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

(11-20-2017, 11:07 AM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-20-2017, 10:13 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-19-2017, 01:44 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   I question how different it is.  There was plenty of government
>   oppression and jailing in the US in and around the awakening era
>   in response to civil rights and antiwar demonstrations.  I'd
>   suggest we have to wait until these countries get well into the
>   unravelling era to see if there's anything fundamentally
>   different.  

You've gotta be kidding.  Where did this come from?  Have you even
read the articles I've written about these countries?

In DRC, government-sponsored milities are killing and mutilating
opposition civilians.  3.9 million people have been forced to flee
their homes to escape the violence, with hundreds of thousands in
Zambia, Angola and other countries.  Nothing like that happened in
America.

In Burundi, a UN report has documented massive numbers of attacks on
political opponents, including torture, sexual violence, arbitrary
jailings, targeted assassinations and summary executions.  Nothing
like that happened in America.

In Syria, the government has repeatedly used missile attacks on
innocent civilians in marketplaces, hospitals, schools, and ordinary
neighborhoods, and has even used Sarin gas on opponents.  Nothing like
that happened in America.

In Cambodia, the governing party has succeeded in using the courts to
dissolve the opposing political party and arrest its leaders.  Lyndon
Johnson may have wanted to do that, but in the end, nothing like that
happened in America.

So I don't know what political or ideological point you're trying to
make from this bizarre comparison, but America was nothing like these
countries.

Face it Xenakis, Americans and westerners in general don't want a "global nanny" international system.

Yes, many don't, and yet, many do.

(11-20-2017, 11:39 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-20-2017, 11:07 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-20-2017, 10:13 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-19-2017, 01:44 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   I question how different it is.  There was plenty of government
>   oppression and jailing in the US in and around the awakening era
>   in response to civil rights and antiwar demonstrations.  I'd
>   suggest we have to wait until these countries get well into the
>   unravelling era to see if there's anything fundamentally
>   different.  

You've gotta be kidding.  Where did this come from?  Have you even
read the articles I've written about these countries?

In DRC, government-sponsored milities are killing and mutilating
opposition civilians.  3.9 million people have been forced to flee
their homes to escape the violence, with hundreds of thousands in
Zambia, Angola and other countries.  Nothing like that happened in
America.

In Burundi, a UN report has documented massive numbers of attacks on
political opponents, including torture, sexual violence, arbitrary
jailings, targeted assassinations and summary executions.  Nothing
like that happened in America.

In Syria, the government has repeatedly used missile attacks on
innocent civilians in marketplaces, hospitals, schools, and ordinary
neighborhoods, and has even used Sarin gas on opponents.  Nothing like
that happened in America.

In Cambodia, the governing party has succeeded in using the courts to
dissolve the opposing political party and arrest its leaders.  Lyndon
Johnson may have wanted to do that, but in the end, nothing like that
happened in America.

So I don't know what political or ideological point you're trying to
make from this bizarre comparison, but America was nothing like these
countries.

Face it Xenakis, Americans and westerners in general don't want a "global nanny" international system.

Yes, many don't, and yet, many do.

And that shows the delusion of boomers and silents. Why is it that those two generations want the world order to be based on overarching supranational organizations like the UN, EU, NATO, WTO, OPEC, etc; instead of world politics being handled at the national level. To most people born after about 1955 or so, this strikes them as Boomer tyranny.

(11-20-2017, 12:22 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-20-2017, 11:39 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-20-2017, 11:07 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-20-2017, 10:13 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-19-2017, 01:44 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   I question how different it is.  There was plenty of government
>   oppression and jailing in the US in and around the awakening era
>   in response to civil rights and antiwar demonstrations.  I'd
>   suggest we have to wait until these countries get well into the
>   unravelling era to see if there's anything fundamentally
>   different.  

You've gotta be kidding.  Where did this come from?  Have you even
read the articles I've written about these countries?

In DRC, government-sponsored milities are killing and mutilating
opposition civilians.  3.9 million people have been forced to flee
their homes to escape the violence, with hundreds of thousands in
Zambia, Angola and other countries.  Nothing like that happened in
America.

In Burundi, a UN report has documented massive numbers of attacks on
political opponents, including torture, sexual violence, arbitrary
jailings, targeted assassinations and summary executions.  Nothing
like that happened in America.

In Syria, the government has repeatedly used missile attacks on
innocent civilians in marketplaces, hospitals, schools, and ordinary
neighborhoods, and has even used Sarin gas on opponents.  Nothing like
that happened in America.

In Cambodia, the governing party has succeeded in using the courts to
dissolve the opposing political party and arrest its leaders.  Lyndon
Johnson may have wanted to do that, but in the end, nothing like that
happened in America.

So I don't know what political or ideological point you're trying to
make from this bizarre comparison, but America was nothing like these
countries.

Face it Xenakis, Americans and westerners in general don't want a "global nanny" international system.

Yes, many don't, and yet, many do.

