iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Adam Hanft

Adam Hanft

Posted: August 18, 2009 03:45 PM

Anniversary Irony: How the Woodstock Generation is Sabotaging Health Care Reform


The anniversary forensics into the lasting implications of Woodstock were completed this weekend, with one critical oversight.

There was no commentary about the utter absence of baby boomer support for health care reform. The generation that sought to spread peace and love throughout society seems completely disinterested in spreading mammographies and diabetes screenings.

Where the hell are they? The boomers, after all, were the demographic cohort that turned protest against inequity into a generational branding statement. There are roughly 70 million of them, so imagine what would happen if they adopted the fight for the extension of health care as another civil right -- as part of the ongoing struggle for social justice, no different than civil rights and women's rights? The entire national dialogue would be different.

If you were 25 at Woodstock, you're 65 today -- one year past Paul McCartney's archetypal Age of the Elderly. You should be on the vanguard of change. Boomer endorsement of health care reform would be a powerful validator. But times pass and hypocrisy hardens. Consider the visual picture of the debate: young families and middle-aged people telling heart-wrenching stories of lost insurance, or no insurance, and the ghetto of pre-existing conditions versus older people ranting about government bureaucrats making decisions for them.

How many of those objecting seniors looked back nostalgically on Woodstock this weekend? Now, they are reacting just like their frightened, defenders-of-the-status-quo parents back in the sainted 60s.

So the synchronicity of the Woodstock anniversary and the raging health care debate shouldn't be overlooked. Much has been written about the narcissism and self-involvement of the boomers, and the way in which the undisciplined indulgences of the sixties -- sex, drugs, rock and roll -- became sublimated into a parallel consumer world of undisciplined, indulgent consumption.

If you're going to reward yourself with everything NOW, and scorn the future (just take a look at the dismal stats about boomer savings) -- then you're going to have an equally selfish view of health care. Which means a reluctance to share it; a very anti-Woodstockian value

Indeed, the boomers consume health care in the same guzzling fashion that they bought homes and cars and electronics and designer everything. And they're worried that their God-given right to consume often and endlessly is being threatened by the Obama plan.

Can we blame them for this expectation of everything? From the time they were born, and their Spock-trained parents catered to their every whim, boomers were spoiled and privileged. Society existed to dandle them and indulge their fantasies.

They also grew up as children (and adults) during the largest expansion of employer-based health care in history. Corporations may have been boring (and sometimes evil), but they were generous. Boomers' white-collar and blue-collar parents had great benefits. They never had to deal with scarcity, with limits, with tough resource decisions. They always had plenty of toys, plenty of jobs, plenty of choices. So when opponents of reform use trigger words like "rationing", boomers get all twitchy and shrill.

Then there's the "Unplug Granny" distortion. The reason it's so contagious is that it strikes at the essence of boomer anxiety, the inevitable march to mortality. They want to go on forever. They see themselves as adolescents, they dress like adolescents,they listen to oldies music that suspends them in adolescent amber.

The free-love, communal mud-spirit of Woodstock has wizened and twisted into an forever young ideology that is making it difficult to have any intelligent conversation about end-of-life decisions. If it's going to cost a million dollars to keep me alive for another month, that's my boomer right.

Of course, there are yowls of protest about health care reform from the generation that precedes the boomers. But I haven't seen any meaningful segment of boomers talk about the need for reform, even if it means some degree of sacrifice. Talk to physicians in any area with a high concentration of those on Medicare and you'll hear the same refrain: every little ache and pain is an occasion (even a social occasion) for a trip to doctor, since Medicare pays anyway. That's the boomer ontology.

Gen X and Gen Y, as we know, have very little patience with the boomers. They see them as a self-involved generation that's leaving them a sick planet and a distorted set of values. Health care reform is the last chance the boomers have to live up to the promise of Woodstock, but it seems like they're still stuck in the mud.

