Generational Failure
By Mitch Berg
I saw this graph over the weekend – and it’s gotten me thinking.
It shows how children in Finland during the Finnish Civil War who became communists and socialists tended to see themselves as, or be, less successful than their fathers, both in occupational and educational terms. In this data set, the pattern became clearer the higher up the educational and occupational scales one went.
Having observed a lot of socialists and other dyspeptic leftists in my time, I don’t think the pattern has changed much in the past 100 years (see: Woody Kane).
Here’s the problem.
“Gen Z” sees itself, statistically, as uniquely burdened by economics, frequently seeing that as the “legacy” of previous generations leaving them nothing.
And this particular failure has many fathers; yes, the educational system that taught them to embrace victimhood; their Millennial siblings and aunts and uncles who set the example of building identities around one’s maladies. And, to be honest, yes – an economy that is currently top-loaded with workers from a couple of very large generations, and a list of other confounding factors – tax rates, zoning laws, the advances in technology that are disrupting traditional job markets – that give the Zoomers some difficulties of their own.
So – does the “socialist loser son” metaphor apply to an entire generation?
That’s going to take some un-doing.
November 18th, 2025 at 1:16 am
[…] Introduces Bill To Ban Domestic Spread Of Government Media For Foreign Audiences Shot In The Dark: Generational Failure STUMP: Chicago Foolery – On The Treasurer Playing With The City’s Money, Movember 2025 […]
November 18th, 2025 at 6:25 am
I would be perfectly happy if society became communist. Everyone work hard and gladly contribute their earnings to the common pool. Everyone draw from the pool only what they need, share and share alike.
The problem is that converting from a capitalist society to a communist society requires a transition period during which people are conditioned to the new way of thinking – socialized if you will – and that transition period requires someone at the top to guide the transition along the proper path.
Being the smartest person in the room, I will selflessly volunteer to be the person at the top. Everyone give all your money to me and I’ll give you back what I think you deserve. Not forever – only until I determine that the transition is complete – at which point I will voluntarily step down.
That’s the reason “true socialism” has never been tried. They didn’t put me at the top.
That’s the reason so many young dreamers are communists. They all think they will be the guy at the top.
November 19th, 2025 at 6:20 am
Moderation. I was hoping the new format would change that.
Hard to discuss the difference between capitali$m and $ociali$m if the words are banned.
November 20th, 2025 at 9:18 am
Bigman’s comment “everybody thinks they’ll be at the top” reminds me of art lovers’ appreciation for orientalist art. Everybody thinks they are going to be the Sheikh or the harem favorite, not the harem eunuch or the odalisque at the bottom of the pecking order. But the latter were, of course, far more numerous.
Same basic thing with Communism; every young idealist thinks he’ll be Brezhnev or Stalin, not the poor guy starved in the Holodomor or sent to Siberia. And the reality of Communism makes the old harem system look positively egalitarian in comparison.
The big problem, in my view, is that human nature is not perfectible. It is inherently sinful, and hence can only be restrained–and that only when consequences for bad behavior are suffered by every level of society.
Since Communism will always be governed by an unaccountable elite, that means that it will naturally be brutal.