The link begins with "The Depression left deep emotional scars on the American psyche." During this period in time, music gave people an escape and entertainment. Just before the crash, the song "Happy Days Are Here Again" was written for a movie, and it became Franklin Roosevelt's campaign song. I think Roosevelt was a pretty awesome man with encouraging words like "the only we have to fear is fear itself". A personal philosophy he developed because he had asthma and many life-threatening moments. He defied doctors' orders to live a very sheltered life and repeatedly put himself in dangerous circumstances. He was the man we needed in our most difficult times.

The song "Happy Days Are Here Again" was written for a movie just before the crash. Roosevelt used that song for his campaign to be the president of the US. "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps" is an impossible feat, but the saying became a metaphor for achieving success and self-sufficiency through sheer effort. Baby Boomers were the children of those who survived the Great Depression, and we carry the attitudes and memories of tough times. A far cry from today's expectations of immediate gratification.

Roosevelt began Social Security based on age, not need! No one wanted to accept charity because it was so shameful. To protect the dignity of the elderly SS is based on age, and many years later it is followed by the Older Americans Act, which again took care of those who survived the depression. Social Security benefited everyone because by making it possible for the elderly to retire, it opened jobs for the young. And yes, SS was the only income for most people in that generation. They were also the generation that fought in the First World War. What do these have to do with nationalism, the following generation, and today?

Such a witty fellow, Roosevelt. Happy Days indeed. Songs like Brother, Can You Spare a Dime rang truer in those dark times, and were even popular.

My parents lived through the Great Depression and WWII. If we Boomers carry the attitudes and memories of those dark times, I don't think they weigh on most us very heavily, or that they've ever done so. Many of us were and still are positively wanton in comparison with our mothers and fathers. We have some responsibility for today's expectations.

Edward T Hill was an anthropologist and wrote of how every culture has a consciousness and a subconscious, just as individuals do. I think nations need periodic analysis just like humans do, and for the same reason. What lies in our subconscious can become problematic.

That might not be true, but for sure my life is wrapped around the Great Depression and World War. I don't think that is common. But I am fixated on that past. I am sure our parents were as they were because of what they experienced during the difficult times. It was as important to my mother to make people happy by entertaining them as it was to Bob Hope. It is something that came out of that time in history, as the hippy movement and peace activism came out of my time. When my mother was made aware of hippies, she said she thought she was always one. Yeap, she was. "put another cup of water in the soup, someone is coming to dinner". "Go to your room until you can come out with a smile". 'Don't cry. Be strong for me".

And then came Kennedy. "Don't ask what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country". That nationalism was so different from what it is today. And Kennedy gave us the Older Americans Act, which entitled us to decent housing, transportation, nutrition sites, senior centers, free college classes, and opportunities so we could continue contributing to society. Opportunities like the Senior Companion Program and Grandparents who volunteered in the schools, and we got a stipend of $2.65 for our volunteering if we were low-income. That has all been destroyed as the mood of our nation has changed.

I think we agree that the mood of our nation has changed. I think we agree that the difficult times our parents faced shaped them.

But what generation since theirs has (as a generation) experienced similar times? Most Boomers, I think, abandoned any desire they may have had to serve others and elected to serve themselves. They were used to being served, and accepted it as their due. They became the self-indulgent elites that, together with their progeny, rule us now. They feel entitled to rule and tell others what to do, and more than ever have the means to convince us that this is the way it should be.

This is the example they set.

I think we agree that the mood of our nation has changed. I think we agree that the difficult times our parents faced shaped them.

But what generation since theirs has (as a generation) experienced similar times? Most Boomers, I think, abandoned any desire they may have had to serve others and elected to serve themselves. They were used to being served, and accepted it as their due. They became the self-indulgent elites that, together with their progeny, rule us now. They feel entitled to rule and tell others what to do, and more than ever have the means to convince us that this is the way it should be.

