Well, like the Czar, you probably call them “generations,” whereas the trendy thing to call them these days is “cohorts.” Although sociologists mock at the idea that people born within certain time-frames share similar, almost predictable values, it’s important to note that more people mock sociologists. While generation gaps are arguable, and some are based on less rationale than others, there are clear differences between people of different ages that range well beyond the physical or psychological: people who grew up together, under different cultural and historical influences, really do view society differently and solve problems in fundamentally different ways.
From time to time, the Czar likes to revisit these differences for you, and put together his observations. Here, in chronological order, are the Czar’s summaries of America’s generational cohorts Zeitgeists.
The Czar understands some groups prefer certain clusterings of birth years; uh-uh: the Czar knows better, and has adjusted some dates below. Additionally, the Czar has identified key splinter groups within some cohorts worth acknowledging.

The Lost Generation

Birth years: 1890 – 1901. The term was coined by Gertrude Stein and popularized by Ernest Hemingway to describe the strange disconnect America’s youth felt during and after World War I.
Characteristics:

• Grew up under Republican prosperity
• Values limited government and individual liberty
• During the Depression, appreciated the value of food and money
• Recognized the horrors of war.

Good news for this generation: Turned out not to be lost, but quite adaptable and capable; saw fantastic transition from agrarian to urbanization and was the first to recognize the value of women and minorities.
Bad news for this generation: You’re pretty much dead already or about to go. It’s been nice knowing you.
“Where were you when” moment: Armistice, 1918.

The Greatest Generation

Birth years: 1901 – 1924. Although this generation had quite a few names, the novel of the same name by Tom Brokaw cemented this name forever.
Characteristics:

• Worshiped FDR and the New Deal
• Volunteered and mobilized to fight fascism, to an indescribable degree
• Could fix or repair just about anything; ask someone from this generation if you doubt it.

Good news for this generation: Beat Hitler.
Bad news for this generation: Terror of growing up in the Depression and fighting fascism made them spoil their kids to the nth degree, creating the Boomers.
“Where were you when” moment: December 7, 1941

The Silent Generation

Birth years: 1925 – 1946. The term originated in Time magazine, noting how they avoided drawing too much attention to themselves; this generation wanted peace and quiet. They didn’t get it.
Sub-generations:

• The Beat Generation
• The Eisenhowers

The Beat Generation

Birth years: 1925 – 1933. The Czar has coined this term.
Characteristics:

• Grew up during World War II and just when they thought the bad times were over, got drafted into the Korean War
• Among the earliest counter-cultures; often skeptical if not disrespectful toward authority. You think M*A*S*H was wholly invented to parody the Vietnam War? No way: there was a fair amount of truth to the erosion of discipline during the Korean War.
• Grew up in small families often run by a single mother due to dads fighting WWII.
• Began to question the use of racial discrimination
• Resented traditional norms: two parents with a non-working mom, classics, fine art. They wanted to do their own thing, baby.

Good news for this generation: Expected their kids to be tougher than they were; don’t mistake their pseudo-liberalism for weakness: most of this generation suffered during their early years and expected the kids to man up the same way.
Bad news for this generation: Ensured we’d have really bad poetry for a long, long time.
“Where were you when” moment: Sputnik.

The Eisenhowers

Birth years: 1934 – 1946
Characteristics:

Valued education and understanding of consumer affairs: last generation who could readily write checks, figure out their own mortgages, calculate compound interest, and pay their own taxes without help.

Fear, paranoia and distrust: always assumed that governments were run by madmen and that nuclear was inevitable.

Made things work, even though the economy of the 1950s and 1960s was heavily taxed and jobs could be scarce.

Began to question the use of racial discrimination

First generation who could expect to live many years into retirement.

