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

(02-25-2018, 05:17 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-24-2018, 09:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Remember when I was raked over the coals on the old forum page because I liked the music and the personality of a 17-year old? I was smitten, and I was so happy that a 16-year old kid could make the best pop music recording in almost 40 years-- and it has not been surpassed since, even by himself. You know who I mean.

Well, am I smitten again? I like this kid who is getting so much crap, just like Justin did, on his you tube videos. It's just because he's so good at speaking out for his buddies at school, and saying #NeverAgain to shootings, saying politicians must take action. And he's a skilled video and film maker and student journalist at Marjory Stoneman Douglas school. This video shows his cool and his charm, but it gets a bunch of dislikes by alt-right trolls who rush in because they want their assinine "gun rights." Just like Justin got the most dislikes ever on you tube, just because a young guy who was young for his age had a good hit record. As Justin said, "all the haters I swear look so small from up here"





His famous video about an argument of a lifeguard with his friend is on his channel, it has 742,000 views now.

David Hogg's channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpMMcYV...A11vBnFngQ

standing up for his friend against a stupidass "lifeguard"
https://youtu.be/lhMNNaTwsyM

Oh, the young opportunist. Yeah, I saw him/ picked him out/ right away. My take, the dude didn't lose anyone that he truly cared about during the shooting. Yeah, he lost some classmates and saw some bodies but he didn't loose anyone important to him. Why, he's a loner too. A loner who has stable parents who lives in a stable home who grew up in a stable environment. I didn't like the dude. I've seen dudes like him before in life, in business business and in politics. Reds are so much different than blues. Reds aren't interested in making decisions for blues or taking rights away from the blues. Reds are only interested in making decisions for reds (themselves). The blues are interested in making decisions for blues, reds, purples, greens, navy blues or everyone in general. I don't think the young blue dude has been around enough to be making important decisions for me or taking away rights away from me. There's a difference between a young king who's become used to being treated like a king who was granted the title and a king who wasn't who rightfully earned his title.  Right now, we have a system in place where reds and blues are supposed to be working together and making decisions for everyone which is failing miserably. You're an example of why this is happening today.

Reds are VERY interested in making decisions for blues. You decide that we should be saddled with guns, and that we can't stop them from being used by idiots. You decide that corporations should continue to destroy our environment and destroy our climate and rip off workers and consumers. You decide that we should have cutbacks in the entitlement programs that we paid for, and that rich folks shouldn't pay hardly any taxes, leaving it all for our grandkids.. You decide that we should have lousy free-enterprise health care. You decided that gamblers and speculators should have the "freedom" to drive up our home prices and ruin our economy without any supervision. A lot of you decide that we should not teach evolution in schools. You reds have decided all these things and more for us. You decided that the USA should stay mired in an 18th century world. Don't tell me you don't decide things for us. It is you guys that are ruining the system with your stubborn regressive fanaticism.

I don't care about your gun rights. I would rather that young people live than have you reds have guns to kill burglars who might steal your laptop or your jewelry. I don't care that much about your stuff. It's not worth risking even YOUR life for.

Quote:Do you think the young blue dude (clueless blues) knows that the assault rifle ban was in place during Columbine? Did the national ban of assault rifles stop the massacre that took place at Columbine or the big shootout that took place between a couple of bank robbers and the police in the streets of LA? A shootout where the cops were out gunned because the criminals where more technologically advanced ( illegal AK-47's and body armor) than the cops and the civilians who the cops were doing their best to protect with their feeble standard issue pistols and shotguns. I don't think he or the clueless blues know this or take either of them into account prior to delivering arguments.

The young blue guy (who says he is non-partisan and believes in the Second Amendment, unlike me) knows a lot more than the idiots you guys have elected who refuse to act on gun control. The assault weapons ban reduced mass shootings and gun violence, and it increased when the ban was senselessly lifted. Bans work everywhere, but in a country already awash with guns, no laws can stop all massacres now. I say if a gun law can save a few lives, it is much more worthwhile than if some hunter can't shoot a deer or some maniac can't shoot up a school or office somewhere. Or if some of the robbers can't get an illegal AK-47 to shoot some cops more easily. Ask the cops if they want the robbers to have permission to get AR-15s and see what they tell ya.

Quote:How does it feel taking flack from the left and the right? Do you stand a chance at over coming two older and more knowledgeable people? My issue with blues is the caliber of the primary people who make up the bulk of their target audiences. I'm not a fan of idiots. I don't cater to the feeling of idiots. I don't market idiots. I don't employ idiots. I don't get into bed with idiots. I don't make deals with idiots. I don't rely upon idiots or invest in idiots. I don't take orders from idiots. Unfortunately, you earned you way into the idiot column a long time ago. I don't own stock in blue America. I'm not associated with poverty. I'm not associated with welfare. I have no interest in Socialism or Communism or Fascism or Monarchy's or any old system associated with Europe.