And that shows the delusion of boomers and silents. Why is it that those two generations want the world order to be based on overarching supranational organizations like the UN, EU, NATO, WTO, OPEC, etc; instead of world politics being handled at the national level. To most people born after about 1955 or so, this strikes them as Boomer tyranny.

Or, on the other hand, maybe it shows the wisdom and intelligence of
the boomers and silents, and shows the clueless ignorance of the xers
and millies.

This book of mine was originally published at the same time as The Fourth Turning, and it's about cycles and prophecy. I have always maintained that there is some overlap in the cycles. I have just republished my book on kindle ebooks, and it's available free this week. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077CBFCC4

(11-20-2017, 02:28 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]This book of mine was originally published at the same time as The Fourth Turning, and it's about cycles and prophecy. I have always maintained that there is some overlap in the cycles. I have just republished my book on kindle ebooks, and it's available free this week. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077CBFCC4

Grabbed a copy. Thank you for the heads up.

*** 21-Nov-17 World View -- China's envoy to North Korea fails to end nuclear crisis

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Speculation grows of North Korea's Kim Jong-un illness as his weight soars
  
• China's envoy to North Korea fails to end nuclear crisis
  
• Trump declares North Korea a state sponsor of terrorism
  

****
**** Speculation grows of North Korea's Kim Jong-un illness as his weight soars
****


The gargantuan Kim Jong-un inspects a tractor factory last week (AFP)

A year ago, reports indicated
that
concerns were growing among North Korea officials about the health of
child dictator Kim Jong-un, who had been gaining weight rapidly from
consuming high-quality cheeses, Big Macs, vodka, steak, and sushi, and
who had been apparently drinking heavily and smoking heavily, with the
result that he was suffering from gout, diabetes, high blood pressure,
high uric acid, and high cholesterol. Earlier this year, state media
showed him limping.

Now the speculation about his health has been growing again. Recent
pictures show he has ballooned in weight again and appeared to be
struggling. On a cosmetic factory visit, he was uneasy on his feet
and needed a folding chair, while on another trip to a shoe factory
his face was dripping in sweat.

The child dictator has also been quiet for two months in provocative
actions. The last ballistic missile launch was on 15 September, while
the last nuclear test was on 3 September. Some analysts are
attributing this long pause to American president Donald Trump's
threat to unleash "fire and fury" on North Korea, and later adding
that the military options are "locked and loaded," later referring to
Kim as "Rocket Man."

But other analysts speculate that this delay in nuclear and ballistic
missile testing is another sign that he is unwell. Either way, nobody
seriously believes that North Korea has ended its nuclear weapon and
ballistic missile testing, and new tests can occur at any time.
News Corp Australia and Deccan Chronicle (India) and Daily Star (London)

Related: N. Korean officials reportedly alarmed at Kim Jong-un's drinking and massive weight gain (04-Aug-2016)

****
**** China's envoy to North Korea fails to end nuclear crisis
****

A special envoy sent personally by China's president Xi Jinping to
North Korea has returned to China amid signs that he apparently failed
in his mission.

The envoy, Song Tao, met with several North Korean party officials.
But as a special envoy sent personally by Xi Jinping, Song Tao should
also have had at least a brief meeting with North Korea's leader Kim
Jong-un, but several sources confirm that no meeting took place,
something that is being interpreted as a snub directed at Xi Jinping
himself.

Even more important, there is no sign that any agreement was reached
on the nuclear crisis, which many international observers had been
hoping. When the envoy was first announced, even Donald Trump tweeted
that it was a big move, and "we'll see what happens."

Well, there was no sign of a breakthrough on the nuclear crisis, and
the snub that Kim delivered to the envoy suggests that whatever
proposal Song Tao brought with him from Kim Jong-un was not only
rejected, but was rejected in as offensive a way as possible.

Actually, proposal that China most likely advanced has already
rejected by the US, referring to it as "insulting." At the United
Nations in September, China stated its "freeze for freeze" proposal:

<QUOTE>"The situation on the peninsula is deteriorating
constantly as we speak, falling into a vicious circle. The
peninsula issue must be resolved peacefully. ...

The proposal by China and Russia of a two-track approach, which
promotes the denuclearization of the peninsula, and the
establishment of a peace mechanism in parallel the suspension
initiative which calls for the DPRK to suspend its nuclear missile
activities and for the United States and the Republic of Korea to
suspend their large scale military exercises and the step by step
conception from Russia are the basis on which both countries
currently propose a roadmap to resolve the peninsula
issue."<END QUOTE>

Under this proposal, the United States and South Korea would end their
annual joint military exercises, while North Korea would supposedly
freeze its nuclear weapons development. This freeze for freeze
proposal is something of a joke, since the West has made numerous
concessions in the past in return for a North Korean promise to end
nuclear weapons development, but they simply go underground with
development, and later repudiate their promise whenever they want.

