Role Model Capitalism

[3blake7]

I was thinking, as usual and put my finger on something I would like to discuss. The idea of Role Model Capitalism, which is a phrase I just made up until something better comes along. It's the idea that culture at large has changed, from children looking up to their parents, Hereditary Role Model Monarchy, to it becoming socially acceptable at large to rebel from your parents, to believe they are out-of-date and out-of-touch with how things are for the younger generation, and to find social acceptance outside of the home, in whichever social group that happens to fit. This creates a situation of Role Model Capitalism, where different social groups compete against each other through seduction.

 

The older social groups are still holding on to older methodologies, like obedience which are failing to have the effect that they once had. Nowadays, if you socially reject someone, they will be socially accepted by another social group, the original social group would be out-seduced. If you are cruel to someone because they are different, you'll be out-seduced by a social group that playfully makes fun of them and accepts them anyways. If you demand obedience and treat someone as an inferior, they will find a social group that treats them like an equal and shows them respect, you'll be out-seduced. If you want your child for instance to have your values, you have to out-seduce the competition.

 

Do you believe this is an accurate description of a real sociological mechanism? Also, do you know of a more official label for this?

 

Perhaps parents should be required to get a parenting degree, to understand the psychology and sociology behind parenting, so that they may better parent their children to conform to their values.

Edited May 30, 2015 by 3blake7

[swansont]

I was thinking, as usual and put my finger on something I would like to discuss. The idea of Role Model Capitalism, which is a phrase I just made up until something better comes along. It's the idea that culture at large has changed, from children looking up to their parents, Hereditary Role Model Monarchy, to it becoming socially acceptable at large to rebel from your parents, to believe they are out-of-date and out-of-touch with how things are for the younger generation, and to find social acceptance outside of the home, in whichever social group that happens to fit.

 

When are you claiming this change occurred?

[iNow]

We've always grouped tribally so that's not new. We just have new tribes and readier access to them. Before, it was the clan in the next clearing, the family at the neighboring stream, the pack down the hill, etc. now, it's online discussion forums, Twitter pages, Instagram accounts, ad infinitum, but the underlying mechanism is unchanged (even if the groups from which we can select have exploded in number).

 

Ultimately though, "social norming" and "peer pressure" as existing topics may already cover what you're thinking here.

[3blake7]

 

When are you claiming this change occurred?

 

It didn't happen all at once, to borrow a metaphor there isn't an exact point where you go from young to old, it's too gradual to pinpoint an exact turning point. I would say over the last 200 years. Before cultures were more isolated and so their sociological defense mechanisms were adequate but now there is less isolation so cultures are competing against each other and some have more effective sociological mechanisms for retaining and/or recruiting members.

 

 

We've always grouped tribally so that's not new. We just have new tribes and readier access to them. Before, it was the clan in the next clearing, the family at the neighboring stream, the pack down the hill, etc. now, it's online discussion forums, Twitter pages, Instagram accounts, ad infinitum, but the underlying mechanism is unchanged (even if the groups from which we can select have exploded in number).

 

Ultimately though, "social norming" and "peer pressure" as existing topics may already cover what you're thinking here.

 

I agree the mechanisms haven't changed, just the diversity of the cultures available to a person with the invention the radio/television/internet and more cultures being represented locally.

 

I guess the question I wanted to discuss is more, are some cultures failing to recognize the new environment, the new competition and maladjusting in a subconscious (from a sociological standpoint) attempt to retain members? A good example is older cultures attempting to prevent their youth from being lured into the black market culture. The black market culture really took on a life of it's own in the 70-80s, it diverged from mainstream culture and developed it's own slang, style and even values. That, in my opinion was caused by the downfall of unions, the minimum wage no longer increasing with increases in productivity and the wars on drugs. So, public policy created an environment where a black market would flourish, followed by it's own unique culture, with it's own belief system, and methodologies for recruitment and retention. The government, schools and parents are all attempting to understand the attraction youths have towards these cultures and compete against them. A positive adjustment could be cultures to form community watches, which accept members of all ages, for rap groups to support them and make it cool to be a "good guy".

 

So, in your opinion, what are some maladjustments and better alternatives in the war of cultures?

[iNow]

I think the downfall of unions is more related to an uber wealthy elite powerful few having disproportionate power and recognizing that elimination of unions helped protect said wealth and power so active steps have been taken to demonize and dismantle them, but that's off-topic, I know.

 

The core challenge I have with your premise is that you seem to be trying to generalize a local experience / series of personal anecdotes on to society at large. The new environment you cite is hardly universal and what we see is clearly much more heterogenous. I must stipulate, though, that your point remains somewhat ambiguous and unclear to me so I may not be comprehending your thesis / core thrust properly.

 

More broadly, I'd say extending our sense of community beyond local family, tribe, township, or nation and more toward a global family that's inclusive of all humanity, non-human primates, mammals, non-mammals, and even animals and plants (from local system to ecosystem) would largely be a good thing that would ideally increase our sense of empathy, partnership, collaboration, and long-term collective well-being. In that sense, modern technology and social media is quite likely helping far more in aggregate than it's hurting.

Edited May 30, 2015 by iNow

[MigL]

Also ascribing a 'newness' to youth rebellion is not accurate.

The young have always rebelled against their elders, whether now, 100 yrs ago, 1000yrs ago or even 10000 yrs ago ( it's active even in the animal kingdom ), and is one of the main driving forces for social change.