This is the example they set. — Ciceronianus

Wow, I am so glad you replied! Your observation seems right, but I am not part of that, and the 1970s recession was like the Great Depression where I live. The college and city were fighting for college renters. We had a joke, "It is easy to have a small business in Eugene. Just start with a big one." and in the hills, there was a large colony of homeless men. At the same time, the downtown looked like a ghost town. That area still has not recovered. The recession was severe and lasted a long time. We were a farming and timber town. I had come up from LA, California, and lived in culture shock, but I am so glad I stayed. For a while, hippies ran this place, and I liked that period best. But the economic crash, led to a flood of Californians pouring in, and now property values are too high, housing is scarce, and the traffic is horrible.

All that said, I have been wondering what happened to those of us who believed we would make the world a better place. I know very well that was my mother's generation's belief. They gave a lot to make life better and we claimed their hopes and aspirations with the belief we would do better than they did, but :scream: I am screaming :scream: what happened to the rest of my generation? Why did they become so materialistic? Why are they all about themselves? How could they betray us? I remember being told when we grew up we get back on track with the materialistic and less ideal capitalist way.

Can I slip in a dramatic fact of that time period? Many women of my cohort postponed careers to care for the family, and during the recession, our husbands were experiencing midlife crises and they walked out, leaving us alone to support the children. We had to hide our education to get jobs, and thank heavens the children were teenagers, so we didn't have child care costs, but meth hit the streets, and our teenagers were hurt and angry, and the lack of jobs meant they were not absorbed into mainstream society. They came of age at a very bad time. And as grandparents, we had to fight the state for custody of our grandchildren. And we won. Policy and law radically changed in favor of the family.

Somehow, in all this mess, your words ring true. The reasoning for communal living was sound, but psychologically, we were not prepared for that, and most communes failed. I remember a social war on communal living. Like it just wasn't American!

I am reading my post, and I am thinking, women's liberation happened!

We've led different lives. Mine was more traditional middle class. The usual trek through the education system; working factory jobs to help pay the way. I'm a younger Boomer, and they stopped using the draft lottery with those born the year before I was, so even Vietnam didn't sufficiently radicalize me (or frighten me). I see how the recession impacted you more than it did me.

And I've always been cynical, alas. So, it didn't surprise me that much when Boomers fell under the spell of filthy lucre. But the extent to which the elites want to control our choices and lives as well as profit from them does surprise me.

I was born during the Great Depression. My parents became very frugal, and I have always been conservative in my wants and needs. Except my father went to town one day and bought a new Buick sedan (1938) for about $900.! My mother never forgave him for that. But I learned to drive in that car 13 years later.

I am reading my post, and I am thinking, women's liberation happened! — Athena

Indeed it did. My wife fell under its spell and I supported her by attending meetings with her. As frequently happened during that time we ended up divorcing. We drew up the papers ourselves. It was painful at the time, but good for both in the long run.

We've led different lives. Mine was more traditional middle class. The usual trek through the education system; working factory jobs to help pay the way. I'm a younger Boomer, and they stopped using the draft lottery with those born the year before I was, so even Vietnam didn't sufficiently radicalize me (or frighten me). I see how the recession impacted you more than it did me.

And I've always been cynical, alas. So, it didn't surprise me that much when Boomers fell under the spell of filthy lucre. But the extent to which the elites want to control our choices and lives as well as profit from them does surprise me. — Ciceronianus

Oh my God! What you said needs to go into the discussion I have been having with BC is the thread about how children should be raised. It is possible we will have exhausted our supply of oil in another 100 years. Let's put that in perspective. A child born today could still be alive when we can no longer maintain our economy, and all industrial economies collapse. We remain on this course because terrible things would happen if we stopped doing what we are doing. This is insane because we live on a finite planet, and there is no way to avoid the disaster.

Constantine moved the Roman capital to the other side of the mountains that were abundant in gold, and this wealth was not shared with the whole of Rome. Those who are getting rich off oil will not share that wealth with us when there is no more oil. Our children born today may see the end of life as we know it, and we are in denial of this reality.

