick Brookes, telling us that millions of school children are ‘under performing’. As it happens, I quite agree with Mick on this (as does every intelligent lecturer/teacher).\ I spent many years working as a lecturer in further and higher education – and saw over recent years, for myself, the steady ‘dumbing down’ of education at every level – hence the incredible GCSE and A level results every year – where now, virtually 100% pass with ever higher grades; increasingly employers set up their own exams to ‘test’ job applicants – having many good ‘A’ levels doesn’t mean much, anymore. Why should young students exert themselves? Why bother to really study, in so many subjects, when it’s increasingly difficult to ‘fail’?

Your final post introduces another study, that of the IPPR, four or five years ago. I have no reason to argue with their general observations comparing the behaviour of young Britons at home (and abroad) regarding their drinking, fighting, drug taking and sexual activity. I don’t really wish to open all this up here – and certainly agree the aggressiveness and drunkenness needs to be addressed more seriously than it is. (I agree with our local MPs seeking to de-criminalize drugs, and I’m all in favour of youth’s natural explorations of their own sexuality in advance of settling down and raising families). So, therefore, it is to be expected that I believe the proposals of the IPPR to institute after-school classes of martial arts, girl guides, boy scouts, army cadets etc., etc. as just the sort of return to the ideas of ‘the empire on which the sun never set’ as ABHORRENT. I would solidly support youngsters rejecting the proposals to re-institute a modern version of the Hitler Youth into the UK.

So let’s look at some of the reported findings NOT in dispute between us. Poor behaviour is exclusively exhibited by young people. Britain is full of rude, ill-mannered, aggressive, selfish people who show neither respect nor consideration towards others. This is expressed through many ways …. look at use of the roads: anyone rash enough to obey a speed limit can practically expect to be lynched. Aggressive revving, tailgating, cutting up, are the order of the day - speeding, aggressive driving, not giving way to others -- no wonder kids look around them and think that's how society's supposed to work. Not holding doors open, not acknowledging kind or polite behaviour when it is received, dropping litter, shouting on mobile phones in public places, not saying hello to customers or to shop assistants, not saying please and thank you or sorry, when appropriate, allowing children to be noisy and disruptive in public places, playing music loudly, talking loudly and boorishly in restaurants, parking on pavements, and so it goes on.

Look on the trains, tubes and buses: everywhere, you'll see parents urging their offspring to grab a vacant seat before some little old lady can get to it. You'll see the crowds on the platform idiotically surging forward to get on board and blocking the exit of those getting off. Standing back for a moment would actually get them on board much faster, but no, that would be a concession to the fact that other people exist, and in our "no such thing as society" world only a weakling acknowledges that.

Worst of all, perhaps, is the cult of stupidity. It's OK to be able to recite in intricate detail the history of your favourite football team; but any other kind of knowledge is taboo. People apologize with a sheepish giggle if they let slip some fact they happen to know, and greet with a blank-eyed ("so?") shrug any fact imparted to them. So youth swiftly get the message that intellectual curiosity has no place in the adult world. Why should they bother to learn, or think, or develop any interests beyond the purely animal?

We adults have shaped today's youth. Perhaps if we could all make the effort to remember how civilised adults are supposed to behave, and do it, the young might gain some vague idea of what a half-decent society expects
of them. Who knows, we might even return to being one. What we need to recapture is the social standing we hoped to be building back in the mid-1940s – when it was OUR world we hoped to be creating, NOT a world where we desperately looked for someone to ‘lead’ us – a Cameron, a Clegg, a Miliband. When we manage to do that, we’ll rediscover teenagers today are no different from teenagers of countless past generations. Rather than the re-cycled versions of punks, mods & rockers, rather than the more noticeable, more brash, with more money to spend on drink and drugs (just a warped reflection of the rest of British society, which is becoming equally as rude and obnoxious). The problem doesn’t lie with the teenagers, who are always going to push the boundaries, but with the rest of this society. If we adults were better behaved, consumed less, thought more, cared more and were less selfish in our actions, then our teenagers would moderate in line with this so that their actions were less degenerative.

Write your own blog and stop silting up other peoples with this effluent you windbag.

What a preposterous individual! I would hazard a guess, you have an 'admirer' Jo, in this loon, make sure you keep the Doors and Windows locked!