You and the reds in general are interested in taking us back to 18th century libertarianism where greedy businessmen have full permission to exploit and destroy our country. I am not a fan of idiots either, which is why sometimes I lose patience with you red guys. Some of you are worse than others. I don't consider you a troll like the nutjobs who made snide comments on this fun little vacation video. At least I hope you are not. A lot of you have good qualities as people. But you are holding our country back, and leaving it in danger from a pack of wild animals called greedy businessmen and unhinged fanatics. We need to move ahead to a new system and a new society where people know themselves and the divine presence, and have compassion enough to design a society that works for the most people most of the time. I have faith that it can be done, if the Awakening returns and people wake up to the potential to be creative that lies within all of us.

(02-25-2018, 12:43 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-24-2018, 07:43 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]This philosophy of self-reliance in what we now call red states and red counties did not used to interfere with sensible notions of government acting to help and protect the people. They voted for Democrats like FDR to fix the economy and the eroded land, and bring energy to the Tennessee Valley, and they appreciated them. They supported JFK and LBJ when they acted to help reduce poverty in Appalachia, and brought good lighting and plumbing to the rural people. Gun control was accepted, and so was the qualifications clause of the 2nd in the Courts that were appointed by the presidents they voted for...

Well, I was in many ways with Eric.  One difference is that he does not acknowledge what he calls the qualification clause as a justifications clause.  In this, I close to follow the label and intent of Professor Volokh of UCLA from "The Commonplace Second Amendment", one of the many Standard Model articles.  There were many Jim Crow Supreme Court cases that removed many aspects of the Bill of Rights after the Reconstruction ended.  Most Jim Crow rulings were annulled by Thurgood Marshall and the NAACP during the middle of the 20th century.  Volokh finds other examples of rights with justification clauses used during the Founding Era.  What is common is an absurd results manifesting if you go with Jim Crow, and an interpretation never touched by the courts in the other cases.

And, yes, the I am very much blue on many issues.  As a crisis approaches, it is common for one party to cling to the past.  They clung to things like slavery during the Civil War era, and Laissez Faire economics during the Gilded Age.  Much that was clung to is best left in the past, where Lincoln and FDR left it.

But this does not mean accepting bad law or abandoning the meaning to be found in the Constitution.  It was easy if morally bankrupt in the 19th century to pretend or believe that slaves deserved exemption from the Whig quest for equality under law.  It was easy if morally bankrupt to push reprehensible working conditions during the Gilded Age on workers who had no real choice but to accept.  It is morally bankrupt to pretend or believe we are not warming the globe, destroying what future generations will very much covet.

But it also means you don't have to demonize those who think and live differently than you.  As crisis approaches, it is natural to demonize.  Eric provides a good example.  I do not see the red as evil, insane, twisted or other.  They are clinging to an old culture that fits well with their environment.  I sympathize with them a lot.  It is easy to see Washington DC as corrupt, as following the corporations rather than the People.  It is easy to see them wishing just to be left alone, if blue folks from far away don't tell them what to do.  They are in many ways understandable.

You don't have to demonize to understand.  In this the red are correct when they say the blue are not listening.

Eric sure isn't.

But they want, and they vote for Washington DC to follow the corporations rather than the people. That's what they vote for over and over again. That is their fondest wish, and they elect people to do exactly that. They are clinging desperately to laissez faire today. It is past time for the reds to stop listening to their demons. We do all have demons within us and around us. Runaway cravings and thoughts and worries, and also people in elite society dominated by these demons who rip us off and keep us shackled and poor, or try to. Sympathizing with demons does not work; we have to see them for what they are and say no to them. If you say that what the reds do is morally bankrupt, as you did above, then I don't see any difference there from what I am saying.

The "loner opportunist" whom Classic Xer doesn't like and his Dad make themselves clear as Anderson Cooper takes it to the conspiracy theory nuts who ruin our country's discourse.





David Hogg says more about the disgusting conspiracy theories

One side has lost it's mind, this commentator says.

(02-26-2018, 03:51 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The "loner opportunist" whom Classic Xer doesn't like and his Dad make themselves clear as Anderson Cooper takes it to the conspiracy theory nuts who ruin our country's discourse.





David Hogg says more about the disgusting conspiracy theories

"Alternative facts" strike again. No matter how obvious the reality is, some people will fabricate a story as if such can clear those with an agenda that reality cannot support.

Minitrue is alive and well in America.