At the same United Nations Security Council meeting, US ambassador
Nikki Haley responded to the proposal statement by calling it
"insulting":

<QUOTE>"The idea that some have suggested the so-called
"freeze for freeze" is insulting. When a rogue regime has a
nuclear weapon, and an ICBM is pointed at you, you do not take
steps to lower your guard. no one would do that, and we certainly
won't."<END QUOTE>

So, we don't know whether the same "freeze for freeze" concept was
proposed by Song Tao to the North Koreans, but many believe that it
was, and that it was rejected as firmly and offensively as possible.
Xinhua and South China Morning Post (Hong Kong) and Nikkei and The Diplomat

****
**** Trump declares North Korea a state sponsor of terrorism
****

President Donald Trump has announced that the US will designate North
Korea a state sponsor of terrorism, referring to it as a "murderous
regime."

Iran, Sudan and Syria are currently the only countries on the list.
North Korea used to be on the list, but it was removed by President
George Bush in 2008 in the hope that it would convince the North
Koreans to end their development nuclear weapons.

However, as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson acknowledged, there are
already so many international sanctions on North Korea that
designating it as a state sponsor of terrorism will have little effect
except symbolically. AP and Daily Mail (London)

Related Articles

• Donald Trump in Seoul issues stern warning to North Korea -- and to China (09-Nov-2017)
  
  
• Chinese geologists warn of looming nuclear disaster from North Korean tests (01-Nov-2017)
  
  
• North Korea crisis: Would the United States sacrifice Los Angeles for Seoul? (18-Oct-2017)
  
  
• Steve Bannon and Henry Kissinger form project to sound alarm on China (30-Sep-2017)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, North Korea, Kim Jong-un,
China, Xi Jinping, Song Tao, Nikki Haley, freeze for freeze,
Iran, Sudan, Syria, Rex Tillerson

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

(11-20-2017, 10:13 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]So I don't know what political or ideological point you're trying to
make from this bizarre comparison, but America was nothing like these
countries.

I'm not trying to make a political or ideological point; I'm pointing out facts that may have a bearing on generational theory.

Sure, the awakening activities in African countries are bloodier than during the most recent US awakening.  It's a difference in degree, not in kind, though.  It may just be due to differences in technological and institutional maturity.

(11-20-2017, 11:20 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-20-2017, 10:13 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]So I don't know what political or ideological point you're trying to
make from this bizarre comparison, but America was nothing like these
countries.

I'm not trying to make a political or ideological point; I'm pointing out facts that may have a bearing on generational theory.
...

it's an interesting commentary on where we are at (I don't just mean in this thread or forum, but writ large) ... it seems that everything everyone says is assessed in terms of what political or ideological point is trying to be made; it's no wonder that conversations by people across political ideologies is virtually impossible these days.

(11-20-2017, 11:20 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]> I'm not trying to make a political or ideological point; I'm
> pointing out facts that may have a bearing on generational theory.

> Sure, the awakening activities in African countries are bloodier
> than during the most recent US awakening. It's a difference in
> degree, not in kind, though. It may just be due to differences in
> technological and institutional maturity.

In DRC, Burundi and Syria, government security forces are
targeting specific tribes or ethnic groups, results in millions
of civilians fleeing their homes and sometimes their country
to escape government violence targeting civilians, including
women and children.

If someone on Breitbart made the argument you're making, I would
assume that he was a paid troll of one of those countries, or that you
just wanted to bash America, and I would probably be right.

At any rate, nothing that happened in America even remotely resembled
that. There were no security forces targeting specific tribes or
ethnic groups, and there were no women and children fleeing their
homes for another country to escape government violence. That only
happens when the preceding crisis war was a civil war between tribes
or ethnic groups within the same country. It's obviously impossible
when the preceding war was an external war, because the war enemies
are in a different country. This isn't rocket science.

*** 22-Nov-17 World View -- Italy is blamed for shocking increase in slave trade in Libya

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• CNN investigation finds thriving slave trade in Libya
  
• Italy defends its role in Libya's slave trade
  

****
**** CNN investigation finds thriving slave trade in Libya
****


A migrant looks out of a barred door at a detention center in Gharyan, Libya, Oct. 12, 2017. (Reuters)

While Americans have been riveted to the sexual harassment scandal,
Europeans and Africans have been riveted to a CNN video that reveals a
thriving slave trade in Libya.

Reporters carried concealed cameras to a slave auction just outside
Tripoli, the capital city of Libya. They witnessed a dozen men
auctioned off in the space of six or seven minutes.

That auctioneer says, "Does anybody need a digger? This is a digger, a
big strong man, he'll dig. What am I bid, what am I bid?"

The bidding goes on, and the man is auctioned off for $400-1000.
Within minutes, the man is handed over to his new "master."

The men are migrants who had come from countries like Niger, Chad,
Mali and Algeria, and paid sometimes thousands of dollars to human
traffickers to take them to Libya. Once in Libya, they would have to
pay another human trafficker to put them onto a dangerously
overcrowded boat, where they hope to reach Italy. But if they run out
of money in Libya, then they can be imprisoned in detention camps, or
sold as slaves.