 
 
  • Comments
  • 72
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:09 AM on 08/20/2009
I experienced the "Three Days of Peace and Music" at Woodstock when I was 19. Most of the people I saw there seemed to be under 25 and some of them were in their 60s. I estimate about 600,000 people attended some part of the Woodstock festival. There were 66 million Americans born during the baby boom years so at most 0.9% of us were there. I believe that before we arrived many of us were radicals and many were radicalized by the experience. I am still a left-wing Democrat, but while I strongly believe in universal health care fully supported by general taxation, I support the Obama plan, with a public option, as an improvement.

Using the census definition, the oldest baby boomers would have been 23 then and 63 now, so the we are not quite seniors yet. None of us are covered by Medicare unless we are disabled. The youngest boomers were eight years old the weekend Woodstock took place. Many of us boomers are struggling today to support our truly aged parents. My mom turned 90 this year, is blind, deaf, suffers from dementia and has just moved up to her third level of assisted living. Despite Medicare, her out-of-pocket medical expenses totaled over $31,000 last year, about 71% of her total income. This year her out-of-pocket medical expenses will exceed her income.
07:35 PM on 08/19/2009
WOW!

Another slam the elderly for the worlds problems essay.

Someone will blame Adam Hanft's generation for something equally ridiculous someday.

How about "Gen [ fill in the blank ] er's responsible for 500,000 deaths in Iraq."?

Yes thats stupid and unfair Mr. Hanft.

Michael
04:06 PM on 08/19/2009
Inflaming inter-generational conflict will not help the situation. It was those 30-somethings (so smart!) that thought up all those fancy ways to scam prospective homeowners -- without having to take any risk themselves. And for your information, I do NOT want the plug pulled on me. I want to live. Call it "entitlement" if you will.
Yes, some of us did take out second mortgages -- to pay for college educations for next generation.
I can't tell you how angry this article has made me. Total lack of understanding about what concerns seniors. We DON"T want our Medicare slashed anymore than it already has been slashed -- and we seniors have felt it!
This article doesn't help -- it hurts.
By the way, I support single-payer. But that's "off the table" Single payer advocates were not permitted to speak and have been effectively ignored. So much easier to blame senior citizens -- who are, in fact, among the most vulnerable in our society. This is what USA has become. Crass and cruel.
The article is cruel. And utterly un-helpful.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
kmswriter
This mean we can't be friends?
03:59 PM on 08/19/2009
I'm here - '47 - two of my children get it - the other, when i say i want medicare (21/2 yrs away) - she has a harumpf for me - she just turned 40 (8/14/69) and most spoiled "it's all about me" generation - everyone from Mass was at woodstock 'cept me.. - I am all for a public option - single payer - and working with my neighbors who are of one generation older than i to help them cut thru the lies - the are getting on board.

