Conversations with the Generations: World Views

by edited by Penny Harrison

To gather insight into the ways we perceive ourselves and others, Open Spaces sponsored discussions on thoughts about the world in which we live. On the presumption that we are shaped to some degree by the commonality of our experiences and the point we are in our lives when we have them, these groups were divided by age: 25-39 years; 40-61 years and 62+ years. It was our thinking that these groups corresponded roughly to the years of assessing what needs to be done and beginning to get involved, years in the midst of activity, and years of reflecting and rethinking and sometimes recommitting.

We welcome your participation and your comments sent to info@open-spaces.com on any of the questions presented, and will publish some of them in an upcoming newsletter. The questions focusing on world views and the answers offered by group participants follow:

1. Has your understanding of the world changed through the years? If so, how?
2. Do you feel basically optimistic or pessimistic about the future?
3. Has your view of human nature changed? If yes, how?
4. Do you feel we are going in the right direction locally? Nationally? Globally?

Discussions around these questions ranged widely, and we report on some of the more interesting and relevant insights in following sections.

25-39 Years
Members of the 25- to 39-year old generation have lived through enough “regime changes,” Middle East peace processes, “groundbreaking” trade agreements, and sanction-imposing votes to have begun forming an understanding of international issues and the role the United States plays in shaping them. In spite of these collective experiences, however, members of this generation have only begun to pass through the events that will undoubtedly influence their world view in the manner that the two World Wars, the Korean Conflict, the Cold War and Vietnam shaped the perspective of older generations – namely the attacks of September 11, 2001 and the unfolding U.S. response. There is a general feeling among people in this generation that the world view they held two years ago is no longer accurate, but a new, coherent vision has yet to emerge. While older generations can place current world events in the context of America's approach to and experience with past wars and crises, this generation has no such framework upon which to place and evaluate these events.

Still, some members of this group are deeply worried that the backlash against the events of 9/11 has already carried us away from the spirit of internationalism required to address the problems of an increasingly linked and interdependent world. “One of the central questions of our generation is how we will overcome the impulse toward anger, isolationism, and xenophobia in order to address growing global problems such as wealth disparity and environmental destruction. How do we respond wisely to this in order to promote a more peaceful world for generations that follow?”
Although they are only beginning to experience what are likely to be formative “global events,” many individuals in this generation have had their current thinking about foreign affairs greatly influenced by time spent abroad either through school programs, extensive travel, work overseas, or public service programs such as the Peace Corps and Volunteers in Asia:

We're breaking down barriers of country in our generation and we're really becoming a smaller world. Traveling or living elsewhere for a while really helps drive home that point. It's becoming more important in our lives, careers, and communities to reach beyond city, state and country.” For people who have not traveled, insights into other countries come regularly via emails and web-photos sent by friends traveling or living overseas: “In one week, while I was sitting at my desk, I got email ‘updates' from friends in Paris, Jakarta, Singapore, and the Ivory Coast. Of course, I'd love to experience those places myself, but it was great to hear about my friends' adventures in other countries and get a sense of the places they were living.

The sense that the world is getting smaller and more accessible has led many in this generation to take a more critical view of the way in which U.S culture and politics are affecting people outside of this country:

I think American values are important, but I also think it's important to understand that there are people on the other side of the globe who see what's going on in American society and think ‘what heathens.' ‘How can they do X, Y, and Z? How awful to spend money on all of these things when there is such great poverty in the world.' I think it's important to understand that there's an underlying goodness in most people and change is afoot everywhere, but it is a gradual process. It's not something you can shove down the throat of a culture.

Others have returned from time overseas to turn an at-once appreciative and skeptical eye on the American media. One man in his mid-20s who recently returned from several months traveling in Asia remarked:

When I returned to the States I had two competing feelings that I still haven't reconciled. On the one hand, after being in China and watching the government use the press to manipulate people I felt a deep sense of gratitude that we have a free press that can ask hard questions of the government and investigate stories. On the other hand, I felt sick after reading the stories in the mainstream media here about the situation in Indonesia . The reporters seem to be simply touting the Administration's line – no questions asked! I spent a few months in Jakarta and Bali , and the situation with terrorist groups and the military isn't nearly as black-and-white as the major papers here would have you believe.