(02-25-2018, 04:42 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-25-2018, 10:16 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think the culture of the late 18th century and red culture today resemble each other at all.  The only link: red culture idealizes: "the Founders" in a way that makes them unrecognizably rigid and absolutist.  The red overlay is closer to a nihilistic version of libertarianism.  They celebrate "freedom", as long as it's THEIR freedom: guns, yes; prayer, yes; abortion, no (actually, hell no), and patriotism as they define it ... and only as they define it.  I live deep in Red America.  I have friends that hold these views.  They feel free to tell me how I should think, but act hurt and angry if their values are questioned even a little.  It's your value-lock problem on steroids.

And let's understand: this is not an issue of "both sides do it", even though both sides rally to their respective flags.  This is "We're right and you are evil" compared to "We don't agree".

But we are headed to another 1T, an inherently conservative time. But before current conservatives of the National Rifle Association and a Republican Party that seems to have an agenda reminiscent of the John Birch Society get excited about the impending new conservative era -- it won't be their style of conservatism. The conservatism will be forged in the darkest and most decisive years of the Crisis Era, and it will most likely be a rejection of much that is offered with the label conservative. It will be more parallel to the conservatism of Dwight Eisenhower (preserve and defend the New Deal from radicalism and foreign menaces) than of people who want a New Feudalism.

It will be for law and order, such being seen as necessary for economic stability and growth as well as the protection of civil liberties. It will treat legal precedent and diplomatic protocol as virtues more important than the political fad of the day. It will put thrift above immediate self-gratification. It will see education far more useful for getting economic results than will be superstition and ignorance in achieving some transitory advantage for politicians. It will confirm same-sex marriage and homosexuality as unworthy of challenge (so long as such is between consenting adults) but crack down on sexual harassment and messing with children. It might tolerate marijuana but crack down harshly upon opiates and meth. In view of the success of America's non-Christian and non-white model minorities despite difficult times for many white Christians in the economy it will promote entrepreneurialism and formal education, the former for creating the necessary wealth and the latter in part to make Americans less amenable to demagogues (I expect Donald Trump to be one of the most widely-reviled figures in America for decades.

Of course I expect a crackdown on people seen as dangerous, disloyal radicals.

If it is parallel to Eisenhower, it will have substance more resembling what Obama sought. Consider that what the New Deal types wanted was something resembling the 1950s... and by the late 1930s America was already showing portents of what the 1950s (or at least the late 1940s) would look like. I take note of a recent poll of historians (paradoxically those students of the past are the best predictors of the future) in which the liberals already saw Obama among the top ten Presidents, and even the conservatives saw him 14th.

Surely you have seen my favorite map, the one comparing elections involving Eisenhower and Obama... right?

Most likely, I won't see the entire 1T, but it's not likely to be similar to the last one.  It may more closely resemble the one prior, and be dominated by moneyed interests.  Then again, the chaos Presidency of DJT could trigger a transformation I hadn't expected even two years ago, and the next 1T could be truly transformational.  In any case, technology will march on, and whether it gets used for good or ill will dictate the following 2T and 4T.

(02-26-2018, 11:42 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Most likely, I won't see the entire 1T, but it's not likely to be similar to the last one.  It may more closely resemble the one prior, and be dominated by moneyed interests.  Then again, the chaos Presidency of DJT could trigger a transformation I hadn't expected even two years ago, and the next 1T could be truly transformational.  In any case, technology will march on, and whether it gets used for good or ill will dictate the following 2T and 4T.

Normally the 1T locks in cement the values trialed and erred by the 4T. That would be a divided country by region, a divided country by wealth, and perhaps global warming, with the culture war on the side? I am not sure of the driving issue of the 4T, therefore the lessons in cement of the 1T are pending?

(02-25-2018, 06:50 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-25-2018, 10:16 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think the culture of the late 18th century and red culture today resemble each other at all.  The only link: red culture idealizes: "the Founders" in a way that makes them unrecognizably rigid and absolutist.  The red overlay is closer to a nihilistic version of libertarianism.  They celebrate "freedom", as long as it's THEIR freedom: guns, yes; prayer, yes; abortion, no (actually, hell no), and patriotism as they define it ... and only as they define it.  I live deep in Red America.  I have friends that hold these views.  They feel free to tell me how I should think, but act hurt and angry if their values are questioned even a little.  It's your value-lock problem on steroids.

And let's understand: this is not an issue of "both sides do it", even though both sides rally to their respective flags.  This is "We're right and you are evil" compared to "We don't agree".

I have the same freedom's as you and them. We all have those freedoms: guns, prayer and speech (patriotism being expressed as we see it and define it as individuals). Whether one chooses (another freedom/right available to all of us) to use them or not is another matter relating to all of us as individuals. You don't think prayer or religion is important and you don't believe guns are still necessary these days as far as citizens are concerned and you're ok with the government getting rid  of them. What term do we use to describe people who don't seem to care about anyone else but themselves or the views of anyone else other than their own? I can think of a couple and a couple of systems too. I see one of them in your post (nihilist).