The CNN video and revelations about the slave trade in Libya resulted
in sometimes violent protests in Paris, when over a thousand
protestors demonstrated outside Libya's embassy in Paris, carrying
banners saying, "No to slavery in Libya." The protestors threw stones
at the police tried to break into the embassy, and the police fired
tear gas.

The demonstration was called by the Collectif contre l’esclavage et
les camps de concentration en Libye (CECCL – the Collective against
Slavery and Concentration Camps in Libya), set up in Paris after the
CNN video was broadcast.

On Tuesday, the UN Security Council approved a resolution urging
tougher action to crack down on human trafficking and modern slavery
worldwide. CNN (14-Nov) and Reuters and Libya Herald and Africa News and AP

****
**** Italy defends its role in Libya's slave trade
****

More than 600,000 people from Africa, Asia and the Middle East have
arrived in Italy since 2014, and a record 180,000 refugees crossed the
Mediterranean from Libya to Italy in 2016, but instead of setting a
new record in 2017, the number of refugees has fallen substantially,
thanks to deals that Italy's government made with Libya's tribes,
warlords, and coast guard.

Under the deals, Italy pays money to tribal militias and officials to
prevent refugees from entering Libya or, once there, to detain them
and prevent them from proceeding further on their trip to Europe.

These deals have been heavily condemned by human rights organizations
as inhumane, because it leaves the refugees vulnerable to abuse, and
the slave auctions are being pointed to as evidence not only of abuse,
but of a return to a slave trade that was supposedly a remnant of the
past.

However, the fact still remains that the policy, however cruel and
inhumane, has led to a sharp drop in migrants reaching Italy, which is
the outcome that Italian officials were seeking, especially after
other EU countries refused to accept any of the refugees themselves.

"The suffering of migrants detained in Libya is an outrage to the
conscience of humanity," according to the UN. However, Italy's
interior minister Marco Minniti defended the policy:

<QUOTE>"The alternative cannot be to resign ourselves to the
impossibility of managing migratory flows and hand human
traffickers the keys to European democracies.

[The human rights issue] is, was and will be a question we will
not relinquish, but we know that condemning (abuses) is not
enough, we must act."<END QUOTE>

Minniti didn't specify any details, but he may be referring to a
"revolutionary" proposal put forth by Italy's foreign minister
Angelino Alfano two months ago. Under the plan, refugees in Libya
would be evaluated, and 50,000 of the most vulnerable would be
resettled to other countries. This plan sounds like wishful thinking,
since a quote plan adopted by the European Union in 2014 has been a
complete failure, because many EU countries refused to accept refugees
for resettlement. AFP (15-Nov) and AFP (29-Sep)

Related Articles

• Italy's deals with Libya's warlords substantially reduce flow of refugees (19-Oct-2017)
  
  
• EU countries refuse to help Italy deal with massive refugee crisis (16-Jul-2017)
  
  
• Italy begs for help after 12,000 migrants arrive in four days (30-Jun-2017)
  
  
• Italy prepares for possible Mediterranean refugee crisis this summer (05-May-2017)
  
  
• EU migrant crisis moves to Italy as Austria begins closing border (13-Apr-2016)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, CNN, Libya, Niger, Chad, Mali, Algeria, France,
Collectif contre l’esclavage et les camps de concentration en Libye, CECCL,
Collective against Slavery and Concentration Camps in Libya,
Italy, Marco Minniti, Angelino Alfano

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

(11-21-2017, 12:37 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-20-2017, 11:20 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   I'm not trying to make a political or ideological point; I'm
>   pointing out facts that may have a bearing on generational theory.

>   Sure, the awakening activities in African countries are bloodier
>   than during the most recent US awakening. It's a difference in
>   degree, not in kind, though.  It may just be due to differences in
>   technological and institutional maturity.

In DRC, Burundi and Syria, government security forces are
targeting specific tribes or ethnic groups, results in millions
of civilians fleeing their homes and sometimes their country
to escape government violence targeting civilians, including
women and children.

If someone on Breitbart made the argument you're making, I would
assume that he was a paid troll of one of those countries, or that you
just wanted to bash America, and I would probably be right.

At any rate, nothing that happened in America even remotely resembled
that.  There were no security forces targeting specific tribes or
ethnic groups, and there were no women and children fleeing their
homes for another country to escape government violence.  That only
happens when the preceding crisis war was a civil war between tribes
or ethnic groups within the same country.  It's obviously impossible
when the preceding war was an external war, because the war enemies
are in a different country.  This isn't rocket science.

Are the crackdowns always on the losing side in the preceding crisis war?

I note that Mugabe was forced to resign as Nixon was, suggesting there are still similarities between awakening patterns.

Do you have an example of a first world country with an internally directed crisis war and subsequent bloody crackdowns, so we can differentiate between the effects of internal versus external crisis wars and the effects of development level?

