by Marc » Sun Feb 05, 2012 9:04 pm
Hi, Higgie,
Funny, for a long time, I too have thought about the mythical character Gordon Gekko's famous phrase "Greed is good" in the movie Wall Street — and how it was uttered before I and the rest of the "Reagan Youth" could do much within the banks and corporations. I'm going to postulate a hybrid theory that is admittedly a re-hashing of what I've mentioned before, but which takes both your and John's ideas into account: I do feel, as a Gen-X'er, that we were heavily raised (as a group) to be frequently amoral and badassed. What so frequently characterized our growing up was a dearth of love and a dearth of structure, facilitated by grownups (that is, as we X'ers grew up) who so often didn't really care holistically about our welfare. That sort of thing surely left a mark.
However, with the Gordon Gekkos of the world who were off "doing their thing" by the mid-1980s, what I feel you had going on is the existence of many Boomer, many Silent, and probably even some G.I. generational cohorts who, having been "extra liberated" by the ushering in of the Third Turning, were willing and able to act in greedy or amoral ways, even though the coming-of-age Generation-X'ers were being perfectly cultivated for the task. Thus, if you take the way that Gen-X'ers were raised, and couple it with what they experienced as they came of age (e.g., "shareholder value," "mean and lean," "just-in-time" supplier/HR networks, mergers and acquisitions and IPOs galore, etc.), you have the coming together of "Nomad nurturing" with "Third Turning behavioral shaping" to produce particularly venal Nomads in many cases. But yes, I would have to essentially agree with you, Higgie, that that "Third Turning ethos" which was heavily orchestrated by non–Gen X'ers helped to shape Gen-X venality and fraud as Gen-X'ers gained significant positions within organizations. Venal as they could also be at times, Boomers and Silents, as John mentioned, generally couldn't have created super-complex financial derivatives and such, whereas the extra-venal and frequently-more-analytical Gen-X'ers could frequently do so. But, all in all, there is ample blame to go around, I do feel, for who was the enabling factor in the rampant financial fraud that has recently occurred. Thanks for sharing your valuable perspective. —Best regards, Marc
Hi, Higgie,
Funny, for a long time, I too have thought about the mythical character Gordon Gekko's famous phrase "Greed is good" in the movie [i]Wall Street[/i] — and how it was uttered before I and the rest of the "Reagan Youth" could do much within the banks and corporations. I'm going to postulate a hybrid theory that is admittedly a re-hashing of what I've mentioned before, but which takes both your and John's ideas into account: I do feel, as a Gen-X'er, that we were heavily raised (as a group) to be frequently amoral and badassed. What so frequently characterized our growing up was a dearth of love and a dearth of structure, facilitated by grownups (that is, as we X'ers grew up) who so often didn't really care holistically about our welfare. That sort of thing surely left a mark.
However, with the Gordon Gekkos of the world who were off "doing their thing" by the mid-1980s, what I feel you had going on is the existence of many Boomer, many Silent, and probably even some G.I. generational cohorts who, having been "extra liberated" by the ushering in of the Third Turning, were willing and able to act in greedy or amoral ways, even though the coming-of-age Generation-X'ers were being perfectly cultivated for the task. Thus, if you take the way that Gen-X'ers were raised, and couple it with what they experienced as they came of age (e.g., "shareholder value," "mean and lean," "just-in-time" supplier/HR networks, mergers and acquisitions and IPOs galore, etc.), you have the coming together of "Nomad nurturing" with "Third Turning behavioral shaping" to produce particularly venal Nomads in many cases. But yes, I would have to essentially agree with you, Higgie, that that "Third Turning ethos" which was heavily orchestrated by non–Gen X'ers helped to shape Gen-X venality and fraud as Gen-X'ers gained significant positions within organizations. Venal as they could also be at times, Boomers and Silents, as John mentioned, generally couldn't have created super-complex financial derivatives and such, whereas the extra-venal [i]and[/i] frequently-more-analytical Gen-X'ers could frequently do so. But, all in all, there is ample blame to go around, I do feel, for who was the enabling factor in the rampant financial fraud that has recently occurred. Thanks for sharing your valuable perspective. —Best regards, Marc