I suggest you actively go out and meet some at open mics or some of the bars. You may be pleasantly surprised by the reality that is NOT presented by the media.

What worries me most is that "it's easy to be free when you have been brought up in freedom; it is not easy otherwise. A zoo tiger, escaped, will often slink back into the peace and security of his bars. If he can't get back, they tell me he will pace back and forth within the limits of bars that are no longer there."
Neither the millennials nor the millions of recent immigrants have any experience, respect, or longing for freedom.

It is not just this generation or that one. Ayn Rand said that she knew that she was challenging 2500 years of philosophy. Even Aristotlle did not question the principles of altruism. You can dig into Greek philosophy and find near-egoists such as Aristippus of Cyrene (Elder and Younger and Arete of Cyrene), and to a lesser extent both the Epicureans and Stoics (oddly enough, perhaps).

In the 19th century, nominal individualists such as Godwin, Stirner, and Nietzsche, and, of course, Bentham and Mill, also expounded some emotional commitments to selfhood. But, really, Rand gave egoism a rational, reality based foundation.

It is not just this generation or the previous one, or the last 100 years since the Federal Reserve or whatever... Your ability to stand up and say that you live for yourself was given to you by Ayn Rand who put that idea into forms that were understandable with her fiction, and then her non-fiction. Rand is to selfishness as Newton is to calculus.

Objectivism. Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism is the best organized presentation of how to live a good life. You can find disagreements among Objectivists but the summary is easy:

The following is a short description of Objectivism given by Ayn Rand in 1962:
At a sales conference at Random House, preceding the publication of Atlas Shrugged, one of the book salesmen asked me whether I could present the essence of my philosophy while standing on one foot. I did as follows:

Metaphysics: Objective Reality
Epistemology: Reason
Ethics: Self-interest
Politics: Capitalism
If you want this translated into simple language, it would read: 1. “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed” or “Wishing won’t make it so.” 2. “You can’t eat your cake and have it, too.” 3. “Man is an end in himself.” 4. “Give me liberty or give me death.”

If you held these concepts with total consistency, as the base of your convictions, you would have a full philosophical system to guide the course of your life. But to hold them with total consistency—to understand, to define, to prove and to apply them—requires volumes of thought. Which is why philosophy cannot be discussed while standing on one foot—nor while standing on two feet on both sides of every fence. This last is the predominant philosophical position today, particularly in the field of politics.

My philosophy, Objectivism, holds that:

Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.

Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses) is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.

Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.

The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man’s rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church. -- http://aynrandlexicon.com/ayn-rand-id...

The problem here is that we in the Gulch go around and around on religion and it just creates animosity. Objectivism is the reason for Atlas Shrugged. Atlas Shrugged is the reason for Objectivism (if you know the biography of Ayn Rand.) The benefits of a free market and limited government are accepted as "floating abstractions" by political conservatives who are attracted to sites like this - and this one especially because of the movies.

Religion is a destructive force. It robs you of reality and reason and ultimately of self.

Of course it is complicated, as human life is. Ayn Rand pointed out that Christianity in particular was a step forward because its focus was not just obedience to the gods, but the salvation of the individual. (I add that historically, the disciples were hellenized Jews, so they adopted many ideas from Greek philosophy, hence, their interest in showing people how to live well.) But that is a small consolation and stands as a minor exception to an overwhelming condemnation of all that is wrong with religion. Objectivism demonstrates why communism and Christianity share common foundations of mysticism and altruism.

What you choose to believe is your own business, of course. You seem to be a nice enough person who accepts the social rules of private property.

Thanks!

LOL! It most certainly is.

Actually, those are great principals. And the optimum part is that you state "Because I want that".

Stefan Molyneux goes further as to say "you wouldn't want the opposite for you and yours".

Rape is bad because you would not want it for you.

Property Rights (not taking other peoples property) must exist, because you would not want people taking your property. I wish we could explain this to Liberals.

Anyways, that's what I was looking for. To see people have a codified view that keeps THEM on their best behavior. (And not some relative BS, again like the left, It's okay to take, if you do something good with it)

I prefer to base my character on principles instead of morals or ethics. Both of these are voted on by someone and they change over time. No one votes on the principles of a thing and it doesn't change. For example, a principle of lead is "heavy". If it's not heavy, it's can't be lead (principle: a defining characteristic of something).

I live by four principles:
I tell the truth (because I want others to be truthful with me).
I am equitable in my dealings with others (so they will be fair and impartial with me)
I recognize property interests of others (because I want them to recognize mine)
I adhere to that "do unto others" thing which, essentially incorporates the above three principles.