I don't have the freedom to kill an unwanted fetus like the women do now and neither do you. Abortion is a woman's right that we don't share because we're men and it's illegal for men to kill unwanted fetus's without the woman's consent. I don't care what happens to abortion, I view abortion as a woman's issue for women to decide on their own via democratically or a legal issues addressed (continued or ended in the courts) in the courts. Being I don't really care about it or place a value on it or care about whether the ones who do it end up in hell or not and so forth, I don't recognize it as an important issue and vote Republican. People killing people for their interest is still pretty common. Like I've said, we don't live in heaven and I don't vote or make decisions as if we do.

From your response, you are not a resident of Red America ... not really.  Do you feel the need to defend actions you wouldn't take or ideas you don't hold?  I don't think so.  FWIW, I think you fit much better in the pre-2015 GOP than you do today.  If the recent CPAC convention is any indication, the GOP is eating their own. I'm baffled by the process, but I'm not a Republican.  Maybe you can explain.

(02-26-2018, 12:15 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2018, 11:42 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Most likely, I won't see the entire 1T, but it's not likely to be similar to the last one.  It may more closely resemble the one prior, and be dominated by moneyed interests.  Then again, the chaos Presidency of DJT could trigger a transformation I hadn't expected even two years ago, and the next 1T could be truly transformational.  In any case, technology will march on, and whether it gets used for good or ill will dictate the following 2T and 4T.

Normally the 1T locks in cement the values trialed and erred by the 4T.  That would be a divided country by region, a divided country by wealth, and perhaps global warming, with the culture war on the side?  I am not sure of the driving issue of the 4T, therefore the lessons in cement of the 1T are pending?

We may be heading for a time a lot like the late 19th and early 20th centuries, if the government decays further.  The absence of communal power opens the door to private power, and stalemated government is as good a way to kill communal power as I can see: no coup required.

Bob's notions of listening to the other side, and Eric sure doesn't, can only be taken so far. David has mentioned that he knows some of these red America people. I've met some too. I'm sure there's a spectrum of opinions, attitudes and behaviors among red America. We listen to them, and we share some of their real concerns. We blues and greens don't agree with them much of the time, even if we understand probably better than they do themselves what's driving them to their parochial opinions, and we understand perfectly well that they have been deceived into supporting the wrong solutions to the real problems that some of them face every day.

A lot of red culture these days is driven by brainwashing within red media bubbles. I can listen only so long to their nonsense. I contribute to the climate change discussion site. After a while, the steady supply of trolls who keep spouting alternative facts that have been debunked over and over again gets very tiring. They are holding on to unscientific alternative theories, some made up from their own personal ideas, in face of the very real danger to our way of life that we face. The gun debate is just another example. Should I "listen" to the hundreds or thousands of trolls who tweet or come on to the page of a student journalist's vacation video and say he's a paid crisis actor, even though the facts they refuse to see obviously prove beyond any doubt that this was a rumor planted by a fired Republican campaign staffer? What should I think about such numbskulls as these? And even though their claims that guns are needed to protect themselves against the government, or that assault rifles are needed for hunting, etc etc., are contributing to the deaths of thousands of innocent people, and even though they insult students who experienced this outrageous tragedy and who accept the 2nd Amendment but want some background checks, as if that means they want to take their guns away? These idiots are not worth listening to. I turn off Pence and Conway and Huckabee Sanders regularly because I know they are Trump syncophants and paid liars. No, I don't watch alt-right programs and Alex Jones propaganda. This is the stuff that a large portion of the Trump base listens to-- this Trumpist group of creeps who yelled in agreement when Trump said at his rallies that protesters should be carried out on stretchers. They put him in office because they fell for all this crap, every bit of it.

(02-26-2018, 12:51 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2018, 12:15 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2018, 11:42 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Most likely, I won't see the entire 1T, but it's not likely to be similar to the last one.  It may more closely resemble the one prior, and be dominated by moneyed interests.  Then again, the chaos Presidency of DJT could trigger a transformation I hadn't expected even two years ago, and the next 1T could be truly transformational.  In any case, technology will march on, and whether it gets used for good or ill will dictate the following 2T and 4T.

Normally the 1T locks in cement the values trialed and erred by the 4T.  That would be a divided country by region, a divided country by wealth, and perhaps global warming, with the culture war on the side?  I am not sure of the driving issue of the 4T, therefore the lessons in cement of the 1T are pending?

We may be heading for a time a lot like the late 19th and early 20th centuries, if the government decays further.  The absence of communal power opens the door to private power, and stalemated government is as good a way to kill communal power as I can see: no coup required.

We may be, and this is exactly the 4T crisis that we face. The competition with this red culture during the remaining 10-11 years of THIS 4T will decide what kind of 1T and 2T we will have, and what kind of country we will have for the foreseeable future.

(02-26-2018, 12:51 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2018, 12:15 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2018, 11:42 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Most likely, I won't see the entire 1T, but it's not likely to be similar to the last one.  It may more closely resemble the one prior, and be dominated by moneyed interests.  Then again, the chaos Presidency of DJT could trigger a transformation I hadn't expected even two years ago, and the next 1T could be truly transformational.  In any case, technology will march on, and whether it gets used for good or ill will dictate the following 2T and 4T.

Normally the 1T locks in cement the values trialed and erred by the 4T.  That would be a divided country by region, a divided country by wealth, and perhaps global warming, with the culture war on the side?  I am not sure of the driving issue of the 4T, therefore the lessons in cement of the 1T are pending?

We may be heading for a time a lot like the late 19th and early 20th centuries, if the government decays further.  The absence of communal power opens the door to private power, and stalemated government is as good a way to kill communal power as I can see: no coup required.

But something is even more dangerous now -- Big Government as an enforcer for economic elites. This allows a merger of economic power with State power, which practically defines fascism. A fascistic America would be a monstrosity with torture chambers, people disappearing into some lethal void, and labor camps.

(02-26-2018, 01:19 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2018, 12:51 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]We may be heading for a time a lot like the late 19th and early 20th centuries, if the government decays further.  The absence of communal power opens the door to private power, and stalemated government is as good a way to kill communal power as I can see: no coup required.

We may be, and this is exactly the 4T crisis that we face. The competition with this red culture during the remaining 10-11 years of THIS 4T will decide what kind of 1T and 2T we will have, and what kind of country we will have for the foreseeable future.

This assumes that a counter-narrative can be offered, defended and act as a rallying point for the alternative to neo-liberalism.  Count me skeptical.  I don't see any evidence that the Democrats will abandon their culture-warrior stances, and, barring that, there is no other way to create the commonality needed to move hoi polloi, who pay minimal attention to details.  It's like living in a loop.  Atrocious behavior generates anger.  Anger generates action, but the action is split by cultural demands that tend to anger most of the populace.  Atrocious behavior arises, and the loop repeats.  

Until someone with charisma and stature focuses the anger on communal action, this won't change.  The Dems seem incapable of seeing that, or too cowardly to take the risk.

(02-26-2018, 02:21 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]But something is even more dangerous now -- Big Government as an enforcer for economic elites. This allows a merger of economic power with State power, which practically defines fascism. A fascistic America would be a monstrosity with torture chambers, people disappearing into some lethal void,  and labor camps.

Credit where its due: the GOP understands who they serve and they serve them well.

(02-26-2018, 02:38 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Reds are VERY interested in making decisions for blues. You decide that we should be saddled with guns, and that we can't stop them from being used by idiots. You decide that corporations should continue to destroy our environment and destroy our climate and rip off workers and consumers. You decide that we should have cutbacks in the entitlement programs that we paid for, and that rich folks shouldn't pay hardly any taxes, leaving it all for our grandkids.. You decide that we should have lousy free-enterprise health care. You decided that gamblers and speculators should have the "freedom" to drive up our home prices and ruin our economy without any supervision. A lot of you decide that we should not teach evolution in schools. You reds have decided all these things and more for us. You decided that the USA should stay mired in an 18th century world. Don't tell me you don't decide things for us. It is you guys that are ruining the system with your stubborn regressive fanaticism.

I don't care about your gun rights. I would rather that young people live than have you reds have guns to kill burglars who might steal your laptop or your jewelry. I don't care that much about your stuff. It's not worth risking even YOUR life for.

Quote:Do you think the young blue dude (clueless blues) knows that the assault rifle ban was in place during Columbine? Did the national ban of assault rifles stop the massacre that took place at Columbine or the big shootout that took place between a couple of bank robbers and the police in the streets of LA? A shootout where the cops were out gunned because the criminals where more technologically advanced ( illegal AK-47's and body armor) than the cops and the civilians who the cops were doing their best to protect with their feeble standard issue pistols and shotguns. I don't think he or the clueless blues know this or take either of them into account prior to delivering arguments.

The young blue guy (who says he is non-partisan and believes in the Second Amendment, unlike me) knows a lot more than the idiots you guys have elected who refuse to act on gun control. The assault weapons ban reduced mass shootings and gun violence, and it increased when the ban was senselessly lifted. Bans work everywhere, but in a country already awash with guns, no laws can stop all massacres now. I say if a gun law can save a few lives, it is much more worthwhile than if some hunter can't shoot a deer or some maniac can't shoot up a school or office somewhere. Or if some of the robbers can't get an illegal AK-47 to shoot some cops more easily. Ask the cops if they want the robbers to have permission to get AR-15s and see what they tell ya.

Quote:How does it feel taking flack from the left and the right? Do you stand a chance at over coming two older and more knowledgeable people? My issue with blues is the caliber of the primary people who make up the bulk of their target audiences. I'm not a fan of idiots. I don't cater to the feeling of idiots. I don't market idiots. I don't employ idiots. I don't get into bed with idiots. I don't make deals with idiots. I don't rely upon idiots or invest in idiots. I don't take orders from idiots. Unfortunately, you earned you way into the idiot column a long time ago. I don't own stock in blue America. I'm not associated with poverty. I'm not associated with welfare. I have no interest in Socialism or Communism or Fascism or Monarchy's or any old system associated with Europe.

You and the reds in general are interested in taking us back to 18th century libertarianism where greedy businessmen have full permission to exploit and destroy our country. I am not a fan of idiots either, which is why sometimes I lose patience with you red guys. Some of you are worse than others. I don't consider you a troll like the nutjobs who made snide comments on this fun little vacation video. At least I hope you are not. A lot of you have good qualities as people. But you are holding our country back, and leaving it in danger from a pack of wild animals called greedy businessmen and unhinged fanatics. We need to move ahead to a new system and a new society where people know themselves and the divine presence, and have compassion enough to design a society that works for the most people most of the time. I have faith that it can be done, if the Awakening returns and people wake up to the potential to be creative that lies within all of us.

(02-27-2018, 11:30 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2018, 01:19 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2018, 12:51 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]We may be heading for a time a lot like the late 19th and early 20th centuries, if the government decays further.  The absence of communal power opens the door to private power, and stalemated government is as good a way to kill communal power as I can see: no coup required.

We may be, and this is exactly the 4T crisis that we face. The competition with this red culture during the remaining 10-11 years of THIS 4T will decide what kind of 1T and 2T we will have, and what kind of country we will have for the foreseeable future.

This assumes that a counter-narrative can be offered, defended and act as a rallying point for the alternative to neo-liberalism.  Count me skeptical.  I don't see any evidence that the Democrats will abandon their culture-warrior stances, and, barring that, there is no other way to create the commonality needed to move hoi polloi, who pay minimal attention to details.  It's like living in a loop.  Atrocious behavior generates anger.  Anger generates action, but the action is split by cultural demands that tend to anger most of the populace.  Atrocious behavior arises, and the loop repeats.  

Until someone with charisma and stature focuses the anger on communal action, this won't change.  The Dems seem incapable of seeing that, or too cowardly to take the risk.

As you suggest, it will take a good candidate, like Bill Clinton or Barack Obama, who can convince people (as Obama and Clinton tried to do, somewhat successfully) to see that the concerns of their own cultural identity are being held back by the same private-power-enforced stalemate that holds back those of other cultural identities. Hillary made it clear too, using the slogan "stronger together." I don't think that's hard for people to understand; there just needs to be a candidate who can communicate well and give the impression that (s)he can be a leader.

Horoscope scores are a good indicator of who is and is not such a leader. Few candidates who run and lose, and not too many who are nominated and lose, have the score that indicates this ability to communicate and inspire confidence. Only two candidates ever in history who were never nominated, ever had a higher score than the winner of the election in which they actually competed. One of those was Carly Fiorina, who had a score just barely higher than Donald Trump's score. But Fiorina was not nearly as well-known as Trump, and that made a big difference.

Whether you accept this index or not, the bottom line is that Democrats as well as Republicans lose when they don't choose candidates who can communicate. If we want leadership that can turn the ship of state around from the domination of private power, and make it work, we need to choose the right person who can do that. If we do, and that person is actually a good leader as well as a good candidate, then it could happen. But the public will also need to support him or her, and let him keep a congress (s)he can work with.

As I see it, the only two possible candidates who can accomplish this for sure are Terry McAuliffe and Mitch Landrieu. Sherrod Brown is a maybe. Chris Murphy also has a slightly higher score than Trump. I have doubts about him though. Oprah Winfrey is another maybe if she runs.

Seth Meyers hasn't really put himself into a position of credibility yet, but he has a very high score too.

I thought Hillary had a chance against Trump, even though she had a much lower score than he. There were a few other things going for her, and she did win the popular vote. But we really needed a candidate who we could have been sure was going to win, not just one who might win. Trump is an expert salesman and entertainer. He connects very well with an audience. That is a hard thing to beat, even though he has no other virtues. Sanders had a better score than Hillary, but maybe he was not good enough either, and maybe too easy to pillory for his "socialist" ideas.

http://philosopherswheel.com/presidentialelections.html

(02-26-2018, 11:42 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-25-2018, 04:42 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-25-2018, 10:16 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think the culture of the late 18th century and red culture today resemble each other at all.  The only link: red culture idealizes: "the Founders" in a way that makes them unrecognizably rigid and absolutist.  The red overlay is closer to a nihilistic version of libertarianism.  They celebrate "freedom", as long as it's THEIR freedom: guns, yes; prayer, yes; abortion, no (actually, hell no), and patriotism as they define it ... and only as they define it.  I live deep in Red America.  I have friends that hold these views.  They feel free to tell me how I should think, but act hurt and angry if their values are questioned even a little.  It's your value-lock problem on steroids.