Philosophy does deal with this. Plato's cave deals with this, along with existentialism and nihilism. I don't know enough about those branches of philosophy. I just know Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq wars were about oil, and we are all paying for those wars when we pay taxes and that bill has to get pain before we have universal health care and well-funded schools. The oil industry is getting rich at our expense, and when the oil is gone, yes, our economy collapses. Shouldn't we be able to do better than this?

I focus on democracy because if our economy collapses, so will our governments, and our only hope will be understanding democracy enough to make it work, as humanity struggles to survive in a very hostile climate.

Indeed it did. My wife fell under its spell and I supported her by attending meetings with her. As frequently happened during that time we ended up divorcing. We drew up the papers ourselves. It was painful at the time, but good for both in the long run. — jgill

How was a divorce good for both of you? Did she have that great career that liberation seemed to promise us, and does she live in economic comfort as we believe we should have? You have added a new dimension to my questions about our sanity.

:lol: I just had a vision of myself as a child sitting on the sidelines watching everyone else play. I am still that child sitting on the sidelines watching everyone else play and wondering what are they thinking?

I was glad when my X left and filed for divorce, but I don't see that as the best possible outcome for the family. From my point of view, men thought women's liberation meant they no longer had family responsibility. They walked away, leaving the women with hurt and angry teenagers. I don't think that was a good thing. Today, it makes my heart happy to see a man in the park with his children. I am hoping the younger men are better husbands and fathers than when there was too much division between what men and women did.

I think if we replace the autocratic model of industry with the democratic model, things would be much better for families. But if women suddenly pulled out of their jobs, it would be as bad for the economy as restricting our use of oil. Two paychecks, two tax payers, meant more money for banks and the government gets more to spend on military might. I am not sure this is best for humanity.

I was glad when my X left and filed for divorce, but I don't see that as the best possible outcome for the family. From my point of view, men thought women's liberation meant they no longer had family responsibility. They walked away, leaving the women with hurt and angry teenagers. I don't think that was a good thing. Today, it makes my heart happy to see a man in the park with his children. I am hoping the younger men are better husbands and fathers than when there was too much division between what men and women did. — Athena

I insisted on custody of our 9 year old daughter. My ex wife spread her wings and did well, now married and retired. My daughter is business manager of a large academic/professional school in a institute in NYC. She will retire in the next few years, as will her husband.

When you are handed lemons make lemonade.

Back to the Great Depression. Herbert Hoover's "rugged individualism" lost him the election and put Franklin Roosevelt in the presidency. The Roosevelts have a history of progressive political action. Before Franklin was Theodore Roosevelt, who increased government power to regulate Industry when the gap between the rich and poor was huge. Theodore was anti-monopoly and he regulated the railroad. Franklin built on this government control of Industry. However, Hoover, was responsible for reorganizing the federal bureaucracy that made the New Deal possible when Franklin Roosevelt was the president. That is, these men worked together for a more moral and efficient government.

I say a more moral government because not only do I see the moral decisions, but James Williams an American philosopher was concerned about the moral decisions, and he favored the liberal point of view.

"Certainly Dewey does not offer us final or settled solutions but this is not the issue; at various times in his long career, he thought seriously and deeply about many social and moral problems, and it is our contention that he provided his liberal followers with some answers to some of these problems. His social and political activities were a lived extension of his political theorizing. From the First World War to the end of the Depression and after-as long as he was actively involved in social and political movements-he applied his theory to practice in concrete engagements. Dewey's appeal for the use of intelligence in social change can easily lend itself to caricature as long as intelligence retains its scholastic connotation." BY EDWARD J. BORDEAU
https://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1077&context=rel_fac

That is very exciting to me because it is Enlightenment thinking, and I fully believe it was Enlightenment thinking that made the US great. The most noble purpose of education is to prepare the young to be responsible citizens. This is a far cry from the present mood of the US to oppose intellectualism. And curiously, Christians hated William James.