(11-22-2017, 12:31 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]> Are the crackdowns always on the losing side in the preceding
> crisis war?

No. An interesting example is to look at the three countries,
Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda. All three countries were involved
in the Hutu-Tutsi genocide of 1994, but today the Burundi
government is Hutu, while the Rwanda and Uganda governments
are Tutsi.

(11-22-2017, 12:31 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]> I note that Mugabe was forced to resign as Nixon was, suggesting
> there are still similarities between awakening patterns.

There are may similarities between awakening patterns.

(11-22-2017, 12:31 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]> Do you have an example of a first world country with an internally
> directed crisis war and subsequent bloody crackdowns, so we can
> differentiate between the effects of internal versus external
> crisis wars and the effects of development level?

It's an interesting question, but the problem is that the phrase
"first world country" is purely political.

Is China a "first world country"? They're the second largest economy
in the world, but they claim, for political reasons, that they're an
"underdeveloped country," so that they can continue to blame the
United States for every problem in the world. Is India a "first world
country"? Is Russia?

So I'll give you a useful working definition of "first world country":
A first world country is one whose political development has advanced
to the point where all the issues involving tribes and ethnic groups
in its population have been resolved to the point where they no longer
have tribal or ethnic crisis civil wars.

Under that definition, all 2nd or 3rd world countries would still be
having ethnic or tribal generational crisis civil wars, and so there
will be ethnic and tribal crackdowns throughout the entire
generational cycle, mostly beginning in the Awakening era, and
continuing to the next crisis war.

An interesting example might be the US itself, with regard to wars
with Indian tribes. Those were crisis wars for the tribes, though not
the US, but I believe that research would show that when the Awakening
eras (for the tribes) arrived, then it would fit into the framework
that I've described. But this would require a lot of research to
figure out.

A similar analysis could be performed on all the European countries
that are considered "first world" today, to identify what happened in
the decades following the Thirty Years War, the War of the Spanish
Succession, and the Napoleonic wars. Once again, a lot of research is
required.

This concept really isn't that complicated. If you have people in the
same neighborhood in the same village raping, torturing and killing
each other during a crisis civil war, then one or both sides will be
exacting bloody revenge in the ensuing decades. This is just human
nature, and it's pretty obvious.

(11-22-2017, 12:34 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-22-2017, 12:31 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   Are the crackdowns always on the losing side in the preceding
>   crisis war?

No.  An interesting example is to look at the three countries,
Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda.  All three countries were involved
in the Hutu-Tutsi genocide of 1994, but today the Burundi
government is Hutu, while the Rwanda and Uganda governments
are Tutsi.

(11-22-2017, 12:31 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   I note that Mugabe was forced to resign as Nixon was, suggesting
>   there are still similarities between awakening patterns.

There are may similarities between awakening patterns.

(11-22-2017, 12:31 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   Do you have an example of a first world country with an internally
>   directed crisis war and subsequent bloody crackdowns, so we can
>   differentiate between the effects of internal versus external
>   crisis wars and the effects of development level?

It's an interesting question, but the problem is that the phrase
"first world country" is purely political.

Is China a "first world country"?  They're the second largest economy
in the world, but they claim, for political reasons, that they're an
"underdeveloped country," so that they can continue to blame the
United States for every problem in the world.  Is India a "first world
country"?  Is Russia?

So I'll give you a useful working definition of "first world country":
A first world country is one whose political development has advanced
to the point where all the issues involving tribes and ethnic groups
in its population have been resolved to the point where they no longer
have tribal or ethnic crisis civil wars.

Under that definition, all 2nd or 3rd world countries would still be
having ethnic or tribal generational crisis civil wars, and so there
will be ethnic and tribal crackdowns throughout the entire
generational cycle, mostly beginning in the Awakening era, and
continuing to the next crisis war.

An interesting example might be the US itself, with regard to wars
with Indian tribes.  Those were crisis wars for the tribes, though not
the US, but I believe that research would show that when the Awakening
eras (for the tribes) arrived, then it would fit into the framework
that I've described.  But this would require a lot of research to
figure out.

A similar analysis could be performed on all the European countries
that are considered "first world" today, to identify what happened in
the decades following the Thirty Years War, the War of the Spanish
Succession, and the Napoleonic wars.  Once again, a lot of research is
required.

This concept really isn't that complicated.  If you have people in the
same neighborhood in the same village raping, torturing and killing
each other during a crisis civil war, then one or both sides will be
exacting bloody revenge in the ensuing decades.  This is just human
nature, and it's pretty obvious.

... or responsible people decide after the Crisis is over that perpetrators of the worst deeds will be severely punished, that waging war on the losing side will be treated with pardons and amnesties  (American Civil War), and that further bloodletting will not be tolerated.  So long as the bloodletting continues, the Crisis is not over.   

Could it be that the more advanced a country is in such measures as formal education, GDP per capita, and life expectancy that it is less likely to implode in a bloody civil war? OK, there are exceptions. India is very poor compared to what Yugoslavia was under Milosevic, but it has great ethnic and religious divides.

