idk, I have a hard time taking any poll of Americans seriously when it comes to foreign policy in general and Palestine/Israel in particular. Talk to any American for five minutes about the wider world and you’ll quickly realize you may as well be talking to a beagle.
Even when they are honest and can admit they don’t actually know what’s going on in other countries, they will still feel they are entitled to have an opinion on it and that their opinion is correct.
The people who think Taiwan is in New Zealand also have an opinion on Israel and Palestine.
That’s a very broad definition of “correct” on that map lmao.
Yeah why the hell do you pick the ocean instead of the island right there?? Were people asked to use a really tiny touchscreen??
Smh can’t believe this map doesn’t state that all of mainland china belongs to Taiwan.
I guess it depends on the demographics. At my college, there are many black, Hispanic, and Arab students. Almost all of the ones I’ve spoken to are sympathetic towards Palestine.
White people will be weirder about their stances, because as you said, the ones who don’t understand the problem will still end up taking a side due to vibes. The East/southeast Asians I’ve talked to are usually too focus on securing that Lockheed internship to really care.
My bad, I did the thing where I said “Americans” when I should have said “white Americans”.
Shame on you for your erasure.
I got on to my mil about Russia Ukraine a month ago, asking if she knew what eumaidan was or knew anything about Crimea or Donbas. Absolutely no knowledge of any, not even an idea which were places or events. She agreed she didn’t know even the basic history and didn’t bring it up the rest of the week. Que thanksgiving and she’s talking about it again, ask again about those 3, still no clue.
Had she looked up euromaidan since then?
Not op, but no, no she haven’t.
Ding ding
Nope, I’d be surprised if she remembered any of the terms long enough to even attempt to look them up afterwards because she doesn’t care to. If it’s not on CNN it’s not real. Funnily enough though, she’s incredibly pissed Joe lied and is going for a second term although there are no real solutions she could come up with and will still dutifully vote for him. A real gem was “it seems like they don’t even want to win!”
Lol @ white people
The real white man’s burden is having to deal with other white people
Common mayo L
Common
The zoomers are going to put us old people all in the pit and we will deserve it
Ngl sometimes it’s hard to not be mad at every single person over the age of 45 for not murdering at least one fossil fuel exec by now
This was your responsibility assholes, and now I have to live in the world y’all fucked up
People older than like 40 need to start making excuses for the lack of terror
deleted by creator
Edit: sorry I just saw you were referring to people over 40, I haven’t had my coffee yet. Gen X I see you I hear you.
the oldest millennials are 42 this year and 43 next year.
I’m a Zoomer and if you’re talking about the US, communist party membership was literally like 5 times higher in their days than right now
Boomer bashing is dumb
deleted by creator
Yea you’re not wrong, every card carrying boomer I’ve met runs/owns a business nowadays lol
I’m sure it does happen but if ‘every’ Boomer has that life then that might have more to do with where you are or who you surround yourself with, including radicals.
I’ve met a lot of aging Boomer Leftists who are not even homeowners, much less business owners, and barely manage to survive but understand that’s the life they chose for themselves to keep tonsome revolutionary values. Shitting on a whole generation which includes its working class radicals is really misguided, as you said.
Not saying there aren’t based boomers but that’s not really saying much, isn’t the CPUSA notoriously ass? Most communists have no interest in it
The boomers tried to do this when they were still young in the 60s. They ended up blowing themselves up on accident lol
I know what you mean, but there were a lot of violent revolutionary movements that happened worldwide in which people who are now over the age of 45 were the primary participatory demographic.
You can be mad at older revolutionaries for not being successful, and even then the anger is perhaps misplaced, but I don’t think it was for lack of trying.
zoomers
18-34
Removed by mod
Just barely majority zoomers depending on what year you’re using as the cutoff
Removed by mod
yeah I usually use a definition putting zoomers at 26. 27/28 would put me in the zoomer category, and although I know I’m in the “not-quite-millenial, not-quite-zoomer” age range, it just feels like I’m slightly closer to the millenials in how I grew up than the zoomers.
