Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

(08-26-2020, 04:34 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-22-2020, 02:42 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]If one is too much a blockhead to learn the dear lessons of the School of Hard Locks, then one is in really-bad shape.

I agree and I will also add that the Democratic side is the side that's in really bad shape.

It depends on whether you think the issue will be decided by violence or by protest and legislation.  If you think the Boogaloo Bois are representative of America, go with violence.  If you thing Black Lives Matter are more important, you go with protest and legislation.  I see the Spiral of rhetoric and violence to be relatively stable.  We'll see how things go after the election and inauguration.  I do not see people as giving up on a resolution though legal and non violent means.  The Trumpists and Boogaloo Bois are chasing the wrong approach.

(08-26-2020, 05:35 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-26-2020, 04:29 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]If the old values collapse as you say, I hope you and the entire Democratic side are fully  prepared for the large scale chaos and violence that will follow. Nope. You have no chance at forcing millions of thinkers to not think and go long with your emotions and ignorant  silliness.

The big thing is that I check the real world spiral of violence against reality.  You are obsessed with violence and will spout rhetoric at the drop of a hat but do nothing.  A bit ago we had the racist cops and Trump and his feds against the Boogaloo Bois.  Trump has dropped out, leaving the police to hold the field.  I think the police have the edge overall, but will have to stop using racist violence or the protests will continue indefinitely.  We will see what the nation wide pattern becomes after the elections, but I can guess.  This is not going to be settled by violence.  In the Information Age, protest, non violence and legislation have led to the cultural change.

So, how much more violence do people like you need to see than the rest of us before you are able to accept reality at this point?

(08-26-2020, 09:58 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-26-2020, 04:34 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-22-2020, 02:42 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]If one is too much a blockhead to learn the dear lessons of the School of Hard Locks, then one is in really-bad shape.

I agree and I will also add that the Democratic side is the side that's in really bad shape.

It depends on whether you think the issue will be decided by violence or by protest and legislation.  If you think the Boogaloo Bois are representative of America, go with violence.  If you thing Black Lives Matter are more important, you go with protest and legislation.  I see the Spiral of rhetoric and violence to be relatively stable.  We'll see how things go after the election and inauguration.  I do not see people as giving up on a resolution though legal and non violent means.  The Trumpists and Boogaloo Bois are chasing the wrong approach.

I directly associate violence with groups like the Boogaloo Bois, Antifa and Black Lives Matter these days. The American right won't bow down to groups like Black Lives Matter like the Democrats and the wishy washy Republicans stuck in the middle of a potential class war who primarily represent big business and wealthy individuals/contributors who live near to the more violent areas like their liberal counter parts.

(08-26-2020, 11:46 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]So, how much more violence do you need to see than me at this point? Do you really want us to start doing something about the violence that we've been seeing these days? The Liberals have already dropped out but as everyone across the country already knows they haven't fully capitulated and probably won't as long as they're able to get away with being absent for the most part. Yep. The cops will have to stop being cops these days and you'll have to learn how to fend yourself and get used to the idea of defending yourself and your property from the millions who feel that they're entitled and feel they have a right to have whatever you have that's valuable to them these days. So, how many of our cops are willing to place there lives and the lives of their families on the line for a bunch of clueless Liberals like you.

Well, you personally are typing away furiously like the noisy coward you are. That won't help.

The violent racist cops might eventually learn that as long as they continue abusing their power the protest will continue and the cops behaving the worst will be fired and arrested.

The Boogaloo Bois and their ilk will continue to create violence, but they are a long way from making a dent in the cops or starting their revolution. The status quo is not going to change by violence in the short term.

I see the Black Lives Matter protests continuing pending the election and inauguration. The Democrats are projecting weakening the cop's immunity from prosecution and creating a standard for nation wide use of force standard and promise of prosecution if you exceed it. It wouldn't surprise me if they use the time between the election and inauguration to draft legislation.

What have the Republicans done on that front? Escalated lying their way out of it?

As I've observed before I see a road to resolution and the people getting what they want through protest and legislation, but the Democrats can't do it on a national scale while the senate and White House aren't paying attention to what the people want. Violence against the people only gets the people more inclined to vote you out. That is likely enough why the secret police have withdrawn.

