Sen. Rockefeller: ‘people who are 20, 21, 22 years old really don’t have any social values’

A coalition of seven groups representing young people believe that former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a Republican 2012 hopeful, and Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, owe them and the nation an apology for derogatory comments the two have made against America’s youth.

In a letter sent to Gingrich, Rockefeller and a host of political committees and other elected officials, Gingrich and Rockefeller are simultaneously called to answer for remarks they’ve made that shine an unfavorable light on the morals and intelligence of young voters.

During a Senate consumer protection hearing (which Rockefeller, as chairman, led) on online privacy earlier this month, Rockefeller said that “it’s my general feeling that people who are 20, 21, 22 years old really don’t have any social values.” The comments were directed at Mark Zuckerberg, the 27-year-old founder of Facebook, and intended as the Senator’s commentary on the social network’s lax privacy concerns.

Gingrich, during a May 13 speech before the Georgia Republican Party’s state convention, began voicing his belief that young voters should have to pass something akin to an immigration test before being allowed to cast their ballots.

Full: http://washingtonindependent.com/110110/sen-rockefeller-people-who-are-20-21-22-years-old-really-don%E2%80%99t-have-any-social-values

Young people are librul and everybody knows libruls don't have no sohshul valyooz..

Hell most of them haven't even been married once, let alone three times.

:rofl:

were in the streets, striking for peace, marching for women's rights and abortion rights, gay rights. WE had a social conscience based on values and we still do and so do our children.

But I think there is also science that shows the cognitive development in early adulthood places them in a position to be more risk taking and less concerned about possible outcomes - which would kind of point to what Senator Rockefeller was saying. I do think there is some science behind it and it isn't exactly derogatory... Young adults by nature and science are more prone to be bigger risk takers.

until they are twenty-three. Their brains are still developing.

How does Rockefeller take this and turn it into a negative? It is simply science. It has nothing to do with whether or not they are moral or have values.

until 25! (And of course that is the part of the brain that gives us impulse control and the ability to foresee consequences and take them fully into consideration.):

Maturation of the Prefrontal Cortex
The prefrontal cortex, the part of the frontal lobes lying just behind the forehead, is often referred to as the “CEO of the brain.” This brain region is responsible for cognitive analysis and abstract thought, and the moderation of “correct” behavior in social situations. The prefrontal cortex takes in information from all of the senses and orchestrates thoughts and actions to achieve specific goals.1,2

The prefrontal cortex is one of the last regions of the brain to reach maturation. This delay may help to explain why some adolescents act the way they do. The so-called “executive functions” of the human prefrontal cortex include:

Focusing attention
Organizing thoughts and problem solving
Foreseeing and weighing possible consequences of behavior
Considering the future and making predictions
Forming strategies and planning
Ability to balance short-term rewards with long term goals
Shifting/adjusting behavior when situations change
Impulse control and delaying gratification
Modulation of intense emotions
Inhibiting inappropriate behavior and initiating appropriate behavior
Simultaneously considering multiple streams of information when faced with complex and challenging information

This brain region gives an individual the capacity to exercise “good judgment” when presented with difficult life situations. Brain research indicating that brain development is not complete until near the age of 25, refers specifically to the development of the prefrontal cortex. http://www.hhs.gov/opa/familylife/tech_assistance/etraining/adolescent_brain/Development/prefrontal_cortex/index.html

on social values - only to suggest that what he was saying about privacy issues on facebook and other considerations when taken in context probably have some accuracy regarding young adults. Young adults ARE more likely to feel less apprehensive about security issues on facebook because they are less likely to avoid risk...

Edit to add: if you read the article.. it says his statement was directed to Mark Zuckerberg about the lack of privacy controls on facebook (just to give context to my statement above).

teabagger. Polls indicate that this age group is much more accepting of all kinds of differences among people including, but not limited to, different ethnic groups.

There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn't work. - Irving Kristol

Like the US government has any place to complain about lack of respect for privacy?!!

How about if everyone over thirty has to pass a 'brain still processing new information' test before voting?

guiding hand of their elders to send them to die in a foreign country.............

while he was busy voting to send 20-22 year-olds into Iraq

I'm gonna buck the trend here and agree with a small part of the Senator's observation, because it's something I've observed myself. It's anecdotal for the most part and necessarily shrouded in some anonymity. But I would not be surprised to find that there are lots of university staff members who will be willing to confirm this.

College students of today are not the same as students of twenty or more years ago. If one incorrectly isolates just their behavior in college, it's not looking real good, in fact: drug use and drinking appear to be on the rise, as are many of the crimes that fledgling drunks seem prone to committing: vandalism, bullying, fighting, crashing cars, indiscriminate sex and sexual crimes, and so on. Here's a doom-and-gloom report from McPaper that would have long since dropped out had it been a student:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-03-15-college-drug-use_N.htm

In other words, they're behaving just as high school students did twenty years ago and before.

There's a damned good reason for that, which is that high school students are now treated as basically convicts on limited parole. Their behavior in high school is often closely observed and tracked, the "just say no" nonsense even appears to be working, and their drug and alcohol use seems to have dropped somewhat from two decades ago. Even their driving is regulated and curtailed beyond that of normal adults.

And then they go off to college without having developed any actual self control, an army of clockwork oranges who, given their first taste of freedom, naturally exceed that freedom's boundaries as they run through the very same mistakes we old-timers made, only now they're adults and completely liable for every mistake they make as they complete their arrested development. Their experimentation phase is now delayed by high school and magnified by the freedom of choice one enjoys after high school. At the same time, one of the few limited freedoms they have is that of law-of-the-jungle social interaction through communications devices with severe limitations.

Part of the problem is that we lie to them and fill them with nonsense propaganda all through high school, and while it works for a few years sooner or later they figure it out, and then rebel. Part of the problem is that we place pressure on them to behave at a time when their behavior is by comparison almost harmless compared to the damage they can do as fledgling adults.

I think all of these problems could be partially solved by acknowledging a simple truth, which is that if we can teach them to kill and die at seventeen (and we regularly do), then we'd better by God teach them to be ethical and self-sufficient by then, too, instead of tethering them down until some random moment when we cut them adrift without any actual experience of responsibility and consequence.