Roosevelt was the sort of leader needed during the depression because he fostered the ideals of civic nationalism; unlike in certain European nations, the economic frustration did not lead to societal division. You mentioned Roosevelt's social security policy, which I think speaks to his broader strategy of maintaining citizen's dignity throughout the struggle. Americans still vaguely believed in rugged individualism and personal economic responsibility, but Roosevelt saw a way to adapt it to the modern era and contemporary struggles. Just look at all the infrastructure projects, nature reserves, buildings, and artworks commissioned during the depression which employed millions. These offered American citizens pride in their nation and in their work, allowing for both individualism and solidarity to coexist.

"Tough times make good men" is a dangerous cliche (see depression-era populists like Huey Long, fervent nativists/antisemites like Charles Coughlin) but the right cultural attitude, solidarity, and ambition during difficult times can have generational impacts. New deal principles became the ideological establishment for almost half a century. Moreover, the fact that we made it through the depression while still upholding core liberal democratic values remained a source of pride for many in that generation; the depression made those principles even more important and ingrained. ("Look at what it took us to make it through and still be free. We can't give up now").

Followup question: are we still a nation anymore? We all know the state is alive and kicking, but when's the last time somebody bothered to check on her brother? Civic nationalism (the US' chosen type of unifying ideology) is much more intellectually demanding than ethnic nationalism, which threatens to divide pluralist nations into factions. Enlightenment ideals like you mentioned, an emphasis on individual liberty, personal responsibility, active citizenship and pride in duty, rule of law, diversity of opinions, backgrounds, and cultures, and reverence of constitutional foundations all seem to be core tenets of our national identity. It's fundamental for liberal democracies to remain united behind these or adjacent ideals so that solidarity can prevail even in times of crisis or division. Without them, the only common denominators would geography and a prevailing political authority, while sub-national factions jockey for political dominance without much restraint

Followup question: are we still a nation anymore? We all know the state is alive and kicking, but when's the last time somebody bothered to check on her brother? Civic nationalism (the US' chosen type of unifying ideology) is much more intellectually demanding than ethnic nationalism, which threatens to divide pluralist nations into factions. Enlightenment ideals like you mentioned, an emphasis on individual liberty, personal responsibility, active citizenship and pride in duty, rule of law, diversity of opinions, backgrounds, and cultures, and reverence of constitutional foundations all seem to be core tenets of our national identity. It's fundamental for liberal democracies to remain united behind these or adjacent ideals so that solidarity can prevail even in times of crisis or division. Without them, the only common denominators would geography and a prevailing political authority, while sub-national factions jockey for political dominance without much restraint — finarfin

Wow! I love :heart: what you said! I don't know which nation you are talking about, but the US is in big trouble! The Roosevelts had a different set of values than some presidents. And we may want to pay attention to this difference.

I hold my hands at this moment, a book titled "Poverty and Riches" by Scott Nearing, Ph.D. published in 1916. It is a horror story about the exploitation of the poor, including children. This book seems to say we should take Germany's side in the First World War because it did far more for its citizens than England did for its poor and powerless class.

Here is the reasoning for that.. under the Act of 1831...

children of nine could be called upon to work sixty-nine hours a week. "The hours of black slaves' labor in our colonies were at that very time carefully limited by law (Orders in Council, November 2, 1831) to nine per day for adults, and six for young persons and children, while night work was simply prohibited". Not until 1847 was a ten-hour day for women and children secured.

6. Laisez-Faire Justified
The debate in Parliament over the early factory acts sounds weird and uncanny in twentieth-century ears. The Unspeakable working and living conditions of the industrial population were explained and justified in the name of liberty and individual freedom.

The revolting conditions surrounding the lives of the working population were more than offest, in the eyes of English statemen, by the cheapness of the product, the profits of the industries to the manufacturers, and the splendid trade balances that were growing in favor of England.