At one point I looked at the per capita income in various countries and found that China (a few years ago) was right in the middle. The only significant country similar in per capita income was Mexico. It would have been easy to say that the middle-income countries in income were Mexico and China, and that everything else was 'rich' or 'poor'.

Yes, China is 86 (Japanese takeover of Manchuria) to 67 (Communist takeovers of outlying areas of China) years away from its last Crisis Era, so it is likely in Crisis mode. A development bubble invariably leads to a financial panic. How will the Chinese leadership deal with that?

(11-22-2017, 06:39 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]> ... or responsible people decide after the Crisis is over that
> perpetrators of the worst deeds will be severely punished, that
> waging war on the losing side will be treated with pardons and
> amnesties (American Civil War), and that further bloodletting will
> not be tolerated. So long as the bloodletting continues, the
> Crisis is not over.

> Could it be that the more advanced a country is in such measures
> as formal education, GDP per capita, and life expectancy that it
> is less likely to implode in a bloody civil war? OK, there are
> exceptions. India is very poor compared to what Yugoslavia was
> under Milosevic, but it has great ethnic and religious divides.

> At one point I looked at the per capita income in various
> countries and found that China (a few years ago) was right in the
> middle. The only significant country similar in per capita income
> was Mexico. It would have been easy to say that the middle-income
> countries in income were Mexico and China, and that everything
> else was 'rich' or 'poor'.

> Yes, China is 86 (Japanese takeover of Manchuria) to 67 (Communist
> takeovers of outlying areas of China) years away from its last
> Crisis Era, so it is likely in Crisis mode. A development bubble
> invariably leads to a financial panic. How will the Chinese
> leadership deal with that?

Just because there's bloodletting doesn't mean that the
Crisis hasn't ended. Think of the Korean War, for example.

I think that the part of The Fourth Turning book that most
impressed me and stuck with me is the description of the
crisis climax. Here's some text starting with page 257:

Quote:> The catalyst can be one spark or, more commonly, a series of
> sparks that self-ignite like the firecrackers traditionally used
> by the Chinese to mark their own breaks in the circle of time.
> Each of these sparks is linked to a specific threat about which
> the society had been fully informed but against which it had left
> itself poorly protected. Afterward, the fact that these sparks
> were <i>foreseeable</i> but poorly <i>foreseen</i> gives rise to a
> new sense of urgency about institutional dysfunction and civic
> vulnerablity. This marks the beginning of the vertiginous spiral
> of Crisis. p. 257

> Once this new mood is fully catalyzed, a society begins a process
> of <i>regeneracy</i>, a drawing together into whatever definition
> of community is available at the time. Out of the debris of the
> Unraveling, a new civic ethos arises. One set of post-Awakening
> ideals prevails over the others. People stop tolerating the
> weakening of institutions, splintering of the culture, and the
> individualizing of daily behavior. Spiritual curiosity abates,
> manners traditionalize, and the culture is harnessed as
> propanganda for the purpose of overtly reinforcing good conduct.
> History teaches that, roughly one to three years after the initial
> catalyst, people begin acknowledging this new synergy in community
> life and begin deputizing government to enforce it. Collective
> action is now seen as vital to solving the society's most
> fundamental problems. p. 257

> A Crisis mood does not guarantee that the new governing policies
> will be well designed or will work as intended. To the contrary:
> Crisis eras are studded with faulty leadership and inept
> management -- from President Lincoln's poor record of choosing
> generals to President Roosevelt's collassal blunders with such
> alphabet soup agencies as the AAA, NRA and WPA. [p. 258] What
> makes a Crisis special is the public's willingness to let leaders
> lead even when they falter and to let authorities be authoritative
> even when they make mistakes. Amid this civic solidarity,
> mediocre leaders can gain immense popular following; bad policies
> can be made to work (or, at least, be perceived as working); and,
> as at Pearl Harbor, even a spectacular failure does not undermine
> public support. Good policy choices pay off quickly. (In an
> Awakening, by contrast, even the best leaders and plans can fail,
> and one misstep can destroy public confidence.) [pp. 257-258]

> Private life also transforms beyond prior recognition. Now less
> important than the team, individuals are expected to comply with
> the new Fourth Turning standards of virtue. Family order
> strengthens, and personal violence and behavior now face
> implacable public stigma, even punishment. Winner-take-all
> arrangements give way to enforceable new mechanisms of social
> sharing. Questions about who does what are settled on grounds of
> survival, not fairness. This leads to a renewed social division
> of labor by age and sex. In the realm of public activity, elders
> are expected to step aside for the young, women for men. When
> danger looms, children are expected to be protected before
> parents, mothers before fathers. All social arrangements are
> evaluated anew; pre-Crisis promises and expectations count for
> little. Where the Unraveling had been an era of fast-paced
> personal lives against a background of public gridlock, in the
> Crisis the pace of daily life will seem to slow down just as
> political and social change accelerates. p. 258