Good news for this generation: Conservative and self-sufficient, this generation got America safely through the Cold War until its end.
Bad news for this generation: Probably the last generation who would be educated in traditional ethics and civics.
“Where were you when” moment: The Cuban Missile Crisis

The Baby Boomers

Birth years: 1946 – 1963, although these numbers vary as various authors try to exclude themselves from this group by adjusting the dates. Named after the sudden explosion in births as Americans came home at the end of the war and rebuilt families.
Sub-generations:

• The Hippies
• The Post-Boomers

The Hippies

Birth years: 1946 – 1955, although the term “hippies” describes more of a culture than an actual belief. Lots of people born in these years weren’t hippies, although that doesn’t guarantee they were likable.
Characteristics:

• Self-centered, obnoxious, and fixated on their own worldviews, this was the first group acutely aware that it was its own generation; as a result, it defined itself internally by what it wanted, rather than let itself be define by external demands
• Nakedly leftist and even dangerous
• Under-educated by their own insistence at softening education, they were easily manipulated by smarter forces.
• Responsible for love-ins, widespread drug abuse, easy divorce, lousy sex, disco, all of the 1970s, horrific design and style (earth tones, bell bottoms, sideburns, pop art, psychedelic fonts, yuppies, tree hugging, New Age crystal healing, junk bonds, four or five recessions, new math, Andrew Lloyd Weber, the collapse of Black America, Common Core, the Clintons, and everything that’s retro now that was just as bad when it was new.
• Explosive growth in government

Good news for this generation: They generally can be credited with some seriously kick-ass music. Really, even if you hate Pink Floyd, the Beatles, or Prog Rock, that was some pretty cool stuff.
Bad news for this generation: They’re still peddling their egocentric fantasy that they were right about everything, and today’s kids don’t realize how disastrous nana and papa’s philosophies are.
“Where were you when” moment: The Kennedy Assassination, before which and after which nothing else seems to have mattered.

The Post-Boomers

Birth years: 1950 – 1963, maybe. The Czar coined this term in response to a backlash effort he saw by older Boomers.
Characteristics:

• Strong libertarian streak; most dyed-in-the-wool libertarians (“wing nuts”) are from this era.
• Early adoption of Reaganism and its outpouring of optimism.
• Strong sense of entrepreneurialism, especially toward technology and expanding small business by understanding value of quality and customer service (having survived the 1970’s collapse in both).

Good news for this generation: After howling for decades about libertarianism, they’re finally getting some respect and attention.
Bad news for this generation: They generally don’t vote in large enough numbers to make a difference, writing off everything good as the enemy of the perfect.
“Where were you when” moment: Nixon’s resignation.

Generation X

Birth years: 1964 – 1982, or possibly 1985. It depends on your view of a sub-group that followed it. This generation was often called the Latchkey generation until Douglas Coupland reintroduced the phrase Gen X in his 1991 novel (the term did not originate with him, but was in use as early as 1965).
Characteristics:

• Cynical, sarcastic, and skeptical of most traditional institutions
• Considerably self-educated, given that they learned to detect bullshit at an early age
• Generally conservative and libertarian leaning; some of its liberal members are obnoxiously shallow
• Transitioned the world onto the Internet
• Struggling to maintain a belief in faith and religion
• Able to process and sift through an incredible amount of simultaneous information; although they do not multitask as well as later generations, the Gen Xers are quick to identify and reject trends as non-productive.
• Small population has neutered much of its political effectiveness

Good news for this generation: as Boomers die, retire, and lose interest in politics, their voting influence is growing.
Bad news for this generation: They are out-numbered by Millennials, who now have enough members entering voting age to counteract all gains made by Gen Xers.
“Where were you when” moment: The Challenger explosion. If this seems odd, ask any Gen Xers where they were during the explosion, and you’ll get an answer, even if they were toddlers at the time.

The Slackers

Birth years: Okay, maybe 1981 – 1988. The Czar came up with the term, although much of this group prefers to call themselves, with characteristic lack of ingenuity, as Generation Y. Pffft.
Characteristics:

• Fascination with pop culture and Top 10 lists.
• Skateboards and marijuana.
• They emerged as skaters and Goths, until the term Emo became vogue. They now write vampire books for teenagers because, like the Boomers, they are self-absorbed with their own pop culture. It’s probably important to point out that the Boomers actually had a sense of culture. The Emos just hated everything, buddy. They couldn’t even cough up a decent punk culture like the post-boomers did.
• Not terribly interested in work, many of them went to work at Blockbuster video until their dead weight collapsed that titan, too.
• They don’t vote. They generally have little understanding of conservatism or liberalism.
• Thanks for pushing tattoos and piercings on all the kids. Really helped. Thanks.