This is what the Roosevelts were looking at when they determined to use the federal government to take better care of the working class. Heaven only knows how many people would have starved to death if Franklin Roosevelt had not used the power of government to create jobs that were desperately needed.

I am trying to hold this examination of economic crashes and capitalism to a question of morality. Socrates said, when people are exploited, sooner or later, they become a problem to those who exploit them. The Enlightenment was a belief that humanity can do better.

In the 1930s and 1940s, Nearing and Helen Knothe, a lifelong vegetarian, lived together in Winhall in rural Vermont, where they had purchased a large forest tract for $2200 and a moderate-sized farm for $2500.

Scott Nearing, an economics professor who at 45 had made himself unemployable because of his socialist-pacifist views. https://www.google.com/search?q=scott+nearing+vermont+house&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS990US990&oq=Scott+Nearing+&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqCAgHEAAYFhgeMgoIABBFGBYYHhg5MgcIARAuGIAEMgcIAhAAGIAEMgcIAxAAGIAEMgcIBBAAGIAEMgcIBRAAGIAEMgcIBhAAGIAEMggIBxAAGBYYHjIICAgQABgWGB7SAQs4NTg1NzBqMGoxNagCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I think many who could afford a farm turned to farming during the Great Depression. My grandparents owned a chicken farm, so they ate well but.... The story goes that they could not sell the chickens, so my grandfather gave them away. That made my grandmother furious, and they divorced. I thought the divorce rate increased because of the Great Depression, but AI said the divorce rate decreased until the economy started to improve. Then the divorce rate increased.

My grandmother was a teacher, and divorced women could not get teaching jobs in the city so she and her two children had to stay in a rural area until the rules for teachers changed.

My mother, a Southern Belle from Alabama, and my father, from a coal mining town in PA, were both born in 1910. My father became an academic but in high school he worked nights in a coal mine taking care of the donkeys and doing his homework.

The only time my mother worked was when Dad was getting his final grad degree at the U of Texas around 1950, and she played the piano for a womens' PE class. At the height of the GD one summer Dad got a teaching job at a small college in Arkansas where he was not paid but given room and board. Mom and Dad would happily reminisce about the huge bowls of grapes at each meal.

Mom was quite content with her role as wife and mother (just me), although she had a BA in education.

I am glad your father survived the coal mine. That was not a healthy place to be, and one of the best Great Depression. Would like to know more about their experience?



My favorite mine worker's story is Mother Jones.

Mary G. Harris Jones (1837 (baptized) – November 30, 1930), known as Mother Jones from 1897 onward, was an Irish-born American labor organizer, former schoolteacher, and dressmaker who became a prominent union organizer, community organizer, and activist. She helped coordinate major strikes, secure bans on child labor, and co-founded the trade union, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW).

Notice she was a school teacher. At the 1917 National Education Association Conference, one of the teachers spoke of how proud she was of teachers who, in teaching about democracy, were also encouraging the development of granges and unions. Democracy is people uniting to help each other. I hate reading explanations of education being about pleasing Industries that treated humans poorly. That is not a correct understanding of what teachers were doing and why they were so strongly committed to teaching. The democracy we had, came through education, and it included spreading awareness of unions. Unfortunately, the coal miners and the Industry got into a life-or-death battle.

My father didn't know his father who died in a mining accident about 1912. Dad had several siblings but he was the only one to leave the coal mines behind. He had his mother save his pay for tending the underground donkeys and after he graduated high school he attended Penn State for a year, then went into the deep south to continue his education, working as a campus cop to support himself.

Dad's mother was a resourceful woman. She turned her shotgun house into a small grocery store and supported herself and her children for years. The store was still open in the 1960s. She lived to 94 or so. I only met her once when we drove from Alabama to Pennsylvania for a visit in the late 1940s. That was considered a big deal and the local newspaper had an article about our adventure.

