The referenced post has been removed.
Harvard is so proud to have you.
Curiously, on a more serious note (to Bishop, et al), there is a latent argument to be had here. In short, that beginning with the 60's a cultural shift began where community as a concept became a much more divided issue. Community values became hyper localized and a lot of the broad spectrum morals/values/ethics/mores we held to be more or less cultural became very splintered. These shifts culminated in realizing not only a more "free" thinking populace (which is simultaneously a farce and not) but more importantly a much more hyper individualized sense of society and subsequently identity and responsibility. It's not that maturity is the new immaturity, it's that there are things that someone is going to be very mature about while there's a huge swath of knowledge that that young individual is not going to be mature about.
e.g. "I" (a fictional I, not me, aka Dealgood) believe in food i.e. organic, local, non-Monsanto, etc and am going to be very mature and educated about that. But when you ask me about e.g. the economics of food and broader agro-ecology issues beyond western soil and ecosystems "I'll" falter.
Think of it as the selective specialization of knowledge for the sake of taking on something one believes as emblematic and symbolic of what they deem important in the world.
This is why we have a lot of bad arguments: on TV, on newschoolers, on the radio, in newspapers, etc. There's a lot of deeply specialized knowledge that looks up at the world from it's very deep well of thought but can only see a sliver of the sky.
Bottom line, kids aren't more mature. See, there's a critical point with apathy, it only goes so far, but to deem certain issues or ideas as tantamount and emblamatic of your being and worldview, that's the new currency. It masquerades as maturity. But really it's just selectivity. It's nothing more. And it's painfully cheap to read, to watch, and to listen to.