Good news for this generation: They’re now at an age where they’re starting to recognize they need to take life seriously. Or else, they’ve starved to death being the 35-year-old cashier at Taco Bell full of ink and stubble.
Bad news for this generation: Know who cares less than you? Life. Life cares less than you. Time to wake up, dudes.
“Where were you when” moment: Y2K.

The Millennials

Birth years: 1983 – 2000ish. The name Millennial first appeared in the early 1990s.
Characteristics:

• Fairly naive compared to previous generations about manners, work ethics, dress, politics, family life, and retirement
• Grew up with low self-esteem and constant need to be rewarded or acknowledged
• Reliance on social media, although this is probably an offshoot of their need to be acknowledged
• Multitask to an amazing degree, and while they have trouble adhering to a 9-to-5 schedule, actually are more inclined to work 24 hours a day if you approach them through texts and email
• Often under-educated through a variety of pedagogical experimentation and lax testing of applied knowledge; Millennials often feel they can just “look it up on Google.”
• Although the first wave is stultifyingly liberal and often to a fascistic degree, when asked about government takeover of their favorite web-based businesses, show a strong anti-government streak
• May be showing early signs of a libertarian attitude: starting to reject the Democrat party in larger numbers, voted for Trump in surprisingly high numbers, all for legalization of many goods and services; unfortunately, may also skew toward nationalistic without understanding crucial differences
• Materialistic, particular about clothing and technology and high-rent apartments

Good news for this generation: There is substantial reason for optimism: they are starting to get their act together—Millennials are starting to save money for homes, are beginning to embrace marriage, and are now even saving for retirement (something they historically avoided)
Bad news for this generation: This generation is often gullible and lockstep. The longer they are out of the collegiate leftist education camps, the more they reject their upbringing and struggle to develop individual responsibility and political thought.
“Where were you when” moment: September 11, 2001.

Generation Z

Birth years: 2001 – to the present. The term Generation Z was an obvious continuation of the X and Y pattern; there’s a pair of movements afoot to name this generation either Founders (the term was coined by MTV, although its meaning seems vaguely to refer to this generation founding a new society after the mess they perceive being made by the Millennials) or Homelanders (named after the Department of Homeland Security, which is about as probable as Gen Xers being called HUDders). Neither of those will probably stick, and if you look at the history of naming generations, the actual name will come later—and was probably proposed in 2002 or 2003…we just haven’t circulated it enough yet for it to stick.
Characteristics:

• Completely integrated into digital technology: they will transcend both the internet and social media by staying in close contact through social networks hundreds or thousands strong via texting and other instant communication methods
• Consumer-oriented; although some analysts believe they are prone to spend money, the Czar anticipates they only do so after extensive consideration of value versus costs. Today’s kids seem to be able to evaluate product features carefully, even for relatively trivial items.
• Likely going to be quite conservative; however, have little concept of religious faith or its value to a stable society
• Educated, and will reject (or bypass) Common Core for more active learning. Curious and able to connect disparate information together quickly and likely to double-check statements with a variety of sources.
• Will likely see a collapse of higher education; this generation will likely benefit from a subsequent reformation of academia or will reject college for trade schools and internet-based learning.
• Because of their diverse backgrounds, this generation is more likely to value teamwork, cooperation, and assimilation more than modern diversity, largely because they do not observe significant functional differences between individuals (having been hammered to ignore aspects such as race, orientation, religion, disability, or economic background).

Good news for this generation: Has never known a really shitty superhero movie.
Bad news for this generation: Will likely be stuck with ultimate consequences of crushing government debts and costs of tolerating Boomers when the latter were alive.
“Where were you when” moment: This has not yet occurred for them, but will likely occur in the next five-to-seven years.

