Our first student blog post was written by RJ Anderson, an International Development and Human Rights major and 2014 Legacy student. RJ and the Legacy Cohort had the pleasure of dining and conversing with Paul Taylor, author of The Next America, before he gave a public lecture in which the UConn community was invited to attend. In this blog post RJ discusses the insightful conversation that took place.

On Tuesday November 7^th, our legacy cohort had an enthralling conversation with Paul Taylor, a senior fellow at the Pew Research Center. The impetus for our engagement revolved around Taylor’s recent book, The Next America, a social commentary which examined fifty years of public surveys and demographic data in considering the future of tomorrow. In this book, Taylor identifies four generations of Americans – Silents, Boomers, Gen Xers, and Millennials – and considers their interpretations of a range of social issues. Contrasting this with the changing demographic and technological nature of American society, The Next America suggests a future that is shaped by ongoing trends, characteristics, and the many shared histories of our information age. How will Millennials continue to fund and receive benefits from social security? What will a white minority look like? In what ways does technology change our perception and interactions with political, economic, and social institutions? And ultimately, in what direction is our country headed?

Taylor had dinner with our legacy cohort prior to a public lecture with the UConn community. In this space, the young and old were pitted in a full-fledged discussion of generational difference, particularly focused around the issue of technology and information exchange. The genesis of our dinner conversation began with Taylor himself asking the questions, something that continued for the remainder of our personal interaction. Having written extensively about how our generation understood the internet, texting, and other forms of communication, he was overwhelmingly excited to hear our personal reflections. However, and to the conversation’s benefit, the varied age of the participants made for a comprehensive and insightful discussion.

The chief, overriding question, focused on the mediation of knowledge through communication technology. Did the ability to have information at one’s fingertips make society more knowledgeable than previous generations, or less? In other words, how has an Internet culture transformed one’s place within society? Perhaps not surprising, the elder generation in the room had several reservations about technology’s expansive ability to reconfigure cultural relations. They argued that the abundance of knowledge has created an individualist culture that seemed to no longer respect traditional values associated with education, the household, and national identity. The individualism that permeated university halls and 21^st century youth was an affliction of technology’s ability to create multiple conflicting subsets of communal ideals. With the advent of never-ending knowledge, there were jacks of all trades and masters of none. More specifically, those who did orient themselves towards a particular topic were entrenching themselves in an increasingly specialized and seemingly irrelevant subject matter. While the ability to have multiple choices of knowledge acquisition could enhance research, it also distanced the individual person from former social communities. For instance, the landscape of previous generations revolved around the nuclear family, educational hierarchy, and national commitments. In the age of the 21^st century, these forms of ideological solidarity were eroding, and trust in previously established systems was commonly questioned.

The younger generation in the room took an opposed stance. Individualism that accompanied the rise of communication technology created a culture of knowledge. Questioning the perceived reality of traditional institutions was beneficial for overall human progress. Media outlets and state rhetoric required thorough examination, and taking these forms of knowledge dissemination at face value proved problematic. The world of the 21^st century was complex, and globalization’s continual advancement made the individual cognizant of the varied positions surrounding an established issue. As a result, choice was better positioned with individual agency than communal solidarity – which was informed by ideological positions rather than concrete realities. Having knowledge at one’s fingertips enabled a person to engage with an abstracted and complicated world more efficiently than the institutions which traditionally interpreted that world.

This discussion was informed and commented on by the generational positions of the persons in the room. Their personal histories could be placed within the social, political, and economic environment of their upbringing, and the larger realities of a globalized world. Those opposed to technology, and its questionable ability to enhance knowledge acquisition, argued this position from their personal experiences. They found the contemporary generation of students to be treading different paths than they had followed. Granted, while many of these changes resulted from the shifting nature of political and economic realities, the apprehension towards change is common as generations’ age. In this way, the younger generation has always been more apt for progressive change. After all, they are the ones who must navigate and explore new modes of thought; the ones who must shape an alternate future than the reality that has been left to them.

Paul Taylor’s provocative questions and subsequent discussion all neatly fit the central points of his book, The Next America. The advent of new technology, of changing demographic makeup, and shifting economic fortunes are perceived differently across generations. In concluding this blog post, I wish to leave off with some additional questions and reflection. Most pressing is a concern with the future. As our generation heads into positions of power over the next decade, how will our personal decisions reflect a global humanity? If we have the ability to obtain diverse and endless forms of knowledge, how can we use such information to better the world at large? Finally, with the advent of a new generation, and the aging of our own millennial generation, will the abundance of communication technology continue to be a progressive force behind social transformation? In other words, how can we utilize increasing individualism to generate social mobilization around important issues?

Personally, I believe that such questions require an individual belief that is focused on global citizenship. Just as communication technology has simultaneously shrunk and expanded our world, the consciousness that it has evoked is more global than that of previous generations. Communication technology does not have to spell a treacherous or disfiguring future. Rather, it can create a future reality grounded in a holistic understanding of individual diversity. If utilized appropriately, then the world of tomorrow can be one of engagement for all citizens of all nationalities and identities. The appreciation and systematic restructuring of institutions to reflect this global humanity is the task millennials have been handed. As the first generation to experience the internet era, we are the best positioned to utilize its capabilities for the progressive betterment of humankind.

Paul Taylor’s discussion was part of the Leadership Legacy Speaker Series. We invite you to attend our next speaker series event with Anita Hill on Wednesday, November 12th at 7pm in the Student Union Theater. More information can be found here.