Members of this generation also expressed sincere concern over two global issues – the widening gap between the world's wealthy and poor and environmental degradation. They recognize poverty and feelings of helplessness as lending support to many of the current geopolitical crises, but are uncertain of the degree to which America can and should play a role in raising the standard of living around the world. One woman who had recently returned from a year in Ecuador noted:

Returning home you notice the excess that we have in this country compared to other places; there are 35 different kinds of toothpaste to choose from here! I don't know if this wealth would have such an effect elsewhere if it weren't for the fact that, through television, people overseas are bombarded with reminders about how much we have that they don't.

Closer to home, many individuals view the income gap as a critical factor in the current policies emanating from Washington DC :

One of my concerns is the gap between rich and poor – for the past 20 years we've seen an exponential consolidation of wealth. This imperils our democracy. Wealth has become so powerful in influencing the way things go in DC that people are feeling very disconnected. My biggest fear for America is that corporations, who only care about their bottom lines, are driving our government's agenda. The concerns of the larger society are being lost.

Environmental degradation and conservation are perhaps the most defining global issues for the 25-35 year old generation. Across the board, people recognize the enormous impacts that the world's exploding population and rapid industrialization are having on natural resources and ecosystems. While solving these problems will undoubtedly take time and resources, members of this generation feel that doing so is at the heart of their future global and personal security.

40-61 Years
This middle generation is concerned for the future, frustrated by the lack of effective, trustworthy leadership and credible information and disappointed in the failure of the fourth estate, their political representatives and others whose business it is to demand and disseminate that information. Of particular concern are world unrest, economic and political polarization and the narrowing of the separation of church and state. They are searching for reasons to hope hidden in what they see as the increasingly urgent bombardment of bad news and problems on the home and foreign fronts.
Overwhelmed with the demands of their busy
lives, this group expressed a real concern that change is occurring and is going in the wrong direction with very little input from them. “So many rapid changes that people don't have time to process so they resort to knee jerk reactions. What does this mean and how does it affect me?”
They are disturbed by an aura of secrecy that they see as inconsistent with a working democracy: “Sometimes it seems as though we have been for all practical purposes disenfranchised.”

They are appalled by the lack of questioning in the midst of what they say are so many obvious questions. “I keep waiting for the child to stand up and say ‘the emperor has no clothes.' War on terrorism or not, there's something odd going on in Washington . How can we reestablish political awareness?”

They feel that politics has been “dumbed down” and is run by advertisers. “We see a speech given in front of banners saying ‘Corporate Responsibility,' so we say ‘OK there's the two-word message. It doesn't matter what's in the speech, much less what's in the actions.'”
They worry that there are important issues that nobody is addressing.

I see this ever widening gap between people who have so much and those who have very little to live on without education, food, medical care. There's this burgeoning worldwide population. And as we become global citizens, there's a great uncertainty in the future as to what that's going to mean. We've already seen some of the backlash on 9/11 and the rise of fundamentalism. There're huge populations in China , Africa, the Middle East and even in our hemisphere of people who are increasingly left out. I feel that's a powder keg that at some point will blow up and we'll have to deal with it.

Often they connect the inequities with our disproportionate consumption of world resources.

There is a website of photographs from space – a picture of the world at night. The metropolitan areas of North America and Europe are well lit up – this small proportion of the world's population; much of the rest of the world is in darkness. Think of our arrogance in refusing to join efforts to deal with life-threatening environmental problems like the Kyoto Treaty and other meaningful gestures because we worry they're going to interfere with economic progress here.

And some were concerned that sharing means taking away what they have. “Our culture is geared to buy more. After 9/11 you were patriotic if you bought more.” One mentioned that it depended what the “more” was and related a story about some vigilantes who were running around slapping bumper stickers on the backs of SUVs that said “I'm changing the climate. Ask me how.”
They saw reasons for optimism in international cooperation, particularly in the areas of the environment and public health which “have no boundaries.” But they worried that this was being overshadowed by other agendas and that the connections established were in danger of being broken.

Economically, the 40-61 year-olds see layoffs, cutbacks, and people working more hours for the same amount money. They feel that this situation leads many to conclude that they need a tax cut, setting up a cycle where government is unable to pay for roads and schools, leaving people feeling they have less and are thus less willing to pay taxes. This caused considerable consternation to parents of children now feeling the cutbacks in many phases of their lives. Many feel that people in government, and particularly those in leadership positions, are failing in their responsibilities in this regard. “I confess I believe that government can do good and that a progressive government can be a force for progressive change.”

