i agree with your argument but i have a question about your conclusion
re: So I actually predict an increase in easily manipulated fundamentalist-style politicians that corporations, traders and others who direct liquid capital flows will puppeteer to their whims.
what whims are those? this new generation is broke and disenchanted to the point of nihilism. we are family-less, money-less, and generally, hopeless. so my question to you, as i think you correctly assess this situation as well, is what whims do they (fundamentalist-style politicians that corporations, traders and others who direct liquid capital flows) actually have that can connect to the whims of these newer, disenchanted generations?
can you actually sell pro america, pro free markets, pro war type dogma effectivelyy to them, after having disenchanted them from all these things?
You assume that the pro America, pro capitalist ideology isn't pre-sold, so to speak. Even to the "disenchanted," there is nothing to sell, so to speak, for its already within the narrative of America that we all learn. Those that actively embrace it will fall right in line with those who already are hand in hand with these interests, and the "disenchanted" will simply fall in line and allow themselves to be influenced in a way similar to the Nietzschean Last Man: Because their lives and minds are relatively comfortable with the narrative and forms of discourse that exist already, despite their "disenchantment," there is really no reason to become active, because its already comfortable for them.
In this formulation, the reason that I put "disenchantment" in quotations is because I really don't think its quite the passive state that I think you make it out to be. It's an active state of disbelief in the actively stated tenants of the sphere of reference in which you exist. It does NOT mean that you do not disavow yourself from the bounds within which that discourse exists. That's a much more passive belief, rooted in the most deeply held values and axioms, so much so that we don't even really think about it (think about the ways in which we use language. Something as basic as that can be an example of these passive bounds. "Order is better than anarchy" or "Anarchy is chaos, and chaos is horrible" is a slightly more concrete example of this).
So to answer the question succinctly, can you sell all of that to them? What is there to sell? They already believe in all of it. And even in the polarized discourses that exist today, there is a deeply held belief in the liberatory nature of the most base elements of the capitalist system and the reliance of capitalist and specifically liberal and neoliberal capitalist economic models to prove their points "scientifically" (and boy, can I go on tangents about the bogus "scientificity" of those economic models. Though it might be more accurate to call it "imaginary made hyperreal").
There's no reason to sell anybody something that they believe is inherently the general equivalent holding discourse together.
.
cats on sohh, have any idea how much the new generation(90s) is out of the loop.....
@ the wire showing how to get things done in America, from running a businesses to bribing politicians. 
I know a more effective, but I can't say 
The NSA would be knocking my door in 2 seconds like 
