The locust generation: is weakness driving Spain toward collapse?

Are the 'locusts' the weak generation Hopf predicted?

Michael Hopf's quote about "hard times creating weak men" has become a generational meme. Applied to the 'locust generation' —those who grew up in the postwar era and lived through Spain's economic boom— the debate splits between those who see them as parasites who enjoyed unearned prosperity and those who consider them the first stage of a decline that accelerates with each new cohort.

The locusts: privileged or survivors?

The generation that got housing, a car and holidays just by being "serious and hardworking" is seen by some as the cause of today's gridlock. The criticism is that their merit was nil: they were born at the time of the greatest growth in living standards, and today they pontificate from a position they would not have reached had they had to start from scratch. Others, however, point out that this same generation emigrated en masse to Europe, worked in harsh conditions and, although they lived through an expansionary cycle, also laid the foundations of the welfare state.

The escalation of weakness

A widespread analysis in the thread traces a downward line: the locusts would have been the first weak generation; then a second one (aged 40-60) even weaker; and a third (aged 20-40), described as "megaweak and deconstructed". This diagnosis suggests that even today's hardships —job insecurity, unaffordable housing— are not tough enough to forge character, because the system cushions them with debt, handouts and cheap entertainment. The phrase "times have not yet been hard enough" sums up a current that longs for a regenerative catharsis.

The role of economic policies

The discussion focuses on perpetual money printing since 2009 and tax hikes. It is pointed out that the average Spaniard works more than seven months a year just to pay taxes, compared with less than four months 30 years ago. The tax burden, combined with growing public spending on pensions and benefits, is seen as an income transfer that keeps the population anaesthetised but does not solve the structural problems. The criticism is that the system rewards passivity and punishes real productivity.

Immigration and social change

A second axis of the debate addresses the role of mass immigration as a source of pressure on wages and working conditions. It is argued that the arrival of workers from poorer countries has allowed elites to hold on to power, while natives see their purchasing power eroded. The paradox noted is that even newly arrived immigrants end up calling for border closures, reflecting a latent conflict. Others, however, argue that the problem is not immigrants but policies that have deregulated the labour market and increased precarity for everyone.

Closing: The thread does not resolve the question of whether we are heading for a purifying collapse or a soft decline. What does emerge is a shared diagnosis: the combination of unsustainable public debt, rising tax pressure and an increasingly passive citizenry does not bode well for civic renewal, but rather for a wait until the system —as many predict— finally "breaks". Meanwhile, the locust generation remains the symbol of a prosperity nobody believes can be recovered.