There is no need for a god's decree or a church's benediction. Cause and effect is the best litmus ever for defining good and bad.

It's somewhat obvious that many who made comments on this list have only spent a very modest amount of time with a very limited number of millennials and have formed most of their opinions from media. That's a bad idea.

They are far from a homogeneous group. In fact I would say they are far more diverse than the Boomers were. As an example, we only had about three or four "musical" diversity types that interested us in our 20's (rock, jazz, blues, folk). They have hundreds of different styles and styles within styles.

I live in Portland, Oregon and there could not be a grander plethora of millennial collectivists, this is the city of "the new world order". However, here are a couple of things I've learned from working and performing with them for about 3 years.
1. They respect elders for the most part and are exceedingly kind and considerate in their treatment. Consistently opening doors, helping with bags,
2. Nearly completely obsessed with being of service to others.
3. They are the most entrepreneurial generation since 1776. They aren't buying this 9-5 factory or office crap.
4. MANY of them are NOT buying the BS, are very skeptical of bureaucracy and only consider themselves "democrates" because no libertarian has ever talked to them.
5. They are far easier to convert than any other age group.

It might be good to start hanging out with them in bars or other places they go. You may actually form a much more positive picture of a group that is going to be responsible for moving this world forward in another 10 years.

They are strong willed and opinionated, yes....and so were we...remember the long hair, barefoot, smoking pot stuff? We flew in the face of every convention...and we weren't quite as polite about it sometimes.

While the millennials have been taught to be good socialists, I'd sure like them to SHOW ME by creating a business that functions effectively and profitably while allowing freedom of choice. I have worked for stupid people. I have worked for tyrannical geniuses. I didn't work for them long, because neither gave me the choice of being a success or being a flake. Had I been a flake, I would have been gone... had I been 'too much' of a success, I would not have been rewarded.
The Pilgrims found this out in the first two winters of being on the New England coast and losing about 60% of their population to malnutrition and starvation since not enough people wanted to do the real work of planting, caring for and harvesting crops. A lesson lost to the socialist dream of utopia.

Thanks Suzanne43 ,
You are a good judge of character.
Posted by CaptainKirk 8 hours, 35 minutes ago
You can go here and download her book as a PDF
http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/

After watching the video, she is a hero of mine, too.
Thanks for letting me know about her. I wish that I could give you more than one +1.

Millennial thinking is no different than Marxist thinking, socialist thinking or any number of theories that always apply to convince people they need leaders and must obey no matter how it conflicts with morality. Interesting how almost anyone would be against murder unless it is conducted by the state to gain access to property, another country's or their own peoples. The names change but whether you are talking about hippies who wanted to all live together in a commune or the current millennials the route is the same and the destination is the same. It is very difficult to get the human race to give up its own slavery.

The assumptions of this video are pretty much absurd. I guess we need to create new babies, through DNA manipulation that have all of this "everyone else fist and it will all work out" characteristics. (Of course, it would only last one generation and then the earth would be empty of humans.)

Me am Dino Allosaurus Esquire and I approve of your theory.

I have a son who was home schooled.. Still, I'd hate for education to be the responsibility of many a parent I can think of.

Yes just the first few pages should show what we are up against.

I do not think Reagan knew what was happening.
I think GWBush was a very active VP working toward his New World Order.

Re: "Me dino is with those who say education is the responsibility of each state." Education is the responsibility of no state!

Try Objectivism - a philosophy with a completely rational morality. Religion is not necessary for moral actions.

Don't mix religion with Capitalism; they actually are not compatible.

So -- one question; Who is going to provide the work required to plan, create, and distribute this Utopia? The human race does not automatically provide a class of worker bees.who will do all the work with no reward except survival.And if they are rewarded, how will they? By given greater status than the common man? Won't that lead to a ruing class? And back we go, spiriling into the same basic situation that caused the American Revolution and the advent of Capitalism. While almost at the same time, in Russia they had their revolution and went to communism.No "isms" and back we go to who does what is needed to create a society.All the love for humanity is not the province of government, but of philosophy, which should be given a more meaningful role human progress.

the fruition of govt education (public schools)

It's always easy to think the grass is greener on the other side. The hard reality is that it is only once you jump the fence that you realize that its astroturf on top of a gaping pit. If you stop to really look at your own grass, you'll realize that - like anything - you can't just do nothing and expect it to spontaneously generate what you want. You have to water the grass. You have to fertilize it. You have to pull the weeds. You have to mow.

Life is hard work, and of all the messages the Millenials seem to have missed, it's that one.

millennial thinking is an oxymoron