Harry Potter and how Millennial Leftists Don't Even Speak Western Anymore

[jhkim]

Hmm. There is a lot of truth in this. I think though, from what I'm seeing, is that there is still a hunger for knowledge. The schools and mass media don't supply it, but Youtube does. My son is 10, he avidly watches history videos and seems to learn far more about Western history & culture from amateur Youtubers than from school.  So I rather get the impression that Civilisation may be making a comeback.

The bad news is that there is a damned generation, of roughly Millennials, I guess, who grew up in the era that began with the deconstruction of the education system (Political Correctness et al), but before Youtube really took off about 8 years ago. This 1990s through about 2003 or so 'Harry Potter' generation are the most worrying, the most brainwashed and fundamentally ignorant. They never had a chance.

Huh. I'm doubtful about YouTube filling in for what Pundit is talking about. Pundit - do you have a similar opinion of YouTube?

I am dealing with exactly the split that you talk about. My biological son was born in 2000. He is an avid reader, and has done well in school. My stepkids were born in 2004 and 2006, and they are constantly watching YouTube, and I despair of getting them to pick up a book. They do watch history videos, but I find it to be a terrible replacement for reading.

[S'mon]

My stepkids were born in 2004 and 2006, and they are constantly watching YouTube, and I despair of getting them to pick up a book. They do watch history videos, but I find it to be a terrible replacement for reading.

Hmm. I'm sure you're a better parent than me. Plus also it depends what book - admittedly my son's school is 7th worst of 28 or so in the Local Education Authority, maybe others are more rigorous. But the general impression I get is that very little concrete history is taught in British schools - and that was even true of most of my own schooling, two years at a private/independent school excepted. A good Youtuber covers a lot of ground while giving a linear temporal narrative, so the viewer understands what happened when. History education in the UK is pathologically hostile to doing this, it's all "themes". So children never really get an idea of what happened when - and somehow this manages to be true even of the endlessly studied Second World War. They'll do The Home Front - Women in Medicine - The Holocaust - etc etc, but never do a linear sequence of dates & events for context.

[TJS]

There is a difference from previous cases. Before, there was a common canon of western knowledge and symbols.  The average person was by no means an expert on it, but they were regularly exposed to bits of it that created a common symbolic language, usually without most people even realizing or thinking about it.

My generation (Gen X) were for the most part hardly enthusiastic connoisseurs of the classics. But there was enough exposure, both through the education system of 30-50 years ago and pop-culture of that same period that we could immediately understand the significance of certain phrases and references.

Because of massive changes to the education system and the purveyors of pop culture, that doesn't exist anymore. The languages of Western metaphors, parables and symbols that were the underlying deeper language without which our cultural conversation becomes shallow and meaningless.

This isn't happening now.  It happened after the second world war with mass higher education.  Once the purpose of education ceased to be producing an elite then it fragmented and for the most part became vocational training, while the disciplines that didn't fit the new model (such as the humanities) became increasingly insular and obscure.

[oggsmash]

Huh. I'm doubtful about YouTube filling in for what Pundit is talking about. Pundit - do you have a similar opinion of YouTube?

I am dealing with exactly the split that you talk about. My biological son was born in 2000. He is an avid reader, and has done well in school. My stepkids were born in 2004 and 2006, and they are constantly watching YouTube, and I despair of getting them to pick up a book. They do watch history videos, but I find it to be a terrible replacement for reading.

  Good friend of mine is a history teacher.  He says he expects kids to just start tapping pages to books and complain when the book doesnt read itself to them.  I think you are dead on correct, much like writing something by hand versus typing, different areas of the brain are activated by reading versus watching and listening.    Maybe I am just old and in a generation or so we will simply be able to upload information/skills/whatever.   I believe the process to gaining skills/knowledge/physical capability/whatever is as important has having the thing you gain.  I am curious what happens to people when the process is so different with regards to effort to gain is changed.

[jhkim]

Hmm. I'm sure you're a better parent than me. Plus also it depends what book - admittedly my son's school is 7th worst of 28 or so in the Local Education Authority, maybe others are more rigorous. But the general impression I get is that very little concrete history is taught in British schools - and that was even true of most of my own schooling, two years at a private/independent school excepted. A good Youtuber covers a lot of ground while giving a linear temporal narrative, so the viewer understands what happened when. History education in the UK is pathologically hostile to doing this, it's all "themes". So children never really get an idea of what happened when - and somehow this manages to be true even of the endlessly studied Second World War. They'll do The Home Front - Women in Medicine - The Holocaust - etc etc, but never do a linear sequence of dates & events for context.

I know K-12 science education pretty well in the U.S., from a teaching credential and master's in education. I know less about history and English teaching, and definitely not much about schooling in England.

To some degree, I think that memorizing dates and facts is often overrated. I felt my son's schooling was pretty traditional, despite being in the center of hippy-dippy northern California. Yeah, he learned stuff about local history - the Ohlone - and he even learned a bit of Indonesian dance in one of his middle school elective classes. But he still had to memorize all the state capitals and went through history timelines and so forth. He still read Mark Twain and Shakespeare along with some Toni Morrison. I think his K-12 was pretty similar to mine rather than some huge sea change. I have a lot of issues with the educational system today, but I didn't think much of teaching in my time either.

[S'mon]

I think that memorizing dates and facts is often overrated...  ...But he still had to memorize all the state capitals and went through history timelines and so forth.