Turning AZ blue
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
brixtony
03:39 PM on 08/19/2009
What a half-fast, venomous, sterotyped pile of...words. I haven't read the rest of the comments, but, yes, I'm 62, didn't go to Woodstock because I had a better offer - we've been married since '69 - but this is a total crock. Even if the majority of the 65 year olds this writer calls the "boomers" (another innacuracy since the baby boom didn't start 65 years ago) oppose Obama's plan (whatever it is) this older cohort is NOT a monolith. These careless generalizations in the media are how various categories, classes and races of people get pigeonholed irresponsibly. Almost all the older people where I live, voted for Obama and are to the left of him on many issues, including this one. The boomers you refer to are the ones who probably were revolted by Woodstock - the music, hair, lifestyle and everything else. Stop letting others do your thinking for you.
Gen X & Y don't exist except in the minds of superficial, glib, unthinking writers - unfortunately, they seem to be in the majority, as they always have been. for one thing - the benevolent corporations only covered health care to stave off the very government healthcare that many are calling for now. They were afraid of socialism, both before and after the war.
Looking over this column, this guy has a problem with mum and dad - he's certainly pissed off about something deeply personal - it's got little to do with politics or ideas - but
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
pantherburns
labor creates all wealth
03:37 PM on 08/19/2009
This is such an idiotic article for so many reasons. If, as he seems to intimate, that he supports health care reform, why is it that he goes out of his way to use divide and conquer tactics to separate rather than unite us in the fight? His contention that many boomers are on medicare is simply wrong mathematically unless you consider people born before 1944 are part of the baby boom. Woodstock never stood for all and never will. I am a boomer and I support a single payer health care system even though I have one of the best insurance health plans available. Also, members of my generation fought for civil rights, equal rights for women, environmental protection and an end to the Vietnam war, so please don't tar us all with the same wide brush. This appears to be more of a geographical and intelligence (or lack of it) battle than a fight between generations.
03:03 PM on 08/19/2009
I can assure you that hardly anyone who marched or was part of the revolutionary spirit of the 60's is not reflected in the people we see today who are against the public option. Most of the people in their 60's who are against health reform were not the hippies or hipsters of the 60's and 70's....they're the straights who we made fun of. They were a**holes then and they're a**holes now.
02:59 PM on 08/19/2009
I'm 64 years old. It is disgusting that you paint an entire generation with one stroke. I have nothing in common with the upper 2% -- the bankers, the insurance executives, the 30-somethings that thought up credit derivative swaps.
I'm 100% in favor of single-payer nationalized health care program -- similar to the health care enjoyed by my generation in Europe and Canada and Australia and Israel and ... every other first-world nation.
But that is not what is being offered.
Obama would not even listen to any expert on single-payer. I wouldn't mind Medicare for all -- but that is not what is being proposed. Also, Medicare needs to be improved -- dramatically . I'm on Medicare (disability) and I know It's not the greatest.
You talk about my right to end of life treatment -- well, guess what, I DO want to live!

I was given 4 months to live when I was diagnosed with cancer. I received treatment -- expensive treatment -- I am now in remission. You would pull the plug. We boomers understand very well that people like you would pull the plug. Yes, we want to live. You call it "entitlement" with a sneer. Go sneer at your own mother.
Read this article, it pretty much says what I, and many other seniors, think. You can't fool us.
http://www.counterpunch.org/cramer08182009.html
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Anne Johnson
Fairly Unbalanced
02:25 PM on 08/19/2009
I was born January 31, 1968 so I guess that makes me a gen x'er. Baby boomers please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong since I wasn't there I can only go by what I've read and seen on tv. The parents of the baby boomers endured the hardships of the Great Depression and World War II and wanted better for their children. Baby boomers grew up in an era of middle class expansion and most lived very comfortable lives. Back then you could work for the same company for many years and retire with a pension and social security to support your last years on earth. That was pretty much gone by the time that my generation grew up and started working.

Yes the sixties are usually portrayed as sex, drugs, and rock n roll pure self indulgence. But this was also the time of the civil rights movement, womens' rights and the beginning of gay rights. So maybe it is the Woodstock crowd that is in favor of single payer insurance. And maybe it's the people that were on the side of the Chicago police and the National Guard that are the older ones screaming at these town halls. They have finally found their activism.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:01 PM on 08/19/2009
Well said, Anne. As a marketing person for big businesses, I don't think Mr. Hanft really knows the demographics around this issue.
07:57 PM on 08/19/2009
Okay, I'm correcting you, because you're (partly) wrong. I am an early boomer -- born in 47. It is true that the immediate post war period was one of great economic expansion. I had a fairly comfortable life while growing up -- I was never hungry or homeless -- but it was far from lavish. Many of my contemporaries were worse off, and some were better off. There were plenty of poor people even in the 50's and 60's, trust me.

By the time I entered the workforce (1972 -- after USAF), it was NOT generally true that "you could work for the same company for many years and retire with a pension and social security to support your last years on earth." Certainly, there were still some jobs that had pensions -- as there are today -- but that was no longer the dominant paradigm. In fact, it is mostly boomers who have experienced the thrill of working for one company for many years in the EXPECTATION of an eventual pension, only to have the pension plan blow up and leave them with nothing.

