<a href="/keyword/andy-ahart/" >andy ahart</a> Anthony Reed Eng. 158.9 Generation Q? The article `Generation Q', by Thomas L. Friedman, is based on Friedman's opinion that that the new generation of college students is far less active politically than in the past. Generation Q, as Friedman coins it, means `The Quiet Americans'; and just as the definition means, he views this new generation as being quiet and not protesting political or social reforms. He is giving an argument that the new generation is less influential and makes fewer differences than they can and should be making. Friedman's observation is that technology is drastically affecting the way that `Generation Q' makes a difference in the world through activism. He tells of his travels to the college campuses of Auburn University, the University of Mississippi, and Lake Forest and Williams. When Friedman puts mention of his journey to these campuses, he is trying to give the impression that his study has an empirical basis, and thus hopes to strengthen his argument. He makes the comment `One of the things I feared most after 9/11 -- that my daughters would not be able to travel the world with the same carefree attitude my wife and I did at their age -- has not come to pass.' What Friedman says is that he thought that after the terrorist attacks on 9/11, traveling to foreign places outside the country would not be an opportunity for the future generations, and he tells in this quote that he was wrong; `Whether it was at Ole Miss or Williams or my alma mater, Brandeis, college students today are not only going abroad to study in record numbers, but they are also going abroad to build homes for the poor in El Salvador in record numbers or volunteering at AIDS clinics in record numbers. These statements, however, contradict his thesis that there is a lack of activism on the part of Generation Q. This could be Friedman anticipating the opposing argument, which is- `Generation Q is traveling more than ever and giving help more than ever, so how are they less active?'. Friedman next defends his thesis, pointing to the fact that they are not doing anything about the budget and Social Security deficit and ecological deficit. Friedman goes on to tell of how `his' generation has created major problems- the Social Security deficit and ecological deficit-- for `Generation Q'. He says that if we aren't `spitting mad, well, then they're not paying attention.' He is saying that `his' generation has made major problems and it is the job of Generation Q to fix those problems. He argues that Generation Q is not doing a good job of it, as they are busy messing around with their computers and watching television. He then goes on to mention Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and <a href="/keyword/robert-kennedy/" >robert kennedy</a> , and says that when they made a difference, it was not behind a keyboard and mouse. Friedman makes a very strong point: `Activism can only be uploaded, the old-fashioned way- by young voters speaking truth to power, face to face, in big numbers, on campuses or the Washington Mall. Virtual politics is just that- virtual.' He is referring to the fact that supposedly Generation Q is only active through their computers, and he thinks that change can't be made that way. Friedman brings up some interesting points, such as the fact that technological opportunities are causing even more time spent at the computer. However, he fails to consider some important aspects. Friedman is concerned about their lack of activism; Generation Q is in fact active, but in different ways. When he points to Generation Q going to El Salvador to build homes for the poor or volunteering at AIDS clinics all over the world, he is mistaking this activism for something else. While Friedman wants Generation Q to rally and go to the Washington Mall in support (or opposition) of political or social matters, he fails to make the connection that Generation Q actually does show activism. Friedman questions why the new generation is worried about matters outside the political and social realms of the United States, and he doesn't see what difference this makes to the United States citizens. The main problem with Friedman's argument is that he doesn't fully defend it. Friedman is narrow-minded in his harsh criticism of the lack of activism of Generation Q, and he fails to notice the fact that they are willing to travel to various exotic places spanning the globe in order to fight problems outside the budget or Social Security deficits that plague the United States.