I can relate (in the z-millennial limbo bracket) as my upbringing was probably more like older millennials in that I didn’t have a lot of access to tech & the internet in my early childhood years (family couldn’t afford it) but I relate much more to zoomers than millennials nowadays tbh.
Another poll:
That jump in the 25-34 column is pretty surprising.
From what I’ve seen Gen Z is more staunchly pro-Palestine (probably because of being more informed from social media), whereas millennials are more likely to be lukewarm on the whole thing but generically support peace
Under the same poll, the large majority of 25-34 year olds support a ceasefire, but a big of chunk of those people both support a ceasefire and support Israel. Lot of “Israel has a right to defend itself but Netanyahu has taken things too far” talk from libs like that.
The main reason I have this account is so that I can show it as evidence of mitigating circumstances at my Zoomer-led people’s trial.
I’m a late millennial, I can be a wise old hermit sage to the zoomers in the post climate wars apocalypse era.
talk to enough zoomers and you’ll come to understand that anyone older might as well be a boomer.
Every white Zoomer I’ve met is basically a Vaushite so I don’t hold out a ton of faith. Maybe the POC ones will save us.
there’s gotta be some more rigorous explanation for why in this kind of poll, when you break it down by gender, a majority of men always pick the evil option.
More privilege and more aggressive/violent. Sure one could write a whole essay analyzing this but it should come down to mainly those two reasons
Being a man seems to be far less of a factor than being a KKKraker though.
yeah, but that one makes sense to me. Racewar is the preferred struggle of The West, including Israel. White supremacy and Jewish supremacy are clear allies. maybe it just speaks to my lack of feminist education, but what is particularly masculine about bombing babies? And I realize gender is riven with these sorts of contradictions, but is there not also a masculinity in the palestinian struggle for dignity and freedom from the yoke of imperial domination? Why is that so much less appealing to the USian male?
Men are generally socialized to be more okay with violence and use of force. Some dudes also think it’s unmasculine to call for peace over war. A kind of “fellas, is it gay not to bomb hospitals?”
White supremacy and Jewish supremacy are clear allies.
This is true and it’s so absurd to think about. Imagine telling Hitler that in 80 years the White race will die on the hill of defending Jewish settlers.
White supremacy and Jewish supremacy are clear allies
Patriarchy is male supremacy. Which is why the Andrew Tate crowd, red pill crowd, and so on are all natural allies of the other supremacy groups. All supremacists are advocates of extreme hierarchical domination, and in that they are all allies.
I think a lot of men are very self centered. All their thoughts follow directly from their perspective with little interest elsewhere. To them this is a hypothetical that they are trying to fit themselves into. And a lot of them fantasize about commiting violence in response to percieved disrespect.
“Yeah dude if I get hit I’ll hit back harder. I dont even know what I’d do if a terrorist attack happened here. But it wouldnt be super fucking nice for them. Yeah, no, I dont care about your BS. Make excuses about what led to it if you want. Shit happened and now shit has to happen. Fuck off pussy. Im not soft for anyone, anytime.”
Because a lot of us are kids at heart (aka immature) to whom war is nothing but a show, especially if it’s happening far away.
deleted by creator
That 18-34 is brutal
Yes. Though I would also point out that POC opinion is basically within the margin of error of the same result. Makes me even angrier that people like Juliana Marguiles can say that black folks only support Palestine because they’re brainwashed and feel comfortable walking around in public, and otherwise face zero consequences.
