Or simply the force of youthful rebellion that seeks to always create something new as a reaction against the old.
Respectfully disagree. Youthful rebellion appears to be driven by hormone-related factors (elevated risk tolerance) rather than being driven by reactions to anything in particular about a society.
Mao’s rise was driven by youthful rebellion in China
Many Islamic suicide bombers are teenagers
The Amish have rumspringa
And yes some western teens are graffiti artists.
Teen rebellion cuts across cultures, that study just doesn’t show it because it is solely attempting to refute the univariate “brain” factor. I’m not talking about brains. I’m talking about hormones and risk tolerance. Teen rebellion cuts across cultures. And no single-variable “cross cultural study” can prove otherwise
Respectfully disagree.
>A sick society inclines people towards damaging the structures built around them because they see those structures as symbolising their own oppression in some capacity.
If you don’t think oppression exists, and that it can be symbolized by structures, I don’t know what to tell you. Are you against the toppling of sculptures of Saddam Hussein?
What do you think of advertising? Do you not consider billboards “damaging to structures”? How do you think advertising differs from graffiti and do you really find advertising non-oppressive? No ad agencies ask my permission to assault my visual field with a billboard, and neither do graffiti artists. All’s fair in art and war.
I said the exact opposite. The advertising industry shouldn't exist and neither should statues of anyone let alone tyrants like Saddam.