I don't recall either of my parents complaining bitterly about the Depression. They minimized their needs and adjusted as best they could. When WWII came along Dad was offered a commission in the Navy, but he had a health problem and turned it down. After the end of the War he became chief statistician for the War Assets Administration for a brief period. Then on to academia.

My father didn't know his father who died in a mining accident about 1912. Dad had several siblings but he was the only one to leave the coal mines behind. He had his mother save his pay for tending the underground donkeys and after he graduated high school he attended Penn State for a year, then went into the deep south to continue his education, working as a campus cop to support himself.

Dad's mother was a resourceful woman. She turned her shotgun house into a small grocery store and supported herself and her children for years. The store was still open in the 1960s. She lived to 94 or so. I only met her once when we drove from Alabama to Pennsylvania for a visit in the late 1940s. That was considered a big deal and the local newspaper had an article about our adventure.

I don't recall either of my parents complaining bitterly about the Depression. They minimized their needs and adjusted as best they could. When WWII came along Dad was offered a commission in the Navy, but he had a health problem and turned it down. After the end of the War he became chief statistician for the War Assets Administration for a brief period. Then on to academia. — jgill

That is an awesome story. It is interesting to me, and I would like to know more about how her home was turned into a grocery store. I have to use this AI explanation. I Googled 1910 coal company helped a widow create a store.

In the early 1900s, coal companies sometimes operated company towns that included general stores, but specific instances of a company helping a widow create her own grocery store are not widely documented. While not a definitive answer to a specific 1910 event, several historical patterns show how this may have occurred.

Back in the day, people would help, but the help would be a hand up, not a hand down. I can so see how a coal mine owner would give a son a job or help a widow. This is from knowing my grandmother and mother. It is forbidden to take something for nothing. And when there was a charity drive, you gave something to "help those less fortunate." These rules are very much a part of being. That is not all good. It is very hard for me to accept a gift. On the other hand, because I don't accept something for nothing, I am less apt to be a victim of a scam.

AI suggests that the Great Depression affected families and increased people's concerns about economic security. This surely made Roosevelt's creation of Social Security a strong psychological benefit. If we live long enough, we have Social Security. That is no longer true, but neither is it true that Social Security didn't mean the ability to live without a job. It made it possible for older people to retire, and that opened a job for a younger person. However, our life expectancy was a little less than 60 for White males a little over 60 for White females. While Black males weren't expected to live past 50.

For the families, statistically, people stayed married because they could not afford divorce, but family violence increased. This period was very hard for males, as they were expected to support their families, but there were no jobs, so they struggled with feelings of worthlessness, and unfortunately, some desperate wives made this worse as they became critical of their husbands' failure to support their families.

Financially, women fared better because they could earn small bits of money with their domestic skills. Sewing, child care, cooking, etc.. Making them less dependent on Industrial jobs. My father's grandmother wrote articles for a romance magazine. My mother's mother was a teacher, and they had to live in a rural area because city schools would not hire divorced women until the Second World War took the males. As horrible as war is, it rescued the egos of males who were now needed by their nation. And the war gave women employment they would have never gotten without a war. But after the war, the women were expected to return to their traditional family role as homemakers. My father's mother wrote of this difficult transition for a romance magazine. In her story, the wife accepted her duty as a homemaker, but in reality, my parents divorced, and she was a divorced woman.

When I began writing, I was thinking of our materialism and wondering if we would be so materialistic if it had not been for the Great Depression? Would family values have done better if it had not been for the depression and the war? How much of what is so today is a reaction to that past?

Roosevelt was the sort of leader needed during the depression because he fostered the ideals of civic nationalism; unlike in certain European nations, the economic frustration did not lead to societal division. You mentioned Roosevelt's social security policy, which I think speaks to his broader strategy of maintaining citizen's dignity throughout the struggle. Americans still vaguely believed in rugged individualism and personal economic responsibility, but Roosevelt saw a way to adapt it to the modern era and contemporary struggles. Just look at all the infrastructure projects, nature reserves, buildings, and artworks commissioned during the depression which employed millions. These offered American citizens pride in their nation and in their work, allowing for both individualism and solidarity to coexist.