It must have been so much work to brainwash black people to hate apartheid…
So how is millenial/genz discontent going to be dealt with?
i’ve lost track at the number of polls i’ve seen like this throughout the decades as one of the eldest millennials and the biggest take away from every single one is that the ancient adage that we start to track conservatives as we age still mostly holds true. (i’m not sure if i should be glad that i missed the memo).
if things stay on the same course then political leanings will change; but watching Palestinian support drop from the high 60’s in the late 1990’s/early 2000’s into the mid 40’s today from the millennial cohort and watching genz do the same thing makes me believe that this country will be forced to change before our politics ever do.
deleted by creator
Millenials in the late 90s wouldve been children, it sounds like your referring to Gen X
i’m using Wikipedia’s definition of millennial and we turned 18 in 1999; definitely still children, but legally adults in most cases.
85 or 86 is a better cutoff than 81, if you were born between 75 and 84 you grew up in the 80’s and were thus gen X
If you remember the 80’s at all I don’t really consider you a millenial
do you have a well respected independent 3rd party that agrees with this or is this your own world view?
I’m surprised to see this counterfactual argument here and wonder if you’re acquainted with the history of the word:
Members of this demographic cohort are known as millennials because the oldest became adults around the turn of the millennium. Authors William Strauss and Neil Howe, known for creating the Strauss–Howe generational theory, are widely credited with naming the millennials. They coined the term in 1987, around the time children born in 1982 were entering kindergarten, and the media were first identifying their prospective link to the impending new millennium as the high school graduating class of 2000.
I remember this very well because I was a member of the class of 2000. 🧓 and yes, I do remember the 80s.
the ancient adage that we start to track conservatives as we age
i’m pretty sure most millennials in this country are still alive
So how is millenial/genz discontent going to be dealt with?
We’ll be liquidated by war, climate change, etc.
honestly it doesn’t seem like the younger generations will ever engage in organized opposition to Capitalism anyways. I think the social control is too good.
But as we all know universities are the breeding grounds of leftism
The scaling is kind of fucky, most values are in the 30-70 range but the bars make it seem like 20-90
American campus Bolshevism, sponsored by Israel and Lockheed Martin and the NSA
Education in this context only means, College vs Not College. It doesn’t mean, educated in world history and politics.
Interesting, I’ve seen other polls with inverse correlation between edu level and pro-Palestine starting from high school diploma to to phd
50% of college grads approve of Biden’s handling of Israel and Palestine compared to 25% non college grads though lmao
On 12 January 1971, the federal government indicted Philip Berrigan and other East Coast antiwar activists on felony charges of plotting to impede the Vietnam War through violent action. The activists’ agenda supposedly included blowing up underground heating pipes in Washington to shut down government buildings, kidnapping presidential adviser Henry Kissinger to ransom him for concessions on the war and raiding draft boards to destroy records and slow down the draft.
The Justice Department prosecutors chose to hold the conspiracy trial in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, a conservative area where a randomly chosen jury would be heavily against the defendants. However, before the jury was selected at what came to be known as the Harrisburg-7 trial, a group of left-leaning social scientists supporting the defendants interviewed a large number of registered voters in the area to try to figure out how to get a sympathetic jury there. They discovered, among other things that college-educated people were more likely than others to be conservative and to trust the government. Thus, in court, during the three weeks that it took to examine 465 potential jurors and pick a panel of 12, lawyers for the defense quietly favored skilled blue-collar workers and white-collar workers without a lot of formal educations—nonprofessionals, although the sociologists and lawyers apparently never used that term.
The lawyers were uneasy doing this, however, because it went against their intuition. The notion of closed-minded hard hats and open-minded intellectuals is widespread and is reinforced by mass-media characters like loading-dock worker Archie Bunker and his college-student son-in-law, “pinko” Mike. In fact, All in the Family made its television debut the very day of the Harrisburg indictments, 12 January 1971; by the time the trial and jury selection started, it had been on the air for a year.