> When society approaches the <i>climax</i> of a Crisis, it reaches
> a point of maximum civic power. Where the new values regime had
> once justified individual fury, it now justifies public fury.
> Wars become more likely and are fought with efficacy and finality.
> The risk of revolution is high -- as is the risk of civil war,
> since the community that commands the greatest loyalty does not
> necessarily coincide with political (or geographic) boundaries.
> Leaders become more inclined to define enemies in moral terms, to
> enforce virtue militarily, to refuse all compromise, to commit
> large forces in that effort, to impose heavy sacrifices on the
> battlefield and home front, to build the most destructive weapons
> contemporary minds can imagine, and to deploy those weapons if
> needed to obtain an enduring victory. p. 258

> The Crisis climax is human history's equivalent to nature's raging
> typhoon, the kind that sucks all surrounding matter into a single
> swirl of ferocious energy. Anything not lashed down goes flying;
> anything standing in the way gets flattened. Normally occurring
> late in the Fourth Turning, the climax gathers energy from an
> accumulation of unmet needs, unpaid bills, and unresolved
> problems. It then spends that energy on an upheaval whose
> direction and dimension were beyond comprehension during the prior
> Unraveling era. The climax shakes a society to its roots,
> transforms its institutions, redirects its purposes, and marks its
> people (and its generations) for life. The climax can end in
> triumph, or tragedy, or some combination of both. Whatever the
> event and whatever the outcome, a society passes through a great
> gate of history, fundamentally altering the course of
> civilization. pp 258-59

> Soon thereafter, this great gate is sealed by the Crisis
> <i>resolution</i>, when victors are rewarded and enemies punished;
> when empires or nations are forged or destroyed; when treaties are
> signed and boundaries redrawn; and when peace is accepted, troops
> repatriated, and life begun anew.

> One large chapter of history ends, and another starts. In a very
> real sense, one society dies -- and another is born.
> p. 259

It's this "great gate" that's always stuck in my mind, and it's a
concept that relevant to many of the historical examples that I've
looked at.

China's crisis climax occurred in 1949 when the Communist Revolution
ended. India's occurred in 1948 when the Partition War was settled
(though eastern India was on a separate timeline that climaxed in
1971). For Mexico it was in 1921 at the end of the Mexican
Revolution, putting Mexico into a "fifth turning" today.

Although one society dies and another is born, the new society still
inherits memories of the old society. Those memories are passed on to
the survivors' children in highly filtered form (each side remembers
the other side's atrocities, but forgets its own), and those children
begin to act on them in the Awakening era.

*** 23-Nov-17 World View -- Thanksgiving euphoria in Zimbabwe as Emmerson Mnangagwa replaces Robert Mugabe

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Thanksgiving euphoria in Zimbabwe when Robert Mugabe resigns after 37 years
  
• Observers fear a new Zimbabwe dictatorship under Emmerson Mnangagwa
  

****
**** Thanksgiving euphoria in Zimbabwe when Robert Mugabe resigns after 37 years
****


Newspaper front pages across Africa express euphoria at the resignation of Robert Mugabe (BBC World News)

On Tuesday, Zimbabwe's parliament was in session listening to speaker
after speaker tell why president Robert Mugabe should be impeached and
removed from office. Observers were claiming that the impeachment
process would be completed within two days.

In the middle of the legislative session, a messenger delivered a
letter to the speaker, which he began to read aloud:

<QUOTE>"The honorable Jacob Mudenda, notice of resignation as
President of the Republic of Zimbabwe in terms of the provisions
of Section 96 (1) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe (Amendment
Number 20), 2013. Following my verbal communication with the
Speaker of the National Assembly Advocate Jacob Mudenda at 13:53
hours, 21st November, 2017 intimating my intention to resign as
the President of the Republic of Zimbabwe, I Robert Gabriel Mugabe
in terms of section 96 (1) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe hereby
formally tender my resignation as the President of the Republic of
Zimbabwe with immediate effect.

My decision to resign is voluntary from my heart and arises for my
concern for the people of Zimbabwe and my desire for the smooth,
peaceful and non-violent transfer of power that underpins national
security, peace and stability. Kindly give public notice of my
resignation as soon as possible as required by section 96 (1) of
the Constitution of Zimbabwe."<END QUOTE>

When he read the word "notice of resignation," there was wild
cheering, the thumping of tables, dancing and singing. Mugabe had
been Zimbabwe's dictator for 37 years, but now the age of Robert
Mugabe was finally over.

The euphoric celebrations quickly spread into the streets of the
capital city Harare, when thousands of Zimbabweans flooding the
streets, dancing and singing.

There are a number of unanswered questions about Robert Mugabe's
resignation. Did Mugabe really switch speeches at the last minute on
Sunday just before his nationalized televised speech,
double-crossing the army? Then, why did he
suddenly resign on Tuesday?