GorT carefully peeked into his Facebook and Twitter this morning to get a lay of the land. My takeaway: democrats/liberals/those on the left (choose your terminology) have a lot of free time. I honestly don’t know what they’re doing. I have a dog that needs walking, laundry that needs washing, folding, and ironing, dishes to wash, a house to clean, a job that while it is notionally an 8-hour-a-day job sometimes has me working in the evenings, three kids to manage, and yes, a wife who I love spending time with doing things other than the list above. Sigh. In my social media feeds, there are numerous examples of those on the left who dedicated time watching the vote in Congress on the GOP Healthcare efforts. Aside from the likelihood that this kind of practice encourages the 24-second news cycle where all sorts of poor journalism takes place, how does that vote change your life that immediately that you couldn’t wait for the morning news cycle.  Seriously, folks posted that they were staying up, even though they had early morning cross-country flights.

I get that the bill is a mess. I’d argue that PP-ACA and the way it was crafted really pushed us into this mess. And to deflect any early criticism of that statement consider the following:

1. It was a huge modification to the health care insurance market – a private sector business area over which the Constitution provides no authority – done in a single bill over the span of one and a half Congressional sessions.
2. While the democrats provided for more “preliminary” opportunities for working across the aisle, the net result was largely a closed-door effort by the democrats that was passed with legislative maneuvering.
3. Key advertised benefits of the bill were completely false, and known to those advertising it before the vote (“you can keep your plan, if you like it”).
4. Many claim that the democrats incorporated hundreds of GOP amendments – in reality, most of those were technical in nature and not substantive to the bill.

 

So, if people wonder why the GOP is so bent on repealing it, consider the origin. Imagine if, in 2008, Congress tackled some small things related to health care insurance – managing the pre-existing condition issue, enabling competition across state lines, tort reform, etc. We wouldn’t have Rep Pelosi’s infamous quote, “you have to pass the bill to know what’s in it.” – and no, that’s not because of the length but because of the sheer size of the change and all of the dust it kicked up.

But back to my main point: if you have the stomach, go check out social media or just various sites on the internet. The amount of time and effort made by people about how torn they are about McCain – he’s a hero for fighting cancer (yeeeaahhh! He’s a hero!!!) but then he returns to vote to open a floor debate on the bill (Booooo! He’s the devil incarnate!) and then joins with a few other GOP senators to vote down the bill (Yeeeahhh! He’s hero….I think). And the hyperbole is over the top – tens of millions will lose their healthcare and die next year. The conflation of health care and health care insurance and the government’s involvement in it is a topic we covered on our podcast so I won’t repeat it here – it’s worth a listen.

Finally, imagine a country where people don’t spend this sort of focus on these things. Where political decisions don’t become such a spectator sport that encourages the players (our elected officials) to keep their positions almost regardless of their job, and where people can actually have a healthy debate on topics. Maybe one where small changes are considered before multi-Trillion dollar programs are legislatively maneuvered into effect with the understanding that undoing them will be terribly difficult. Maybe I’m trying to push grandma over the cliff in her wheelchair, but if you want government not to tell you what to do  – with your body, your health decisions, or your life, then get them out of the health care AND health care insurance business.

 

The Czar’s post on displaying flags on vehicles encouraged a few of you to respond. While these were uniformly positive, two of them had either questions or an additional thought.

From devoted Operative R, the following observations arrived:

Your recent comments on Flag protocol and the abuses thereof are well taken and timely. Due to the fact that there is an entanglement between Flag protocol and the First Amendment, almost all provisions of the protocol take the form “should be.” Even after much searching, I have not located a penalty section. Notable, for the same reason, is the section which prohibits condo associations from preventing display of the Flag.

Although the flag code itself does not provide any guidelines on punishing those who violate the flag code, 18 USC Sec. 700 01/02/2006 does provide for fines and imprisonment for desecration of the flag; however, as R notes, paragraph (d) of Title 18, Section 700, notes that an immediate appeal can be made to the Supreme Court of the United States if the accused believes the act was executed under the First Amendment—and if the Court has not ruled favorably on behalf of the accused under a previous review.