“There don't seem to be any leaders of stature who have a voice that can crystallize an idea and take it forward to get consensus from people in order to effectuate any kind of plan that would actually solve some of these problems. It's just a lot of small competing voices worldwide, but no one is solving a problem.”

In politics, as in economics, this group noted increased polarization. “I listen to someone say something, and someone else hears a totally different message from the same person at the same event – no connection. That kind of interaction occurs more frequently lately. I used to disagree with some of our leaders, but at least I could understand where they were coming from.”
Religion too appears susceptible to this disconnect. “We're seeing lots of selfishness in the ‘God Bless America ' frenzy. Peoples' idea of God is so petty and narrow.” People noted an increased belief that “this great universal power is just focused on me and just us locally.”

This group expressed regret that the politicization of religion separated it from its roots and its most vital functions. “All the major religions preach about giving up on materialism and seeking the spiritual path. This is not discussed as much anymore. Religion in America has been politicized. We have forgotten the determination of our founding fathers to avoid religious strife by creating a nation with strong protections for the separation of church and state. Today our policy decisions are blurring those lines. It's important to be reminded that success is not based on what you have. It's your level of happiness and contentment, how balanced your life is and how connected you are to everything.”

There are plenty of reasons to be pessimistic, but the reason to be optimistic is that you have kids. If you can't be optimistic about the future, you shouldn't have children. That means that you have to work to try to solve the problems. What worries me a lot is that increasingly people are just in it for themselves or for the goals of their immediate family or immediate comfort needs, insulating themselves against everything else. That to me is a sign of true pessimism. You're only holding out until the lemonade's gone, and it's all over at that point, rather than trying to look for something that's more sustainable.

62+ Years
Many major events have shaped the views of this generation, but three – the Second World War, Vietnam and Watergate – are particularly prominent. Each had its own set of lessons. The two from the Second World War are the dangers of a policy of appeasement and the destructive capacity of a nuclear attack. From Vietnam the advice most noted was “to understand a culture before you put your boots on its soil.” And to be aware that without a free press to call them to account, leaders will lie even about matters of life and death. “There was the evening news report night after night that we had lost no planes in Vietnam . Then when evidence of our downed aircraft was discovered, word came from the White House that though our planes had indeed been shot down, our military knew where they were and they were therefore not ‘lost.'”

These experiences plus frequent reports of “corrected” history engendered a strong cynicism. Watergate only confirmed it. “To those who lived through Watergate, ‘executive privilege' is a familiar term associated with a White House trying to prevent disclosure of its damaging secrets.” Still, strong investigative journalism and those who rose to the occasion gave reason to hope. “There were resignations on principle and those who put preservation of the democracy above political loyalty.” This generation felt that these events taken together “taught that freedom is a charge as well as a gift, and that it takes work to keep it alive.”

Today this group is concerned about the balance of civilian protection and civil liberties. “One more real worry after 9/ll is the potential for the erosion of our rights and liberties. I'm not saying that has happened and there are certainly circumstances where protections need to be in place, but we don't want to see information collected for national security used for political expediency.”

It is equally concerned about the nature of our role abroad. Whereas previous generations marked the passage of time by technological advancement – from horse and buggy to rockets and the internet – this generation notes the flux in our position in the world – from the heroes of WWII to the great hegemonists of today. This has been a difficult adjustment. Though this group resists the characterization, they understand how it arose. They believe that the United States' position does entail certain international responsibilities among which are “helping others to obtain the necessities of life, the opportunity to fulfill their dreams, and spreading tolerance for a multicultural approach to solving our problems and living together in peace.” They know the rest of the world does not necessarily see our intent in the same way. “There is an interesting contrast between the world view of a society – a sect, that needs boundaries around it to preserve its single identity and the multicultural identity of most Americans.”

They realize that the image we project abroad is sometimes not a flattering one, and often not an accurate one. “Access to American lifestyle thru media zoomed into the rest of the world on TV sets and in movie theaters is really awful.” Though members of this generation pride themselves on their tolerance, they feel that what fails to get communicated is that the tolerance allows much freedom of expression that is not mainstream thought. “A TV show, a magazine article, a political statement are all tolerated here, but that's a long way from representing American culture.”

Many in this generation have had a chance to explore other cultures, often through meetings with others in their field. “Europeans and Americans have totally different approaches toward disease,” noted one medical professional. “We see disease as something that invaded the body, and the way to fix it is to cut it out or kill it because it's unnatural, whereas they don't see it that way; they seek to make the body stronger by using the body's natural systems to overcome it. Our philosophy is that doing something is better than doing nothing and their philosophy is often that doing nothing is better. It's fascinating how our view of life infuses itself into the way we do or don't do many things and affects the outcomes.”