I guess the last night's incident is typical, where the cops gave the young crazy kid with a long arm a drink, thinking him on their side, then he went on a shooting spree. They wound up calling ambulances and arresting him. That is the one example of somebody on the conservative side going violent, and it wasn't constructive. You going to escalate with more untrained people with long arms and mental problems?

(08-27-2020, 12:22 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-26-2020, 11:46 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]So, how much more violence do you need to see than me at this point? Do you really want us to start doing something about the violence that we've been seeing these days? The Liberals have already dropped out but as everyone across the country already knows they haven't fully capitulated and probably won't as long as they're able to get away with being absent for the most part. Yep. The cops will have to stop being cops these days and you'll have to learn how to fend yourself and get used to the idea of defending yourself and your property from the millions who feel that they're entitled and feel they have a right to have whatever you have that's valuable to them these days. So, how many of our cops are willing to place there lives and the lives of their families on the line for a bunch of clueless Liberals like you.

Well, you personally are typing away furiously like the noisy coward you are.  That won't help.

The violent racist cops might eventually learn that as long as they continue abusing their power the protest will continue and the cops behaving the worst will be fired and arrested.

The Boogaloo Bois and their ilk will continue to create violence, but they are a long way from making a dent in the cops or starting their revolution.  The status quo is not going to change by violence in the short term.

I see the Black Lives Matter protests continuing pending the election and inauguration.  The Democrats are projecting weakening the cop's immunity from prosecution and creating a standard for nation wide use of force standard and promise of prosecution if you exceed it.  It wouldn't surprise me if they use the time between the election and inauguration to draft legislation.

What have the Republicans done on that front?  Escalated lying their way out of it?

As I've observed before I see a road to resolution and the people getting what they want through protest and legislation, but the Democrats can't do it on a national scale while the senate and White House aren't paying attention to what the people want.  Violence against the people only gets the people more inclined to vote you out.  That is likely enough why the secret police have withdrawn.

I guess the last night's incident is typical, where the cops gave the young crazy kid with a long arm a drink, thinking him on their side, then he went on a shooting spree.  They wound up calling ambulances and arresting him.  That is the one example of somebody on the conservative side going violent, and it wasn't constructive.  You going to escalate with more untrained people with long arms and mental problems?

An obvious coward calling me a coward. That's funny. Do you know what cowards do? Cowards respond to acts violence by violent groups by catering to the demands of a violent group like Black Lives Matter like you and others here do and already have done. I expect to see more and even worse examples of what occurred last night as a direct response to the violence that's been going on for months and as the Democrats continue to fail to meet the basic expectations of it's residents and other people related to other communities or neighborhoods that more or less surround or border them these days. The worthless Democrats that run Minneapolis fucked up again tonight.

It seems Tucker Carlson is not stopping half way.  Fox News via CNN has him praising vigilante justice as the cops had not gone far enough to establish law and order.  

Don't listen to Americans.  Kill them?

(08-27-2020, 01:36 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]An obvious coward calling me a coward. That's funny. Do you know what cowards do? Cowards respond to acts violence by violent groups by catering to the demands of a violent group like Black Lives Matter like you and others here do and already have done. I expect to see more and even worse examples of what occurred last night as a direct response to the violence that's been going on for months and as the Democrats continue to fail to meet the basic expectations of it's residents and other people related to other communities or neighborhoods that more or less surround or border them these days. The worthless Democrats that run Minneapolis fucked up again tonight.

The ratio of your liking to talk a big game and actually doing something speaks for itself.  Coward.  Braaaak, buck buck buck...

Rather shoot people than listen to them?  Unable to distinguish between Black Lives Matter and the Boogaloo Bois?  Or is your ideological blindness showing?  Intelligence does not outwardly seem to matter in falling into and clinging to a worldview, but it does matter in presenting effective arguments.

As I said, the spiral of violence seems steady in the short term.  The Democrats are looking to gain power in the long term.  Violence shouldn't be a problem.  It might be if Trump wins the election.  He not listening to the people while is escalating the violence.  That is OK when there is an election coming up.  It can be endured if it will last only until the inauguration.  What will happen if the Republican approach of instigating violence goes four more years?  Then you may see some violence.  It is not conclusively decided that protest and legislation is the way to go, only that it should be given another shot.  We will see then if people fighting for selfishness and prejudice match up against people fighting for survival and equality.  If protest fails to make the government listen?  

Braaaaak, buck buck buck.

But I see the elections going the other way.  I'll let Bbrower and Eric go on about why.  You don't need another pointing at the polls, so I'll spare you.

(08-27-2020, 02:10 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-27-2020, 01:36 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]An obvious coward calling me a coward. That's funny. Do you know what cowards do? Cowards respond to acts violence by violent groups by catering to the demands of a violent group like Black Lives Matter like you and others here do and already have done. I expect to see more and even worse examples of what occurred last night as a direct response to the violence that's been going on for months and as the Democrats continue to fail to meet the basic expectations of it's residents and other people related to other communities or neighborhoods that more or less surround or border them these days. The worthless Democrats that run Minneapolis fucked up again tonight.

The ratio of your liking to talk a big game and actually doing something speaks for itself.  Coward.  Braaaak, buck buck buck...

Rather shoot people than listen to them?  Unable to distinguish between Black Lives Matter and the Boogaloo Bois?  Or is your ideological blindness showing?  Intelligence does not outwardly seem to matter in falling into and clinging to a worldview, but it does matter in presenting effective arguments.

As I said, the spiral of violence seems steady in the short term.  The Democrats are looking to gain power in the long term.  Violence shouldn't be a problem.  It might be if Trump wins the election.  He not listening to the people while is escalating the violence.  That is OK when there is an election coming up.  It can be endured if it will last only until the inauguration.  What will happen if the Republican approach of instigating violence goes four more years?  Then you may see some violence.  It is not conclusively decided that protest and legislation is the way to go, only that it should be given another shot.  We will see then if people fighting for selfishness and prejudice match up against people fighting for survival and equality.  If protest fails to make the government listen?  

Braaaaak, buck buck buck.

But I see the elections going the other way.  I'll let Bbrower and Eric go on about why.  You don't need another pointing at the polls, so I'll spare you.

Nope if Trump wins the election the protests would either fizzle out or be ended with a crackdown like Detroit 1967, there might be some legistlation after things calm down. Violence is more likely to escalate if Biden wins. Worst Case scenario is a basically tied election.

(08-27-2020, 08:41 AM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]Nope if Trump wins the election the protests would either fizzle out or be ended with a crackdown like Detroit 1967, there might be some legistlation after things calm down. Violence is more likely to escalate if Biden wins. Worst Case scenario is a basically tied election.

I rather doubt it.  In the awakening, progress was made in all fronts.  The Civil Rights Movement ended the overt refusal of service and forced much of the racism to go subtle.  The ladies made a go at the glass ceiling.  The war ended. and for quite a while there was an end to the string of hot wars.  It took a bunch of years before people needed to relearn the hard way not to put boots on the ground, that insurgent proxy wars are problematic.  There was a major surge in building stream cleaning sewage treatment plants.  On several fronts significant process was made.

But much was left undone as well.  During the unraveling things were not as bad as Jim Crow by a long shot, but the racists and elites found a home in the Republican Party and exercised the what ill they could.  This seems to be the next transformative turning.  Surely, you could not expect progress to end?  The turnings turn.  Time to stop enduring and demand change.

Protest will continue as long as we have government that doesn't listen.  As long as Trump and the racist violent police continue to not listen and practice violent racial policing the protests will stay active and we will have some degree of violence.  In the 1960s it was the Black Panthers.  This time it is the Boogaloo Bois.  Last time it took years for the oppressed and the victims to get something of their way.  This time we have learned.  The option of pushing it quicker is there, and I suspect it will be so pushed.  