And let's understand: this is not an issue of "both sides do it", even though both sides rally to their respective flags.  This is "We're right and you are evil" compared to "We don't agree".

But we are headed to another 1T, an inherently conservative time. But before current conservatives of the National Rifle Association and a Republican Party that seems to have an agenda reminiscent of the John Birch Society get excited about the impending new conservative era -- it won't be their style of conservatism. The conservatism will be forged in the darkest and most decisive years of the Crisis Era, and it will most likely be a rejection of much that is offered with the label conservative as 'movement conservatives' now promote. It will be more parallel to the conservatism of Dwight Eisenhower (preserve and defend the New Deal from radicalism and foreign menaces) than of people who want a New Feudalism.

It will be for law and order, such being seen as necessary for economic stability and growth as well as the protection of civil liberties. It will treat legal precedent and diplomatic protocol as virtues more important than the political fad of the day. It will put thrift above immediate self-gratification. It will see education far more useful for getting economic results than will be superstition and ignorance in achieving some transitory advantage for politicians. It will confirm same-sex marriage and homosexuality as unworthy of challenge (so long as such is between consenting adults) but crack down on sexual harassment and messing with children. It might tolerate marijuana but crack down harshly upon opiates and meth. In view of the success of America's non-Christian and non-white model minorities despite difficult times for many white Christians in the economy it will promote entrepreneurialism and formal education, the former for creating the necessary wealth and the latter in part to make Americans less amenable to demagogues (I expect Donald Trump to be one of the most widely-reviled figures in America for decades.

Of course I expect a crackdown on people seen as dangerous, disloyal radicals.

If it is parallel to Eisenhower, it will have substance more resembling what Obama sought. Consider that what the New Deal types wanted was something resembling the 1950s... and by the late 1930s America was already showing portents of what the 1950s (or at least the late 1940s) would look like. I take note of a recent poll of historians (paradoxically those students of the past are the best predictors of the future) in which the liberals already saw Obama among the top ten Presidents, and even the conservatives saw him 14th.

Surely you have seen my favorite map, the one comparing elections involving Eisenhower and Obama... right?

Most likely, I won't see the entire 1T, but it's not likely to be similar to the last one.  It may more closely resemble the one prior, and be dominated by moneyed interests.  Then again, the chaos Presidency of DJT could trigger a transformation I hadn't expected even two years ago, and the next 1T could be truly transformational.  In any case, technology will march on, and whether it gets used for good or ill will dictate the following 2T and 4T.

Having been born near the middle of the last 1T, I also expect to see no more than the early part of the next 1T. But I also expect events to move much more swiftly during the Trump phase of the current Crisis than during the comparatively placid time of the Obama Presidency.

Of course, the Hard Right began by licking its wounds and steadily taking more power until the United States has become a near-dictatorship. Obama did most things by the book; Donald Trump seems to have defied the book. A leader who thinks that historical precedent has great relevance for a leader and who does not have hurt an agenda of salving his hurt feelings (Obama) is by nature cautious, whatever his ideology. A leader who thinks history can be shaped to fit his dreams and has copious scores to settle (Trump) sows the whirlwind, whatever his ideology.

I see President Trump more likely to place blame than to solve problems. That is the danger.

Should he be able to achieve his agenda, then he really will make America Great Again -- for the right people, and probably only those 'right people'. America will be a country to leave, and not to which to immigrate. America will have a brain drain and a disappearance of its most promising entrepreneurs. For most of the history of the world, America has demanded less in identity of people and offered the most that any country could offer. Crony capitalism with acid tests of faith in a right-wing orthodoxy in political and even religious values can send America into an era with an odd combination of stagnation and chaos.

The historical pattern in America has been that the cooler heads ultimately prevail. Maybe after a short era of Donald Trump (I see him as a one-term President even without potential issues of health) we will revert to old, successful patterns. Many countries have survived the fall of disgraced leaders only to come out of the experience with a firm resolve to prevent a repetition of a leader showing signs of potential disgrace. We have yet to solve much that was wrong in the latter years of the post-WWII era. The Multiversity that allowed college students to avoid liberal arts as if they were budding engineers or scientists must go in favor of the old standard of liberal arts that prepared people for genuine leadership by teaching values as suitable for a shop steward as for a college professor. Most of Postmodernist claptrap, the part that pretends that there is no real knowledge other than a personal solipsism, will find its way to the philosophical equivalent of the toxic waste enclosure.The dubious treatment of schlock entertainment as equal to Don Giovanni  or Swan Lake will by necessity die. People will want inner peace, and they will  need to offer a suitable legacy for their children even if t hey can offer nothing else. Superstition will give way to science which has solved far more problems than any divination. The undemocratic trends that give us (for now) a semi-dictator as President and a legislative process that corporate lobbyists dominate must give way to what Abraham Lincoln called for in a dark time: "a new birth of freedom". Above all, the economic idea that we are all operating only for ourselves and our untrained appetites must vanish. We will need to do big things just to get through an economic meltdown without tearing us apart as a people. Wise conservatives will promote thrift which creates savers who have a stake in a moderate conservatism instead of consumer debt that creates people in economic hardship.

