I wouldn't complain if they were already unable to do anything, but many of them are actively preventing further improvements. Often due to it coming at a cost for them. Their unwillingness trickles down to other generations both in teachings and in pressuring the next generation what can and can't be done, and how to respond. Most of late gen X has also thrown in the towel, leaving the future generations to solve it themselves.

This despite the fact leaders are overwhelmingly at/past middle age, as is wealth required to make moves as an individual.

Sure, but I think that it's needlessly divisive to pin it on a generation, particularly when I can find counterexamples for each.

I have no issue whatsoever with complaining about individuals who are destroying the world right now [3], I'm certainly not going to sit here and defend basically any fossil fuel executive, but I think saying it's a generational thing is needlessly reductive and doesn't buy us anything. I don't think Noam Chomsky [1] or Bernie Sanders are destroying the world [2], and I don't think millennial/gen-z bozos like Charlie Kirk are helping it.

[1] I realize he's older than a boomer, but I think my point still fits. [2] At least not advocating for stuff that's destroying the planet. I am not trying to take a directly political stand.

[3] clarification edit.