683
submitted 4 months ago by TheImpressiveX@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] seaQueue@lemmy.world 76 points 4 months ago

Not understanding the difference between pre and post 9/11 politics

[-] Zangoose@lemmy.world 68 points 4 months ago

Hate to break it to you but people born in 2006 are turning 18 this year (and are technically considered "adults").

[-] jaaake@lemmy.world 64 points 4 months ago

Having just turned 43, I can tell you that I don’t think I became an adult until my early/mid 30s.

[-] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 4 months ago

This is a truth that everyone under 30 denies until the day they turn 30. It’s like a magic spell is suddenly broken, and you realize you’re alone in an aging meat husk that now knows the glory of back pain.

I know a young person will read this and think this won’t happen to them. To that person: I am you from the future. Remember us as we were.

[-] user224@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 4 months ago

I know a young person will read this and think this won’t happen to them.

I rather thought "Huh, 30s is still young."

[-] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I have no illusions anymore that this pattern won’t repeat. I enjoy my back pain for what it is: the pre-hip pain era.

[-] EllE@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

I think it's kinda like the old dating age formula; you can date people (your age) / 2 + 7 years old, and you feel like that's the age of an adult.

When I was 15 I felt like ann adult, but people younger than me were teens. When I was 25 I felt like an adult but people under the age of like 20 were just kids. Now I feel like people in their early/mid-20s are just about adults. I'm sure when I'm 50 I'll think back to myself now and consider myself barely an adult.

[-] Zahille7@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

I'm 27 and I think I'm there already

[-] WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 months ago

I thought that too. I regret to report: it gets worse.

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

I'm 40 and it seems like I can continually look back at myself from five years ago and think damn I was an idiot back then. I wonder how I will feel in five years...

[-] gentooer@programming.dev 2 points 4 months ago

That's a relief!

[-] frostysauce@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Wow, you're me!

[-] Yearly1845@reddthat.com 8 points 4 months ago

They are technically, but not actually adults.

[-] obinice@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

That assumes you live in one of a small number of countries for which politics significantly shifted after one of those countries was attacked.

And also that you're at least old enough to have had a reasonable mature understanding of the political landscape before 2001, so as to appreciate how things changed. Let's assume that'd make you at least 20.

...So, we have to be at least 43 years old, and American, or you'll assume we're children?

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

To actually understand you'd have to have been following politics pre 9/11, which would make you probably 16 at the time. That means 39 right now. That's a lot of adults you're ruling out.

If you want to say understand society pre and post 9/11, then you're probably talking 12 at the time, so 35 right now. Still a lot of adults you're ruling out.

[-] TurboHarbinger@feddit.cl 7 points 4 months ago

Bad assumption, a localized event doesn't affect everyone in the world equally.

[-] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 months ago

So, uh, what is the difference?

[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca -5 points 4 months ago

I was alive for 9/11 and I don't know the difference.

I don't care for politics.

[-] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 25 points 4 months ago

I don’t care for politics.

Your sphere of control should match your sphere of concern; and neither of those things are what you think they are.

[-] ripcord@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago

Not at least understanding the difference seems irresponsible.

[-] seaQueue@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Who needs an informed electorate anyway?

[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca -2 points 4 months ago

Why? How does knowing how politics worked before I could vote, help me as a voter today?

I understand enough about politics to cast my vote and beyond the act of voting, I generally don't follow politics. I vote based on party platforms (what they intend to do) and the likelihood of those things happening. Eg, if a party was to say that they'll make everyone rich, I would consider that statement to be delusional, unrealistic and not something that could be fulfilled even if that party was voted in. This is an extreme example, but I think you get my meaning.

Beyond doing my due diligence in figuring out who I want to vote for, and then voting for that party.... What else do I realistically need?

My district always elects the same party anyways, whether I vote for them or not. I've landed in a gerrymandered location and that party basically always wins, but I still vote regardless.

IMO, I shouldn't need to take a political history course to be considered to be a responsible voter.

this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
683 points (97.2% liked)

Asklemmy

43939 readers
450 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS