[yobbo]

It seems likely that "gen z" americans have few clues about what historic and present day russia is, and generally about the land mass between Poland and Korea.

They are just now waking up from two years of debating whether not wearing masks was a hate crime.

Maybe in their minds, the conditions on the opposite side of the world just seem too brutal to belong in the same reality. It looks and sounds too crazy to be real, so they can't decide if it's fake.

[dekhn]

I was a high school student during the collapse of the SU and even before that had a bit of a fascination on Russia. When I went to college (~1992), I took a Russian Politics class because I wanted to understand the collapse and what was going to happen. at the end of the course the teacher asked if we thought that Russia was on its way to becoming a western democracy and we all nodded. He said "you learned NOTHING! Nothing has changed in Russia except a slightly newer generation is in power. Their leadership and government are still corrupt and are handing over the russian state assets to oligarchs who share little with the people of russia. By the way, keep your eyes on these guys Khodorkovky (the oligarch) and Zhirinovsky (the ultra-nationalist) as they represent two directions that Russia could go."

I don't recall putin or medvedev ever being mentioned in that class, but it's clear that's the time that mattered to them, defining their worldview.

[ksec]

>"you learned NOTHING! Nothing has changed in Russia except a slightly newer generation is in power.

Words of Wisdom. It is the same with China as well. On the surface your might think things are moving in the direction to whatever you viewed or desire, western democracy in this case. But as your professor stated. Nothing has changed.

[oxfeed65261]

Btw, Zhirinovsky just died; The Economist has an obituary in the current issue.

https://www.economist.com/obituary/2022/04/16/vladimir-zhiri...

[dekhn]

Yup! my professor was right, russian politics changes very slowly.

[pueblito]

Or, maybe, they grew up talking to people from all over the world and have a far better understanding than boomers raised on television

[fhood]

Neither is correct. Gen Z, like all young generations, is idealistic, anti-status quo, and thinks their experiences and perspectives are completely unique and novel. As they get older they will transition, hopefully retaining some of their more progressive and forward thinking values, which will become imbedded in society and so the cycle will continue.

[ksec]

The problem is we are not seeing this "As they get older they will transition" that usually happens.

What we are seeing, is that the transition out of the idealistic world view, is happening at a much later age. That is already happening with Gen Y or Millennials, and especially those in Tech. People who are over 40s still have these simplistic world view.

I dont know what it is about Tech. But it is especially problematic in tech.

[erdos4d]

Former university lecturer here. In my experience, gen Z have ZERO understanding of history or geopolitics. I'm serious, they just don't know what happened before their lifetime and cannot hold a coherent conversation about historical events or the geopolitical realities which flow from them. So no, this is not true.

[mistrial9]

I have dealt with people on a large spectrum of literacy -- it is true that many people have little practical knowledge of even major international events, but a simple measure misses an important point. People care about those events to vastly different degrees; people know about those events to vastly different degrees; and then people know and care about parts of real history, in skewed and incomplete ways, as an inevitable part of the human condition.

by example -- I knew about ancient greeks partly due to interest in classics as a young intellectual.. most people at that age did not know any details of ancient greeks. But I did not care very much about military history, so even if I knew it, I didnt factor it into relevant thinking. Next, wrt middle ages history of Ottoman slave society, fluxes in military rule in North Africa, or endless tribal and cultural clashes in eastern Europe.. I just did not know many of those things, to this day. Maybe I might care, but I had literally not heard of certain things (like Mongols in Poland, or Napolean imprisoning a sitting Pope, or Vikings in Turkey) and did not know they existed, even as as active learner.

So to sum up, people may know a little bit, but do not care, therefore do not apply it to reasoning. Even people who do have greater capacity for details, may not know, due to incomplete learning and local teaching of history. Last, wikipedia really is a remarkable thing in our time.

[dekhn]

what's really crazy is my 12 year old is watching a lot of political stuff on youtube and was asking me about what will happen with belarus, and the fate of all the other ex-soviet union countries. He also asks a bunch about world war II, which in my opinion is the most important historical event to understand because it's what led to the current situation.

[bsder]

> Or, maybe, they grew up talking to people from all over the world and have a far better understanding than boomers raised on television

I would argue precisely the opposite.

Support in tech for Ukraine is quite high because most people have worked with Ukranian programmers, generally find them to be decent human beings like all human beings, and seeing posts/pictures from someone you know in the midst of being attacked upsets you.

Most Americans working non-tech jobs, even the supposedly worldly younger-than-Boomers, have never had contact with somebody outside American borders. Tech can expand your world. Tech can also simply provide a safe bubble that never disturbs your delicate sensibilities.

[earleybird]

Case in point, had a meeting at the beginning of this week where the meeting request 'accept' included "we might have to cut short this meeting should the sirens sound, thank you for your patience". Brings things into sharp focus.