"Tough times make good men" is a dangerous cliche (see depression-era populists like Huey Long, fervent nativists/antisemites like Charles Coughlin) but the right cultural attitude, solidarity, and ambition during difficult times can have generational impacts. New deal principles became the ideological establishment for almost half a century. Moreover, the fact that we made it through the depression while still upholding core liberal democratic values remained a source of pride for many in that generation; the depression made those principles even more important and ingrained. ("Look at what it took us to make it through and still be free. We can't give up now"). — finarfin

I take it you are as much a fan of Roosevelt as I am, and his wife, Eleanor, was a wonderful First Lady. She was the good woman behind the great man. Thinking of their story makes me regret that our media today does not have the same standards as in the past. The image of our President and First Lady is important to the leadership of our country and how we feel about who we are and our future.

For sure, all the jobs created under Roosevelt gave the US a stronger military, because malnutrition does not result in strong bodies, and the jobs created fed the workers and their families. On top of this would be the psychological effect of having a loved President and First Lady, and knowing how much their decisions helped the common man and his family. I am reflecting back on John Kennedy and his wife. Remember the Camelot years? The Kennedys made many of us very happy and his statement "Don't ask what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" was great leadership like Roosevelt. I pray our next president comes with a great First Lady and that they give us the kind of leadership the Roosevelts and John Kennedy gave us. I am talking once again about believing in ourselves and being hopeful about the future.

Hard times can unite people and bring out the best in them, if the leadership is worth following.

If we are going to psycoanalyze the country's mental health with respect to the Great Depression, which I enjoy doing as much as the next armchair psychiatrist, we should spread our net wider -- knowing that the consequences of mental distress (it's several causes) can be inter-generational. We elderly folk, with elderly parents, and elderly grandparents and great-grandparents are not generationally far-distant from the "Long Depression" (1873-1879), the Panic of 1893, -- never mind the the Great Depression (1929-1933), the recession of 1937-1938, and the Great Recession (2007-2009). Thank you AI for that summary. I'll add the long decline in purchasing power and wages for the working class that began in the early 1970s and continues. These periods are characterized by significant declines in economic output and increases in unemployment, varying in duration and severity.

Then there were wars -- Civil War, Spanish American War. WWI, and so on. There have been huge immigration waves which were unsettling to "native" populations - and settled previous immigrants alike. There were periods of rapid technological change, far exceeding the disruption of computers and smart phones -- think about the telephone, electrification, radio, subways, automobiles, airplanes, motion and sound film, atom bombs and television--all happening in about 60 years. Don't forget about the impact of germ theory and the discovery of viruses. Did I mention Darwin and new biblical criticism that undermined the older interpretations of the Bible?

The late 19th century and 20th century were very rocky times for anyone that preferred stability and predictability.

Go back to the "pioneer days" of western settlement in the US, let's say after the War of 1812, or thereabouts. Lots of opportunity for enterprising pioneers and settlers--but man, a lot of that pioneering was hell on wheels. Ole Edvart Rølvaag's Giants in the Earth depicts the experiences of a Norwegian pioneer couple in the Dakotas:

Giants in the Earth by O.E. Rølvaag tells the story of Norwegian immigrants Per Hansa and his wife Beret as they attempt to establish a new life on the harsh Dakota prairie in the 1870s. Per embraces the land's potential and the challenges of frontier life, but Beret becomes increasingly consumed by loneliness and a deep-seated fear of the vast landscape, which she perceives as a hostile, desolate place haunted by spiritual entities. The novel explores the profound psychological and cultural struggles of immigrant homesteaders, detailing their conflicts with nature—like crippling winters and devastating grasshopper plagues—and the internal battles between preserving their Norwegian heritage and adapting to a new world. The story ultimately chronicles the hardships, isolation, and eventual tragedy that befall the settlement, highlighting the human cost of the pioneering experience. — AI SUMMARY

AI's summary is pretty much what I remember from high school.