Condominium associations and homeowner’s associations are a mixed bag. Yes, sometimes, there’s no reason for an association to pester a homeowner about their flag other than another cranky resident doesn’t like it. But very often, if you read the story carefully, you realize there is indeed something there—either the flag’s display violates the code, or the flag was mounted precariously, or it’s oversized and infringing on another’s property, and so on. Generally, you can tell by the middle of the story whether or not the homeowner is in the right, here, or if—yeah—the association got it right and the homeowner is being a jerk with the flag. As the Czar stated, most violations originate out of ignorance—the offender honestly thinks he or she is being patriotic here, and doesn’t realize there’s disrespect occurring.

Operative B adds a couple of comments:

As a US Navy Veteran, I qualify for veteran license plates for my vehicles—which do have a flag on them. Both my car and my motorcycle are equipped with veteran’s license plates. When parked in my driveway, my veteran’s license plates are clearly seen from the street.

Thus, I am always proudly flying the flag.

• The flag should always be displayed with the star field facing forward, e.g. the field always leads the rest of the flag. The person who owns that Jeep was following Army Regulation DA PAM 670–1, 21-18, which states (in paragraph 2): “The U.S. flag embroidered insignia is worn so that the star field faces forward, or to the flag’s own right. When worn in this manner, the flag is facing to the observer’s right and gives the effect of the flag flying in the breeze as the wearer moves forward.”

  Since the Jeep was using a sticker – or what might be considered a “patch”—this person was doing it right. This is also why you sometimes see flag patches on the right shoulder that look “reversed.”

• One other thing: according to 4 U.S. Code § 8(k) “ The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning.” Those “patriots” who fly a flag on their vehicles that is obviously ripped, tattered, coming apart, or otherwise imperfect, are violating the US flag code. In truth, as a veteran, I’d prefer that these idiots use stickers instead.

Let’s be careful on the canton of the flag (star field). The star field should always be in the upper left on a full flag as you face it. A patch on a uniform does not qualify because it’s not a true flag—there’s no backside to it, and it can’t wave in the breeze. The uniform patch isn’t covered by the flag code, but it is covered by Defense Department regulations as cited by Operative B. Because most NATO nations wear their country’s flag on the right shoulder, the United States moved our flag patch to the right shoulder…which meant the flag looked like it was flying backward. To fix this perception, the flag actually is reversed so that it looks like the service member is moving forward, which was controversial at the time, but most people now think looks pretty cool.

Again, patches really don’t qualify as full flags—although make no mistake, readers, that the patches are treated with utmost respect by our service members—so the uniform patch is not in violation of the flag code. Likewise, there’s no reason for a vehicle to display a reversed flag, either—it’s not bound by DoD requirements; if you do choose to display a reversed flag, it’s because you think it looks better that way.

Your last point is the Czar’s preferred position: use a sticker, magnetic decal, or silkscreen flag on your vehicle. The Stars and Stripes certainly indicate to viewers that you respect the flag, without you having to risk violating the Flag Code because you might be too lazy to read it.

And, yeah, B—if someone is violating the Flag Code by hanging a flag off the back of his vehicle, odds are good he’s violating the Code by having a flag in unacceptable condition as well. That’s two strikes.

Tip for our readers: No United States flag is ever considered obsolete. That 13-star flag you have for Independence Day? That’s an American flag, and falls under the Flag Code. That 48-star flag your uncle brought back from Dubya-dubya Two? That’s also an official flag, and leaving it dumped on the attic floor is a no-no. There are currently twenty-six official American flags that fall under the Flag Code. If you have a Gadsden flag or a Bennington flag or a Betsy Ross flag, those are not covered by the Flag Code, but you know what? Operative R, Operative B, and the Czar will all appreciate it if you treated these with the same level of dignity and respect.

Listeners of our podcasts got quite the lecture from GorT on the importance of brining, to which Ghettoputer and the Czar immediately agreed. Brining meats before cooking them is often helpful, sometimes essential.