You never know what you've got til it's gone! The complete absence of timelines in British history teaching is just appalling, IME & IMO.

[Spinachcat]

The Alt-Right don't generally read Greek AFAIK, but they certainly love their Greek philosophers.

...and their amphibian Egyptian gods!!!

Hail Kek!

Thats gone now.  First cable and now the internet has splintered the audience.  They do best with a small but fanaticly loyal audience.  Briet bart isn't compeating with Huffington, so they can't check each other or make each other better.

Very true.

It's how the newspaper business thrived with major cities have newspapers aimed a political or social bent and creating an echo chamber for that audience. That model produced significant profit for decades. Old TV was an anomaly because the 3 channels had to appeal to everyone, but now everyone can segment into their niche. With YouTube, you can limit your "news" to the opinions of a handful of favorites.

I think you are dead on correct, much like writing something by hand versus typing, different areas of the brain are activated by reading versus watching and listening.    Maybe I am just old and in a generation or so we will simply be able to upload information/skills/whatever.   I believe the process to gaining skills/knowledge/physical capability/whatever is as important has having the thing you gain.

The research supports the concept that the process of learning is more important than the data.

It might be a few generations, but eventually we will bio-download skills and data.

Until then, the research shows books > videos.

HOWEVER...if the choice is "watch a history video" vs. "no reading and all video games", then certainly YouTube videos have a certain level of video.

My friend's son is an A-student who lives on YouTube. Yes, he watches all sorts of interesting history videos, but he also shows too much affinity for "conspiracy theory" videos because a well done video with an authoritative voice and listing of "facts" is very convincing, whether or not those "facts" have any reality or not. AKA, its just as easy to teach a true biography vs an utterly false one.

My main concern with the YouTube generation is whether they will learn how to sift data for veracity.

[Headless]

.... I think his K-12 was pretty similar to mine rather than some huge sea change. I have a lot of issues with the educational system today, but I didn't think much of teaching in my time either.

When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school,
It's a wonder I can think at all.

[RPGPundit]

r Fascist Italian philosopher Evola I think, or Nietzsche - I generally avoid their stuff though.

Nietzsche was the opposite of fascism. Which, granted, doesn't stop dumber fascists from pretending they get him.

Evola was certainly a fascist. He was also a damned good occultist though, which is almost unique; because there were shitloads of nazi (and other ultra-right) occultists, but they were every man-jack of them total garbage.  Evola also lived long enough to evolve in his ideas, and his later works were particularly interesting.

[RPGPundit]

Hmm. There is a lot of truth in this. I think though, from what I'm seeing, is that there is still a hunger for knowledge. The schools and mass media don't supply it, but Youtube does. My son is 10, he avidly watches history videos and seems to learn far more about Western history & culture from amateur Youtubers than from school.  So I rather get the impression that Civilisation may be making a comeback.

I hope so. I do have a lot of hope, tenuous but serious hope, for the gen-z kids.  My hope is they'll push-back hard all the totalitarian garbage and anti-western self-loathing that the millennials are trying to force on them.

Still, how much of that youtubing on your son's part is in some way thanks to you? Or is it really all self-directed?

[RPGPundit]

Huh. I'm doubtful about YouTube filling in for what Pundit is talking about. Pundit - do you have a similar opinion of YouTube?

YouTube is just a manifestation of the Internet. The Internet is potentially the greatest educational tool in human history; and people spend most of their time on it looking at porn or silly images of cats.   It's all in how you use it.  I think that this newest generation (the ones born in the 21st century) are going to be the first generation totally immersed for their entire lives in the internet, so I have some hope that they might be able to use it to a greater potential than previous ones, but I'm not under any illusions that (just like with all knowledge-bases throughout history) the majority won't just end up generally wasting it.

[RPGPundit]

To some degree, I think that memorizing dates and facts is often overrated.

As an historian, I would say that this is like claiming that learning the alphabet is overrated for writing, or that reading a book from start to finish is no better or worse than just flipping back and forth through random pages and skipping a bunch.

[RPGPundit]

...and their amphibian Egyptian gods!!!

Hail Kek!

It's PRAISE Kek.

[S'mon]

Nietzsche was the opposite of fascism. Which, granted, doesn't stop dumber fascists from pretending they get him.

Yes, I nearly mentioned that - but I think that paradox goes back a long time. The TV show Andromeda either lampshaded this or was very ignorant, with its genetically enhanced, hierarchical, clannish, slave-holding Nietszcheans.

[S'mon]

Still, how much of that youtubing on your son's part is in some way thanks to you? Or is it really all self-directed?

The stuff I'm thinking of is not thanks to me, and is not political, just factual/entertaining (he used to watch mostly videogame playthroughs but has been tending to more informative stuff recently). Really I tend to discourage much political viewing and I definitely don't want to be pushing a strong political angle on a ten year old, especially stuff he hasn't got the context for. It's easy for anyone to go down a political rabbithole if you're not careful - I'm certainly mindful of that danger for myself, and I saw it with my ex when she embraced the extreme feminist stuff promoted by Vox/Jezebel etc - the mainstream trash-left media - after we separated. That seems to have stopped now she has a boyfriend; fraternising with the enemy discourages participation in the sex war.

His interest in D&D is certainly thanks to me, obviously his classmates only know videogame fantasy. But I think even there he's more likely to recommend a D&D Youtuber to me than vice-versa, eg Puffin Forest recently.