Admittedly, the world is experiencing a generational overhaul as people continue ageing every day. With modernization as the dominant driving force of the generational change, many aspects of life remain unsettled due to the changing preferences and traditions with each coming generation. The dawning of a new age implies that the social and economic elements of the society must be adjusted to accommodate the newcomers who are undoubtedly distinct from their predecessors. For instance, the baby boomer's generation is entirely different from generation Z. As a result, the market at the moment is undergoing a thorough transformation as entrepreneurs struggle to incorporate the preferences of generation Z cohorts. Despite the intergenerational behavioral disparity, there is a growing trend of intergenerational conflict that threatens the coexistence of old and young society members (Behrens). Due to the uniqueness of each generation regarding their preferences, behavior, and virtues, generational cohorts often find a conflict of interest in various aspects thus creating a semblance of violence in society (Behrens). Society fails to recognize the incompatibility existing between the old and young people causing a misunderstanding as to why some individuals behave in certain manners.
In the U.S, it is estimated that the old population will outweigh the young generation in the coming years (Meara). A survey conducted in 2018 indicated that people above the age of 60 would be many compared to people under the age of 18. The shift in the population will automatically poise significant implications to America. Competition for the scarce resources will increase with a likelihood of conflicts arising thereof. Isolation and division in society will also suffice due to the behavioral and moral differences. Henceforth, adverse consequences associated with age disparity will unfold creating additional harm to the community (Behrens). Therefore, addressing the generational dispute between the old and young generation is incremental to the efforts of building a productive society. Old and young individuals should learn to coexist and help each other progress in life (Behrens). Although I agree that the need to have a cosmopolitan society compromising of old and young people is essential, I disagree with author's optimism concerning the possibility of finding common ground between the old and the young because of adverse differences apparent between the new and old generations.
Summary of the writer's argument
The writer has highlighted and acknowledged the risks of having an age-based divided society. Mr. Freedman understands that the habit of citizens segregating themselves based on generational lines is consequential to the well-being of a nation both on a social and economic approach. He says, "In an edgy new get-out-the-vote ad aimed at young people, a half dozen senior citizens taunt the younger generation, calling themselves a "generation of doers" not "whiners." Through his remarks, one can notice his worries regarding how things will be handled in the future when the older population surpasses the young. There is a historically set precedent that tends to associate a generation to its most common character. For example, the baby boomers are known to be hard workers because they experienced economic hardships during their childhood which hardened them. On the hand, generation Z is referred to as the lazy generation because they were born during the technological era where almost everything is digitalized. In a disguised way, Mr. Freedman expresses his concerns by suggesting the possibility of conflicts between the young and old population. "With that transformation to a more-old-than-young society comes the seeming prospect of scarcity, conflict and isolation."
The writer's main argument is based on his optimism that there is a possibility of building bridges across the generational divide. Having recommended the potential of the society severely suffering from the generational conflicts, Mr. Freedman now thinks that a cooperation-oriented approach will help offset the imbalance between generations. He says, "Without discounting these challenges, I believe there is reason for optimism and the possibility of a far better outcome—one that could help us to avoid conflict and solve problems…" The logical basis for his proposal is the notion that old and young people mutually co-exist and therefore, it is easy to find common ground where the two age groups can share and help build each other. "There is significant evidence from evolutionary anthropology and developmental psychology that old and young are built for each other." According to the writer, some countries like Singapore have successfully implemented an initiative that brings the old and young together with an aim to enhance cohesion in society and intergenerational harmony. Therefore, the writer's standpoint according to his evaluation is practical and can be applied in any country even at the phase of industrialization.
Evaluation of writer's major claims
Mr. Freedman argues that the old and the young mutually co-exist and that they were built for each other. According to him, the two groups are the loneliest in the country and are thus vulnerable to isolation. The level of dependency among them is therefore high with freedman suggesting this as the reason why the young and old need each other. In support of the claim, the writer uses psychological tenets which shows reciprocal relationships between the developing individuals and their ageing counterparts. Although freedman uses scientific evidence to prove his claim, the ideas are theoretical, and their applicability is scattered in real-life scenarios. The young people are characteristically different from the old, and the former is equally unique from the young (Levy, and Macdonald). Their behaviors, preferences and perceptions in life are distinct and cannot be reconciled under any situation whatsoever (Levy, and Macdonald). According to Nelson, the young think that older adults are outdated regarding lifestyle while the old believe that young people are disrespectful and immoral. The age gap between the two cohorts is wide and bridging it especially in modern society is almost impossible (Nelson). Therefore, the complementary relationship between the old and the young proposed by Freedman is hard to realize because of the different perception held by each group.