As last time, the violence will remain minor while there is hope that protest yields to legislation.  The police will attempt to keep the violence contained, and in some cases will believe enough in not listening to the people to go unrestrained in their police riots.  The people who give up on non violence will remain in the minority so long as hope that non violence will work remains.  If anything, the rioting is tending to occur in Democrats controlled urban areas.  Trump's federal secret police have already been forced to retreat.  The bad cops murdering people have not.  Legislation is required to stop it, and there seems to be a path to achieve it so the violence of Trump and the racist violent police will not escalate.

Those claiming Trump Wants protests to escalate are talking nonsense. The protests do nothing to advance any governmental agenda, and his poll numbers declined by over 10 points when the protests began (they have recovered in the last couple weeks due to the DNC going full SJW with the VP selection). The DNC has far more ulterior motive to stir up renewed protests because if the protests fizzle out before the election many Younger Blacks and Younger Latinos would otherwise be attracted to vote Trump in a fully rational voting process. The DNC has far more motives to continuously stir up tensions and the inevitable irrational thought processes that generates so as to prevent a mass demexit otherwise. It is the scarecrow strategy being implemented here. Biden is weaker than Trump on actual policies, and must change the subject to emotional cultural issues rather than policy.

(08-27-2020, 08:14 AM)taramarie Wrote: [ -> ]Whoah this place is really turning to shit. Opening up the door and walking back out and back to animation studies. I will say this. No matter the side, both can and do have extremists. Instead of pointing finger, maybe address ones own flaws and the other side too otherwise it is a back and forth blindness. Good luck America. On the plus side for me, i am getting my green card in a couple of days and will be a European permanent resident as well as a kiwi citizen. Hope all are well here.

Polar opposites don't attract, oil and water doesn't mix, good and evil don't embrace and join hands and that's what you're seeing here today.

(08-27-2020, 01:28 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-27-2020, 08:14 AM)taramarie Wrote: [ -> ]Whoah this place is really turning to shit. Opening up the door and walking back out and back to animation studies. I will say this. No matter the side, both can and do have extremists. Instead of pointing finger, maybe address ones own flaws and the other side too otherwise it is a back and forth blindness. Good luck America. On the plus side for me, i am getting my green card in a couple of days and will be a European permanent resident as well as a kiwi citizen. Hope all are well here.

Polar opposites don't attract, oil and water doesn't mix, good and evil don't embrace and join hands  and that's what you're seeing here today.

Your platitudes are right... but Donald Trump really is a hideous example of a man and especially a leader. Let's start with how he treats about half of humanity... One well-recognized platitude is "Thou shalt not commit adultery".







If Trump shows such frequent, flagrant disloyalty to a spouse, then what does that say about him? I can understand divorce and remarriage because people can make terrible judgment in marriage. (spouse is abusive or criminal... or frigid).

(08-27-2020, 02:10 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]The ratio of your liking to talk a big game and actually doing something speaks for itself.  Coward.  Braaaak, buck buck buck...

Rather shoot people than listen to them?  Unable to distinguish between Black Lives Matter and the Boogaloo Bois?  Or is your ideological blindness showing?  Intelligence does not outwardly seem to matter in falling into and clinging to a worldview, but it does matter in presenting effective arguments.

As I said, the spiral of violence seems steady in the short term.  The Democrats are looking to gain power in the long term.  Violence shouldn't be a problem.  It might be if Trump wins the election.  He not listening to the people while is escalating the violence.  That is OK when there is an election coming up.  It can be endured if it will last only until the inauguration.  What will happen if the Republican approach of instigating violence goes four more years?  Then you may see some violence.  It is not conclusively decided that protest and legislation is the way to go, only that it should be given another shot.  We will see then if people fighting for selfishness and prejudice match up against people fighting for survival and equality.  If protest fails to make the government listen?  

Braaaaak, buck buck buck.

But I see the elections going the other way.  I'll let Bbrower and Eric go on about why.  You don't need another pointing at the polls, so I'll spare you.

As I recall, the last time you fucked up and pissed me off and learned where you ranked with me as far as your importance and your overall contribution to society, you hid/disappeared for quite a while afterwards. Oh, and when you returned, you spent more time trying to appeal and trying to be more able to relate and accept bad information or news that directly relates to you and the side that you have chosen and have continued to blindly support regardless of the circumstances or obvious changes that are needed for people other than you or the typical Democratic supporter or Democratic fan today.