Ignoring these false stereotypes paid off. The government put on a month-long, $2 million extravaganza featuring 64 witnesses, including 21 FBI agents and 9 police officers. The defense called no one to the witness stand. After seven days of deliberation, the jury was not able to reach a unanimous decision, and the judge declared a mistrial; but with 10 of the 12 carefully selected jurors arguing for a not-guilty verdict, the government dropped the case.2
Blue-collar skeptics? Loyal intellectuals? Was the Harrisburg survey a regional fluke? Look at what the nationwide polls showed at the time. On 15 February 1970 the New York Times reported the results of a Gallup poll on the war in Vietnam.3 Gallup had found that the number of people in sharp disagreement with the government over the war had increased but still constituted a minority. While this increase in opposition was important news, what were particularly interesting were the data on the opinions of subgroups of the population. These numbers announced with striking clarity that those with the most schooling were the most reluctant to criticize the government’s stand in Vietnam. There was a simple correlation (although only in part a cause-and-effect relationship): The further people had gone before leaving school, the less likely they were to break with the government over the war. (See note 3 for the results of the poll.)
-
New York Times, 13 January 1971, p. 1. Jay Schulman, Phillip Shaver, Robert Colman, Barbara Emrich, Richard Christie, “Recipe for a Jury,” Psychology Today. May 1973, pp.37-44, 77-84; reprinted in Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Saul M. Kassin, Cynthia E. Willis, editors, In the Jury Box, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, Calif. (1987), pp. 13-47. Jack Nelson, Ronald J. Ostrow, The FBI and the Berrigans, Coward, McCann & Geoghegan, New York (1972). William O’Rourke, The Harrisburg 7 and the New Catholic Left, Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York (1972).
-
New York Times, 15 February 1970, sec. 1, p. 4; or George Horace Gallup, The Gallup Poll, vol. 3, Random House, New York (1972), pp. 2237-2238. The question was worded as follows “Some U.S. senators are saying that we should withdraw all our troops from Vietnam immediately. Would you favor or oppose this?”
Favor Oppose No opinion National average 35 55 10 By age group 21-29 years 39 57 4 31-49 years 36 56 8 50 and over 33 53 14 By extent of education College 29 64 7 High school 34 58 8 Grade school 44 41 15
From Disciplined Minds: A Critical Look at Salaried Professionals and the Soul-battering System That Shapes Their Lives by Jeff Schmidt, Chapter 1 “Timid Professionals”
Bold emphasis is mine.
While I absolutely believe this it could not be further from my lived experience. I live in a college town and work at a university, and the politics of people I’m around here range from Hillary Clinton to “let the streets run red with the blood of the bankers” vs my hometown where the average education level is around 8th grade, it’s Trump signs and confederate flags everywhere you look.
You have to adjust for people who grew up and live in the same area
You’re comparing people from and living in 2 different places
Highly educated people tend to concentrate themselves though. It’s not just that highly educated/non highly educated people from the two locations have different views, there are far less highly educated people in my hometown, and the ones that do exist are irregular as a political group as they’re mostly Indian immigrant doctors.
It’s hard to compare the views of highly educated vs non-highly educated people only living in the same places, because they live in different places.
Also notably the people I went to high school with who had more right wing views then were also the ones far more likely to stay in that town and not go to college, vs the ones with more left wing views generally moved for college and never went back, because it’s a rotten conservative backwater and also because there just aren’t jobs for people with college degrees outside of education and healthcare.
-
I think that’s a good demonstration of why you rarely can draw useful conclusions from opinion polling. slight changes in wording that do not actually change the issue in question (given that one actually understands what is being asked) will dramatically change how respondents understand the issue. a question about “Biden’s handling” of the conflict can easily lump pro-palestinian respondents in with insane right wing zionists who think the Biden administration’s mild chiding of Netanyahu while giving him everything he asks for is tantamount to betrayal. And what good does it do to ask about Israel’s military conduct when all the journalists doing actual reporting on that military conduct are being systematically murdered?
I don’t think the “education” part is too relevant tbh. Although they’re not Marxist hubs like republicans portray, campuses tend to have more organizations and students that aren’t strictly adherent to the status quo, so if you’re never exposed to that then you’re likely gonna keep supporting whatever you supported before.
education level is mostly a proxy for income level when income level aren’t a category