In citing columnist Thomas Friedman's view that the only hope for Islam is to become tolerant and multicultural, one participant says, “that sounds good to me, but is that not asking other parts of the world to accept this multicultural, tolerant view? I'd like to think that the great past could somehow be resurrected, and if a tolerant strain of Islam – and there are some Islamic liberals – comes forward and gains some purchase in the Islamic world then it will build on that kind of self-identity past, not adopting American ways. They'll have to go back and find their own roots, and I think that's where they will find it if this happens.”

Acknowledging that “many of these other countries have such a long history compared to ours,” this generation expressed concern about the ability to export a multicultural acceptance in many places in the world so that diverse peoples can live together with some degree of harmony. “How do you change the paradigm in places like the eastern European countries, which were fighting over issues that go back centuries from family to religion to geography? The Russians came in and put a cap on it. They left, and immediately people went back to the same mindset and the same concerns. How do you move people beyond the prejudices of their grandparents? How do you free them from their history?”

They stress the need for a sense of self – personal authority in developing a free society. “When I was in Turkey and the Clinton fiasco was in full bloom, the Turkish students were just amazed that Americans as individuals could affect their government so strongly. A tradition of totalitarianism allows you only to take orders. What is needed is almost a generational change. As one of my Turkish students said, ‘The Sultan has been gone a long time now, but it's not a recessive gene yet. The memory is there. Grandfather goes in and comes out without his head.'”

And they talked about the law as a substitute for warfare, giving the underdog the power to change things. “Civil rights was a big transformation in our lifetimes and that transformation happened largely because of what happened in the courts. The change happens when people have a legal system that they trust and claim their rights.”

They look with concern at the growing disparity between the haves and the have-nots and note the complexity when the problem is cross-cultural. “We were in India when WTO protests were occurring. Americans were protesting for regulation to limit labor exploitation. Indians were saying these restrictions would take their economic advantage – low wages. That was the official position of their delegation. They can't meet those standards.”
“We talk about reaching out to the rest of the world, but ‘reaching out to the rest of the world' is not the way I'd put it. We're the great imperial power of our day. We took over from the British. People by the thousands opted into their system and took it as their own. But others turned resentments of imperial abuses into national resistance movements.”

They find worrisome the multinational corporations as concentrations of power outside state boundaries. They see our failure to join the Kyoto accord as a real misstep. Kyoto was “an attempt to find a consensus everybody can buy into – everybody but us.”

They talk with hope about those who try to circumvent the political constraints – an international community of people – scientists, human rights and public health workers, nongovernmental organizations. And even within the governments they see possibilities in a movement called “transgovernmentalism,” or national governments cooperating to address international problems. They see the internet as a major help in providing a free flow of information.

On the other hand, this tidal wave of information can be overwhelming. “Villagers with cell phones can threaten the old ways.” Still, on balance they see openness of communication as a good thing – governments have difficulty suppressing it. “The Soviet Union and all of that indoctrination that didn't take. It's very hard to control information. The greatest protection against corruption if there's a relative freedom of information in a country is transparency – a big buzz word now – just expose the bastards. It doesn't always work, but just keep at it and it will. I think it will. I think it's a positive movement and it depends upon that kind of open communication.”

They admire the sincerity and dedication of the younger generation and their willingness to spend years of their lives in minimal conditions trying to help. “I talk to students I'm taking to India . All of them have a strong need to be positive helpers. They will spend time with NGOs doing world development work. I tell them ‘you have to be prepared to be disappointed that your help may not be wanted. But if there is a strong indigenous, grassroots based development going on and there are ways you can support that, do it; just remember it's theirs.'” They see a purity in the motives of the younger generation that was often missing in earlier approaches that provided help with a catch be it religious conversion or resource exploitation.

“There are at least two particularly positive ideas that I run into as I travel,” offered a participant who had done much work abroad. “The first is that our higher education system excels. That was a surprise to me thinking about the Sorbonne and Heidelberg, but I was assured that in just about every discipline higher education in the United States excels.

“The second is that despite all the criticism, we are still viewed as a place where individual rights and human freedom are honored and that the opportunities for whatever you want to do with them are here. From the outside, that's one thing other people still seem to have a great deal of regard for – our respect for the rights and liberties of individuals in this country under our government.”