(08-27-2020, 12:01 PM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]Those claiming Trump Wants protests to escalate are talking nonsense. The protests do nothing to advance any governmental agenda, and his poll numbers declined by over 10 points when the protests began (they have recovered in the last couple weeks due to the DNC going full SJW with the VP selection). The DNC has far more ulterior motive to stir up renewed protests because if the protests fizzle out before the election many Younger Blacks and Younger Latinos would otherwise be attracted to vote Trump in a fully rational voting process. The DNC has far more motives to continuously stir up tensions and the inevitable irrational thought processes that generates so as to prevent a mass demexit otherwise. It is the scarecrow strategy being implemented here. Biden is weaker than Trump on actual policies, and must change the subject to emotional cultural issues rather than policy.

Trump has stepped back from escalating the violence. For a while he was moving government people as secret police into Democratic cities. Clearing peaceful protesters for his Bible holding photo op was about the peak. Since then the military has been a bit more careful about using military force against Americans to support anything with a violent or political nature. He has let the Democrats bear the brunt of fighting those going violent while distinguishing as little ls possible between protestor and rioter.

But I interpret this as an image hit. He might see poll numbers shifting. The why is more important. You do better if you listen to the people than if you use violence against the people. Violence isn’t a win. He has seen half of the solution.

I can see the motive. He is portraying himself as a law and order candidate. He is trying to portray the opposition as a threat, and collect votes from people feeling threatened. He is not seeing the complaints being valid and working to remove the source of complaint. That seems to be the key difference between most people. Are broken windows and thefts more important than people’s lives? Do you distinguish between those that break the law and those exercising First Amendment rights?

Also, if Trump is strong on policies, why is he going with no platform? You can't make something so by lying frequently.

(08-27-2020, 12:01 PM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]Those claiming Trump Wants protests to escalate are talking nonsense. The protests do nothing to advance any governmental agenda, and his poll numbers declined by over 10 points when the protests began (they have recovered in the last couple weeks due to the DNC going full SJW with the VP selection). The DNC has far more ulterior motive to stir up renewed protests because if the protests fizzle out before the election many Younger Blacks and Younger Latinos would otherwise be attracted to vote Trump in a fully rational voting process. The DNC has far more motives to continuously stir up tensions and the inevitable irrational thought processes that generates so as to prevent a mass demexit otherwise. It is the scarecrow strategy being implemented here. Biden is weaker than Trump on actual policies, and must change the subject to emotional cultural issues rather than policy.

I think Trump wants to escalate the violence. I assume his people have restrained him a bit, or he is cautious enough not to go whole hog on this. But doing nothing about the cop killings assures more violence will continue on both sides. We see it escalating in Kenosha, and that suits Trump's purpose just fine. The protests have advanced the agenda toward police reform in some places, but no real advancement on virtually anything can happen under the current 40-year-old neo-liberal stalemate in congress. Something has to break through, and I am still holding to my prediction that something will-- if not this year, then during the next 4 years.

Younger black and hispanic voters will not turn toward Trump. You certainly harbor strange notions, Cynic Hero. It must be fun for you living in your own reality. Older folks may turn to Trump, since they are responsive to fear. The protests have helped the Democratic cause, but they happened for sincere reasons. Murders by cops are outrageous violations of our rights, which you CH don't care about.

Biden got a slight bump of about a point from the DNC, and I don't think his VP selection helped or hurt him much. It was a poor selection, and he did limit his choices in order to appeal to his base, but the negative effect of that lies in the future. The bump seems to have evaporated already, and it remains to be seen whether a Trump Bump happens after his blowhard speech tonight. The fears and lies he puts out have a hypnotic effect on the ignorant and poorly informed, poorly-educated portion of the American electorate, which is way too large.

The lack of a Republican platform this year is a flagrant admission that they only "principle" they stand for is fealty to the dear leader. Violating the law by holding the convention at the White House shows that rule of law is not a priority for them either, and that Republicans are fine with breaking the law as long as it is their side doing it. But if Bill Clinton is embarrassed by a private affair there, then he must be impeached by dozens of Republicans who do the same stuff and worse and lie about it too.