The writer also makes another claim that the elderly are essential for the well-being of children and the whole species in general. Whereas most scholars concur with freedman's argument that the elderly have rooted instinct to connect in ways that flow down the generational chain, some differ with the claim that old people can help instill good morals to children besides assisting them to develop the desired character. According to (Levy, and Macdonald), people tend to lose the meaning of life when they reach their last stages of life. The sense that they are about to die leaves them with no purpose, and all they can do is sit and wait for death. Therefore, arguing that old individuals can help model a strong charmed generation is misleading. Downie et al. show that children brought up by the grandparents mainly lack morals and barely succeed in life. How a senior man or woman perceive life is different from how a middle-aged adult sees growth. During old age, people want to do good especially to those individuals who are close to them on the basis that they would remain in their mind even after they die (Downie et al.). That is why grandparents become lenient to their grandchildren. Hence, there is a high possibility that older people will corrupt the morals of children more than they can help built good character.
Additionally, Mr. Freedman stages a strong argument that governmental efforts can be used to thwart ageism and help bring the young and old people together. The writer uses significant cases where the society has successfully established generational harmony and cohesiveness by introducing the elderly to provide service in social amenities. Nonetheless, freedman optimism that the same can be replicated in America and other societies in the world is misguided. Implementing a social change in society is difficult and will heavily rely on the culture of a given community (Officer, and de la Fuente-Núñez). The culture in Singapore where the initiative prospered is entirely different from the American culture. The author should not think that the project will be accepted in an American context just because the outcome in Singapore was positive. Hence, the optimistic argument made by Freedman is countered by the scholarly knowledge that the beliefs and culture of society are integral to the successful implementation of a social change.
Conclusion
Inarguably, ageism is one of the broad rising trends in the 21st century. The line between the young and the old is continuously getting conspicuous with little efforts made to address the situation. As a matter of facts, the relationship between these two generational cohorts is turning violent with conflicts arising in most of the common platforms they share. The dawning of industrialization further worsens the division as the youngsters get submerged into the frenzy and the elderly being left out. Going forward, society members will have to undertake numerous changes to ensure a cohesive and inclusive society. The predominant shortfalls include the weak incorporation of technology into society, unresolved conflict of interests between age groups, and non-alignment of societal needs with industrialization and modernization. Although some aspects of modernization such as the internet can be used to handle the challenges, the traditional ways are the most effective in bringing generational harmony. Social media is famously used to address problems in modern society, but I think it will not help navigate ageism because it is out of favor of the elderly who are highly involved in overcoming the generational challenge.
Works Cited
Behrens, Helen. "Ageism Real or Imagined?" Elderly Care 10.2 (2008): 10-13. Web.
Downie, Jill M. et al. "Children Living with Their Grandparents: Resilience and Wellbeing." International Journal of Social Welfare 19.1 (2009): 8-22. Web.
Freedman, Marc. "Building Bridges Across the Generational Divide". WSJ, 2018, https://www.wsj.com/articles/building-bridges-across-the-generational-divide 1541086302. Accessed 7 Dec 2018.
Levy, Sheri R., and Jamie L. Macdonald. "Progress on Understanding Ageism." Journal of Social Issues 72.1 (2016): 5-25. Web.
Meara, J. "Ageism and Age Discrimination". Age and Ageing, vol 33, no. 6, 2004, pp. 646-647. Oxford University Press (OUP), doi:10.1093/ageing/afh215.
Nelson, Todd D. "The Age of Ageism." Journal of Social Issues 72.1 (2016): 191-198. Web.
Officer, Alana, and Vânia de la Fuente-Núñez. "A Global Campaign to Combat Ageism." Bulletin of the World Health Organization 96.4 (2018): 295-296. Web.