The Czar likes to brine poultry…although arguments can be made more almost any meat. Brining is the process of soaking meats in salt water (brine); via osmosis, a chemical reaction occurs in which the cells of the meat soak up the salt, which in turn soaks up the water. When the meat is heated during cooking, the salt releases the water back into the cells, resulting in an especially juicy chunk of meat.

This sounds easy, and it is—but there is one especially important thing to remember: the formula to create proper brine. You can’t, despite what the Czar reads from internet grillers from time to time, just dump salt into water. There’s a specific ratio of salt to water you need to use. This isn’t advanced chemistry, fortunately, so just read this post.

Sunday, we decided to do a duck and a chicken on the smoker. The reason for the chicken is that duck is a tremendously expensive way to get very little meat on your plate. The Czar can do many things, but feeding four hungry people off one duck is a miracle equivalent to loaves and fishes. So to add meat to the pile, we threw a chicken into the mix.

Here’s the duck, all defrosted and washed clean, resting on a plastic bag because we really hate contaminating the food with stuff left on the worksurface.

And here are the solid ingredients for the brine. This is a quarter-cup of sea salt (or any kosher salt…iodized salt has different properties and should be avoided when brining…trust us on this) and a quarter-cup of brown sugar. The sugar is unimportant to the process. All you need is salt and water. Frankly, most brine recipes contribute little to nothing to the final flavor of the meat and are a good waste of herbs and spices. Brown sugar however helps make the meat surface a bit sticky, which is important when smoking the meat. Sticky meat traps smoke particles better.

Now we add four cups of warm water and stir to dissolve the sugar and salt. The duck is immersed in this bath. Actually, to be honest, we used a half cup of salt and half cup of brown sugar, and added 8 cups of warm water because the duck was a big guy. The brining formula is quarter-cup of salt to four cups of warm water. Write that down. Anything else you add is immaterial. And yes, you can use beer as a substitute for water…that does impart a slight flavor to the meat, though, especially if it’s an ale.

Every few hours, the Czar rolled this bird over to ensure the whole bird was soaking in the brine since birds tend to float. Two things to observe: first, yes, ducks contain a lot of blood. Chickens generally don’t leak this much when brining, but ducks sure do. The second is to compare the water level in this photo to the one above: see how much salt water the duck absorbed? That’s the photo-proof that brining is a superb way to get moisture into meats.

The Czar also made up a second batch of brine and poured that into a whole roaster chicken stuffed into a gallon plastic bag. Here they are, reunited:

The Czar got the smoker going with cherry wood and Kingsford briquettes. You can slow-cook poultry a little hotter than pork, so the Czar was aiming for a smoking temperature between 200° and 275°, which due to the wind, fluctuated between these values.

Duck and chicken should be cooked to a temperature of 152° – 155°, and then held at this temperature for two to three minutes. This temperature, plus this holding trick, kills more bacteria and bad things on the meat as well as cooking it to 165°, but without drying out the meat. The USDA knows this, and publishes this information on their website, but understanding that most cooks are idiots, has them get the temp to 165&deg. That kills everything, but dries chicken into cardboard. The USDA correctly acknowledges that cooking chicken to a lower temperature is just as safe, but you have to hold it at this lower temperature for a longer period of time.

Here’s the birds on a foil tray; the tray was too large for the smoker, so we curled up the edges.

When the temperature probe hit 152° we counted to two minutes and thirty seconds, whisked the birds off the smoker, and put them on the grill for a bit at 300°, just to gently crisp the skins. We don’t eat the skins, but it helps loosen them up a bit for easy removal.

Anyway, the results were terrific. The chicken was gently smoky in flavor but very moist. The duck was tender, and the little bit of meat we got off it was a classic taste and texture: picture a blend of turkey and steak.

Duck’s probably not your thing, and maybe you’re not into smoking. The point is that none of this is essential: brining, however, can improve your chicken—and other meats—whether you smoke, grill on gas, grill on coals, oven-roast, or bake. And the quarter-cup salt to four cups of water ratio is the secret.