(08-27-2020, 01:59 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-27-2020, 01:28 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-27-2020, 08:14 AM)taramarie Wrote: [ -> ]Whoah this place is really turning to shit. Opening up the door and walking back out and back to animation studies. I will say this. No matter the side, both can and do have extremists. Instead of pointing finger, maybe address ones own flaws and the other side too otherwise it is a back and forth blindness. Good luck America. On the plus side for me, i am getting my green card in a couple of days and will be a European permanent resident as well as a kiwi citizen. Hope all are well here.

Polar opposites don't attract, oil and water doesn't mix, good and evil don't embrace and join hands  and that's what you're seeing here today.

Your platitudes are right... but Donald Trump really is a hideous example of a man and especially a leader. Let's start with how he treats about half of humanity... One well-recognized platitude is "Thou shalt not commit adultery".







If Trump shows such frequent, flagrant disloyalty to a spouse, then what does that say about him? I can understand divorce and remarriage because people can make terrible judgment in marriage. (spouse is abusive or criminal... or frigid).

So, how are his ex wives doing these days? Are there any living off welfare these days? Are there any of their children living off welfare or any of his grand children living off welfare these days?

(08-27-2020, 02:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-27-2020, 02:10 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Braaaaak, buck buck buck.

As I recall, the last time you fucked up and pissed me off and learned where you ranked with me as far as your importance and your overall contribution to society, you hid/disappeared for quite a while afterwards. Oh, and when you returned, you spent more time trying to appeal and trying to be more able to relate and accept bad information or news that directly relates to you and the side that you have chosen and have continued to blindly support regardless of the circumstances or obvious changes that are needed for people other than you or the typical Democratic supporter or Democratic fan  today.

I took a little vacation?  I might have, at that.  If so it was frustration at trying to hold a debate by one who doesn't bother to check against reality.  Still, I have to do something in a time where so many of my other commitments have been canceled by the bug.  I hate to tell you, but it didn't have anything to do with my putting a dent in your self image.  That resulted in a few giggles, nothing more.

Braaaaak, buck buck buck.

I think one differences between how we see the problem is in how we divide among motivations.  I separate groups with different motivations.  The violent racist cops, the federal secret police, the police, the military, Black Lives Matter, the Boogaloo Bois, the KKK, the Neo Nazi, Antifa, the SJWs, the Trumpists, the establishment Republicans, the Tea Party, etc...  In between there is often a blurring of motives.  The more sets of motives one includes, the more your perspective is harder to understand.  The fewer you use, the more the motives are confused.  I'm trying to include enough motivations to be inclusive, but am frustrated when one give for example Black Lives Matter the Boogaloo Bois motives, or assumes Antifa is active when they were opposed to the missing in action KKK and Neo Nazi.  If you lock onto blatant misunderstandings like that, how can there be communication?

You get different sorts of people interested in different things about the turning theory.  Many blues are interested in the possibility of periodic radical change, about a new birth of freedom every four score and seven years.  How does that come about?  What happens to the people who used to share the old values?

On the other hand, there are those obsessed with violence.   You are a prime example.  Xenakis is concerned with xenophobia as it used to exist in the Industrial Age, and does not care or seem to notice that we are not in that age anymore.  S&H made many insightful observations about what happened in the past.  They are sloppy about asking if the observations are true anymore.  If violence used to be necessary to make changes, is it truly necessary anymore?  If you can institute a change with non violence, is it prudent to try that first?

Yet many fans are in one way or another obsessed by the violence rich observation of past times.  They welcome the possibility of violence without noticing the periodic new births of freedom.  I for one am expecting a new birth of freedom.

I think that is much of the difference between us.  Some will see a 4T coming and be fascinated by the possibility of violence.  Others, so long as they can get their new birth of freedom, will use violence only as a last resort.  It could prove necessary if the old thinking is enough in opposition to listening to the new values.  They might refuse to hear.  The might refuse to change.  You have to change to get a new birth of freedom.