So, adding it all up one can conclude that "a good share of the time, life is a bitch and then you die". Not to be overly pessimistic, but "upheaval" has been more the norm than settled stability for a long time. That's the challenge people overcome again and again.

America was lucky (not ordained by any means) to be the recipients of a liberal tradition developed in Europe, a super abundance of land and resources, plentiful population to work the land and add to the human capital, and a few brutal policies which made it all possible.

So here we are, more or less thriving -- just like numerous other countries that have been through the grinder of war, disaster, depression, disease, and so on. Oh, just for example, Vietnam, a small country which received as much bombing as much larger territories in earlier wars. They are flourishing, but I am sure they are also affiliated by shadows from the past.

People over come.

@Athena: Oh, I just noticed from your profile that you live in Oregon. For some reason I thought you were Canadian. I pictured you living somewhere in Manitoba or Saskatchewan.

Nobody ever said I wasn't a day late and a dollar short when it comes to social interaction.

All that information is overwhelming. I can handle only small bits of information at a time. Also, this thread comes up in a google search about the Great Depression, so I think it is best to keep it limited to the Great Depression, on the chance someone is trying to research the subject. And, for me, this is a therapeutic exercise as, at the end of my life, I am working on coming to peace with it.

The bigger picture deserves our attention, but in a different thread, not this one. I have been binging on youtube shows of human history, starting when we separated from other species. For me, that story is an evolution of our consciousness, which is still evolving. If you start a thread, pm me and I will check it out.

Oh, I just noticed from your profile that you live in Oregon. For some reason I thought you were Canadian. I pictured you living somewhere in Manitoba or Saskatchewan. — BC

I write of our pioneer days and the isolation of women, so your guess of where I am coming from is reasonable.

All that information is overwhelming — Athena

Sure. There is only so much one can take in and process, young or old. The good news about mentioning other depressions, aside from the great one, is that people endured the suffering and moved on--again and again.

My father's ancestors were farmers. One of the features of farming in the late 19th into the 20th century is how often farmers moved -- not for better views, but because farms failed financially fairly often. Good land but bad economies. My mother's family were not farmers, but they too experienced financial reversals. My grandfathers loss of his drugstore in the Great Depression had enduring psychological effects; my mother inherited a major share of the disappointment. My remarkably resilient. father didn't.

On your state of residence...

I've never been to Oregon. I spent a week at Holden Village -- a Lutheran camp in Washington's mountains a few years ago -- spectacular. Otherwise for the west coast, I've only been to San Francisco and surrounding territory. Oregon, and the other two west coast states, seemed to have had a history of bloodier labor strife than many places in the US (excepting Detroit, Chicago, the Appalachian coal states...).

My father's ancestors were farmers. One of the features of farming in the late 19th into the 20th century is how often farmers moved -- not for better views, but because farms failed financially fairly often. Good land but bad economies. — BC

My ancestors were farmers too. They worked the land in Toledo and a region located in the south of Madrid, which no longer exists because it is urbanised. I understand what you are referring to -- farmers are often condemned to be here and there, like nomads. It is true that my family had never experienced a similar psychological impact to the Great Depression, but my grandparents recall the financial struggle after the Spanish Civil War or in the 1970s when Spain suffered an inexplicable inflation of prices.

Due to the reasons and circumstances expressed above, the next generations were always taught to avoid farming as labour or financial status. It is poorly treated and low paid. I don't know what your ancestors grew. Mine grew cereals and grapes. Very important products to feed the population, but they are paid very cheaply (as always), and the profits go to the supermarkets and intermediaries.

My point is that farmers have always suffered from failed financial status all over the world.