I see some good signs even if the President seems like the sort of person for which Carly Simon offered the song "You're So Vain". First, someone that awful is not gaining support. Second, youth are capable of coherent, principled protest against the gun culture that puts gun sales above human life. Third, homosexuality is getting the respect that it deserves as a harmless inevitability at the same time that America shows signs of cracking down on abusive, destructive sexuality. We have big economic problems, and our political system offers most of us great sacrifices in the expectation that if we suffer enough for elites who act like a new aristocracy, then the scraps and cast-offs that those elites offer us will make our lives better. The President may be credited with the book The Art of the Deal, but we all have the responsibility to make choices that allow us to make better deals than the bad one that some shyster first offers. (If I am to make one lesson in economics, it is that the way to riches and happiness is to make frequent deals of quality for quality, and that creating quality is the prerequisite for prosperity. Garbage for garbage is futility; deals that burn one of the participants cripple those who get burned).  

If the last Crisis Era tells us anything, we are on the brink of some of the greatest pop culture ever. We are approaching the 80th anniversary of the greatest year in the history of American cinema. If we don't do that, then some other country (India is most obvious as a challenger at that) will do so. It is also about 80 years since Big Band music, the greatest popular music since Mozart was composing music that succeeded on every esthetic level (Mozart wrote and performed music of mass appeal that modern rock stars would envy) , was beginning to reach us.  All in all we will need to figure out for ourselves what is really good and go for it -- and to establish some workable virtues -- like integrity, fair play, empathy, and a solid work ethic. A good society fosters virtues; a bad one wastes and ultimately loses them and debases itself. It is our choice -- reform or ruin, and it begins with our personal lives.

Yup, "You're So Vain" he thinks everything is about him.

Great News!

Dick's Sporting Goods, one of America's largest retailers of firearms is doing the following:

1. no longer selling assault rifles

2. no longer selling high-capacity magazines for guns

3. raising the age for buying firearms in  its stores to 21

http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/28/news/com...index.html

http://pmd.cdn.turner.com/money/big/news...24x576.mp4

(02-27-2018, 11:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-27-2018, 11:30 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2018, 01:19 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-26-2018, 12:51 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]We may be heading for a time a lot like the late 19th and early 20th centuries, if the government decays further.  The absence of communal power opens the door to private power, and stalemated government is as good a way to kill communal power as I can see: no coup required.

We may be, and this is exactly the 4T crisis that we face. The competition with this red culture during the remaining 10-11 years of THIS 4T will decide what kind of 1T and 2T we will have, and what kind of country we will have for the foreseeable future.

This assumes that a counter-narrative can be offered, defended and act as a rallying point for the alternative to neo-liberalism.  Count me skeptical.  I don't see any evidence that the Democrats will abandon their culture-warrior stances, and, barring that, there is no other way to create the commonality needed to move hoi polloi, who pay minimal attention to details.  It's like living in a loop.  Atrocious behavior generates anger.  Anger generates action, but the action is split by cultural demands that tend to anger most of the populace.  Atrocious behavior arises, and the loop repeats.  

Until someone with charisma and stature focuses the anger on communal action, this won't change.  The Dems seem incapable of seeing that, or too cowardly to take the risk.

As you suggest, it will take a good candidate, like Bill Clinton or Barack Obama, who can convince people (as Obama and Clinton tried to do, somewhat successfully) to see that the concerns of their own cultural identity are being held back by the same private-power-enforced stalemate that holds back those of other cultural identities. Hillary made it clear too, using the slogan "stronger together." I don't think that's hard for people to understand; there just needs to be a candidate who can communicate well and give the impression that (s)he can be a leader.

Sadly, Obama was inspiring but detached and Bill Clinton was the neo-liberal who created much of the chaos we need to escape.  I posted a link to a NY Times editorial on another thread that covers most of this.  What's needed is Obama's inspiration linked with the ability to get things done that Clinton knew instinctively, but it needs to be focused away from the neo-liberal alliance between corporations and government and back to an alliance between the public sector and the people of the nation.

Who, how and when?  You think this 4T.  I'm less convince of that.  We still lack the leader, and nothing else can get done without her ... and I use that pronoun intentionally.