Right now, I see a path to get the new birth of freedom while avoiding the violence.  That seems the obvious win.  To one who is obsessed with the dream of violence and doesn't care about a new birth of freedom?  He wouldn't want see it.

Fortunately...  Braaaaak, buck buck buck.

(08-27-2020, 02:46 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Trump has stepped back from escalating the violence.  For a while he was moving government people as secret police into Democratic cities.  Clearing peaceful protesters for his Bible holding photo op was about the peak.  Since then the military has been a bit more careful about using military force against Americans to support anything with a violent or political nature.  He has let the Democrats bear the brunt of fighting those going violent while distinguishing as little ls possible between protestor and rioter.

But I interpret this as an image hit.  He might see poll numbers shifting.  The why is more important.  You do better if you listen to the people than if you use violence against the people.  Violence isn’t a win.  He has seen half of the solution.

I can see the motive.  He is portraying himself as a law and order candidate.  He is trying to portray the opposition as a threat, and collect votes from people feeling threatened.  He is not seeing the complaints being valid and working to remove the source of complaint.  That seems to be the key difference between most people.  Are broken windows and thefts more important than people’s lives?  Do you distinguish between those that break the law and those exercising First Amendment rights?

Also, if Trump is strong on policies, why is he going with no platform?  You can't make something so by lying frequently.

You don't/didn't see the violence that was used by Black Lives Matters to assert their worldview and impose harsh restrictions on local law enforcement as a major problem or the unwillingness of Democratic politicians to confront violent groups with professionals that are trained to confront violence with the use of violence. You forget that World War II was won with violence and the taming of the wild west was done with violence too.

(08-27-2020, 03:28 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-27-2020, 02:21 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-27-2020, 02:10 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]Braaaaak, buck buck buck.

As I recall, the last time you fucked up and pissed me off and learned where you ranked with me as far as your importance and your overall contribution to society, you hid/disappeared for quite a while afterwards. Oh, and when you returned, you spent more time trying to appeal and trying to be more able to relate and accept bad information or news that directly relates to you and the side that you have chosen and have continued to blindly support regardless of the circumstances or obvious changes that are needed for people other than you or the typical Democratic supporter or Democratic fan  today.

I took a little vacation?  I might have, at that.  If so it was frustration at trying to hold a debate by one who doesn't bother to check against reality.  Still, I have to do something in a time where so many of my other commitments have been canceled by the bug.  I hate to tell you, but it didn't have anything to do with my putting a dent in your self image.  That resulted in a few giggles, nothing more.

Braaaaak, buck buck buck.

I think one differences between how we see the problem is in how we divide among motivations.  I separate groups with different motivations.  The violent racist cops, the federal secret police, the police, the military, Black Lives Matter, the Boogaloo Bois, the KKK, the Neo Nazi, Antifa, the SJWs, the Trumpists, the establishment Republicans, the Tea Party, etc...  In between there is often a blurring of motives.  The more sets of motives one includes, the more your perspective is harder to understand.  The fewer you use, the more the motives are confused.  I'm trying to include enough motivations to be inclusive, but am frustrated when one give for example Black Lives Matter the Boogaloo Bois motives, or assumes Antifa is active when they were opposed to the missing in action KKK and Neo Nazi.  If you lock onto blatant misunderstandings like that, how can there be communication?

You get different sorts of people interested in different things about the turning theory.  Many blues are interested in the possibility of periodic radical change, about a new birth of freedom every four score and seven years.  How does that come about?  What happens to the people who used to share the old values?

On the other hand, there are those obsessed with violence.   You are a prime example.  Xenakis is concerned with xenophobia as it used to exist in the Industrial Age, and does not care or seem to notice that we are not in that age anymore.  S&H made many insightful observations about what happened in the past.  They are sloppy about asking if the observations are true anymore.  If violence used to be necessary to make changes, is it truly necessary anymore?  If you can institute a change with non violence, is it prudent to try that first?

Yet many fans are in one way or another obsessed by the violence rich observation of past times.  They welcome the possibility of violence without noticing the periodic new births of freedom.  I for one am expecting a new birth of freedom.