The earliest boomers (like me) are just now becoming eligible for Social Security, and are still at least a couple of years away from Medicare. I've paid into SS and Medicare for almost forty years, and I don't think it's unreasonable to want to collect the benefits.

BTW, I favor single-payer (e.g., Medicare for everyone).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wesleypresley
Anti War since 1968
01:39 PM on 08/19/2009
I was at Woodstock. I voted for Obama. And I am a strong advocate for Single Payer Health Care with a robust public option.
There may be some of the Woodstock generation who have become selfish and inhumane. But it is not all of us. Some of us have lived with the ideals for a better society since 1969. That is we have opposed war and bloated military spending in favor of education for our children, and health care for those less fortunate.
01:22 PM on 08/19/2009
I guess you hated the hippies. What a diatribe.

Real hippies were also for personal responsibility. They have become the hardworking regular families all over the nation. The boomers includes non-hippies too, and conservatives cynics have destroyed America.

"and their Spock-trained parents catered to their every whim,"
not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Spock#Claims_that_Spock_advocated_permissiveness
01:19 PM on 08/19/2009
This article is based on the generational stereotypes pushed by Neil Howe and Bill Strauss in their 1991 book "Generations." Their version of the Boomer demographic runs from 1943 to 1960. The idiots protesting health care, scared witless by the fact of a black president, seem to be older people in their mid-50s and 60s. I'd place this group more as people born before, during or just after WWII, raised in the Cold War/ McCarthyite 1950's. They are the racist teenagers who taunted those little black kids trying to integrate the Little Rock elementary school in 1955, who, though too young for the Korean War, were in favor of the Viet Nam war, who protested against civil rights, who were part of Nixon's "Silent Majority" and who saw the Woodstock generation as a bunch of freaks and hippies. They may have been born in the Boomer generation, but they are spiritually of the James Dean/ Elvis Presley group of the late '40s and early '50s. Their world of comfortable black and white TV memories is long gone, along with Communism and segregation, and they can't deal with it. This is not the Woodstock generation, these are the reactionaries who stood against it. Both exist at the same time. Hanft doesn't seem to distinguish between the two sides. They've always been there, forever at each other's throats.
12:27 PM on 08/19/2009
We are right here! I for one as an attendee of Woodstock think our generation are the folks who elected President Obama. It is my belief the WWII generation is the ones being manipulated by the fear mongers in the health care debate.
I saw this work on my 88 year old parents during the 2008 election, they almost voted for McCain out of fear.
jhNY
Mercy.
12:23 PM on 08/19/2009
As a screed devoid of data and filled to the tippy-top with fantastic projections of envy and dislike, this is indeed a classic. And it's so ironic. Perhaps the author,if he were truly concerned over the fate of health care reform, might have swallowed his animus for a few minutes and written something that might have invited boomers to take a more active role in the current debates, since he seems to think they could turn the whole she-bang around with their mighty voices raised in a unison of solidarity with folks like himself. But no.

He raises poor old Dr. Spock from the dead to administer a beatdown, and blames boomers for being fat selfish nodes of instant gratification and indolence. Look at boomer's savings rates! Perhaps the author might consider that there is no boomer savings because the boomers spent all their money on crazy stuff like college for their children, you know, the generation x and y'ers 'who have no patience for the boomers'. And precious little gratitude.

The media and politicians have found it helpful for marketing purposes to set these fake generational classes against eachother. And we who have been around the block a little bit can see what's behind all the noise: The young folks, who probably imagine they're fierce libertarians, but are merely young andselfish, don't want to have to pay for the retirement and health care of the boomers, and class and age resentment is their ticket to justification.
12:05 PM on 08/19/2009
Wrong. I too am a Boomer fighting hard for health care reform. Instead of falling into rampant consumerism, I grow much of my own food and live partly off the grid--more off the grid each year. Shame on you for characterizing a whole generation of people in a bad light. Some (many where I live) of us took the fundamentals of the peace/love movement and appllied them to our lives.