I think that is much of the difference between us.  Some will see a 4T coming and be fascinated by the possibility of violence.  Others, so long as they can get their new birth of freedom, will use violence only as a last resort.  It could prove necessary if the old thinking is enough in opposition to listening to the new values.  They might refuse to hear.  The might refuse to change.  You have to change to get a new birth of freedom.

Right now, I see a path to get the new birth of freedom while avoiding the violence.  That seems the obvious win.  To one who is obsessed with the dream of violence and doesn't care about a new birth of freedom?  He wouldn't want see it.

Fortunately...  Braaaaak, buck buck buck.

Yep. There are those who are obsessed with looting and violence these days. We also have a political party that's either politically handcuffed for obvious reasons pertaining to race or creed or directly viewed as in cahoots with them as well. And yes, there are those who will resort or support those who resort to violence as a means to detour them or as means to defend themselves, their families, their communities, and so forth. Lets see, we earned our freedom with violence. The Texans earned their freedom with violence. The slaves were freed with violence. The Imperialist Japanese and Nazi Germany were conquered with violence and the Soviet Union was cutoff, isolated and contained by an understanding of America's history and American willingness/preference to fight wars abroad as a means to defend/protect the American homeland. So, whose territory am I in right now?

(08-27-2020, 07:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Yep. There are those who are obsessed with looting and violence these days. We also have a political party that's either politically handcuffed for obvious reasons pertaining to race or creed or directly viewed as in cahoots with them as well. And yes, there are those who will resort or support those who resort to violence as a means to detour them or as means to defend themselves, their families, their communities, and so forth. Lets see, we earned our freedom with violence. The Texans earned their freedom with violence. The slaves were freed with violence. The Imperialist Japanese and Nazi Germany were conquered with violence and the Soviet Union was cutoff, isolated and contained by an understanding of America's history and American willingness/preference to fight wars abroad as a means to defend/protect the American homeland. So, whose territory am I in right now?

You are in the Industrial Age.  All the examples you gave are in the Industrial Age.  Well, the exception is containing the Soviet Union, and they fell due to non violence but have reverted to autocratic rule, so I'm not sure if they can be placed reliably as an Information Age culture.  Putin will eventually fall.  We will have to see how he falls.  Will a war be necessary?

In the Information Age you try non violence first, and if it succeeds great.  If you have to escalate, you escalate.  If the government is clinging to the old values is absolutely dedicated to the old values and is unwilling to change, and there is no peaceful way of transferring power, you resort to violence.  

Some still look at the Industrial Age to develop their view of how the universe works.  Some are carried on by their hunter gatherer genes, divide into us and them instinctively, and will use violence freely on the other group as they are bred to do.  When they think Americans, they think some subset of Americans who think like they do.  To them Americans doesn't mean all those who live in America.  American is given a perverted meaning.

I would suggest with my trying to combine turnings, ages, civilizations and behavioral science, I have warned people to be aware of shifting ages.  Thus, you are on my territory.

We do differ on who benefits from violence.  I see Trump as playing the fear card, of dividing Americans into us and them, of playing up the old us and them hunter gatherer instincts.  Biden is trying to unite all Americans who are listening, is trying to resolve things with protest and legislation rather than violence.  As I see a strong possibility that Biden and the Democrats will succeed in using protest and legislation to solve problems like COVID and violent racist policing, there is absolutely no need for violence save as a subtle threat.  

Even Martin Luther King listened occasionally to Malcom X.  Even he let his anger carry him away from time to time.  While I do not endorse the violence, I am not surprised by it.  It is in our nature as humans.  The threat of it enhances the protest and legislate process.  If violence wasn't a background threat, the establishment would be less inclined to cave.  This is not to say I am enthusiastic about wallowing in violence, or think the police shouldn't make it hard on those who choose to walk the violent path.  But, unfortunately, cultures are stubborn.  The more conservative folk will not collapse their privileged violent perspective as quickly if the violence isn't there.

That does not mean about every four score and seven years a new birth of freedom doesn't come.  You should have picked that up that from turning theory if nothing else.