Where is Robert Mugabe now? Where is his young wife Grace Mugabe?
Will either of them be charged with treason? BBC and Zimbabwe Herald and
BBC

Related: Robert Mugabe stuns Zimbabwe by refusing to step down (20-Nov-2017)

****
**** Observers fear a new Zimbabwe dictatorship under Emmerson Mnangagwa
****

Tuesday's euphoria over Mugabe's resignation was renewed on Wednesday
with a speech by 75-year-old Emmerson Dambudzo Mnangagwa to a very
enthusiastic crowd. He said:

<QUOTE>"The people have spoken. The voice of the people is
the voice of God. Today we are witnessing the beginning of a new
and unfolding democracy. ...

I have also communicated with the South African and Namibian
Presidents as well as Former Tanzanian President Mr Jakaya Kikwete
and they have applauded Zimbabweans for the peaceful manner and
conduct during the operation.

People want food, security and jobs. We need to work together to
ensure we deliver. I dedicate myself to be your
servant."<END QUOTE>

Many Zimbabweans, as well as many observers, were thrilled to hear
this skilled politician of many decades make promises of food,
security, jobs and a new democracy, but others were skeptical.

Although Mugabe recently fired Mnangagwa as vice-president, triggering
the current crisis that led to Mugabe's downfall, the two men
nonetheless worked closely together since independence in 1981.

They're both in the Shona tribe, and they both are responsible for
Operation Gukurahundi, the genocidal war crime that brought in North
Korean soldiers to help exterminate tens of thousands of civilians in
the hated Ndebele tribe.

They've both cooperated in turning Zimbabwe into a police state, where
anyone who speaks against the government is likely to be arrested,
tortured and killed. This is particularly true of the members of the
Ndebele tribe that managed to survive Operation Gukurahundi.

They both worked together on Mugabe's "indigenization" program, which
threw out farm and business owners who knew how to run a farm or a
business, and replaced them with thugs and cronies from Mugabe's and
Mnangagwa's Shona tribe who didn't know how to run a farm or business.
Over three decades, Mugabe and Mnangagwa turned Rhodesia, which was a
wealthy country and the breadbasket of southern Africa, into today's
Zimbabwe, which is an economic basket case.

This transformation from breadbasket to basket case is very apparent
to the people of Zimbabwe, and along with the sudden appearance of
political freed is why the people are euphoric that Mugabe is gone.

However, others point out that Mnangagwa is no different than Mugabe,
and will purse the same brutal policies.

This was already signaled on Wednesday when Mnangagwa gave his speech.
He could have given it at a neutral venue, so that all segments of
Zimbabwe society could attend.

Instead, he gave it from Zanu-pf headquarters, which is the political
party of the Shona tribe. And although he gave the speech in English,
for the benefit of the international audience, he gave the last part
of the speech in his native Shona language, for the benefit of his
supporters, to the exclusion of others:

<QUOTE>"Dogs can keep on barking and barking, while the train
that is Zanu-pf continues to rule."<END QUOTE>

This is the kind of language that Robert Mugabe used regularly, and
Zimbabweans in the Ndebele tribe see this statement as a signal that
Mnangagwa is going to be as violent towards the Ndebeles as ever.

Mnangagwa is scheduled to be sworn in as president on Friday. After
that, we'll see if anything has really changed. Zimbabwe Herald and BBC and Guardian (London) and Globe and Mail (Canada) and New Zimbabwe Vision (Blog)

Related Articles

• Robert Mugabe stuns Zimbabwe by refusing to step down (20-Nov-2017)
  
  
• Ecstatic throngs in Harare Zimbabwe demand that Robert Mugabe step down (19-Nov-2017)
  
  
• Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe sacks the VP so that his wife can succeed him (07-Nov-2017)
  
  
• Democratic Republic of Congo issues farcical call for elections in December 2018 (07-Nov-2017)
  
  
• Zimbabwe bans food imports as new 'bond note' currency crashes (21-Oct-2017)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Zimbabwe, Zanu-pf,
Robert Mugabe, Grace Ntombizodwa Mugabe, Gabriella Engels,
South Africa, Namibia, Emmerson Dambudzo Mnangagwa,
Rhodesia, Shona, Ndebele, Operation Gukurahundi

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

(11-22-2017, 12:34 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-22-2017, 12:31 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   Are the crackdowns always on the losing side in the preceding
>   crisis war?

No.  An interesting example is to look at the three countries,
Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda.  All three countries were involved
in the Hutu-Tutsi genocide of 1994, but today the Burundi
government is Hutu, while the Rwanda and Uganda governments
are Tutsi.

(11-22-2017, 12:31 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   I note that Mugabe was forced to resign as Nixon was, suggesting
>   there are still similarities between awakening patterns.

There are may similarities between awakening patterns.

(11-22-2017, 12:31 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]>   Do you have an example of a first world country with an internally
>   directed crisis war and subsequent bloody crackdowns, so we can
>   differentiate between the effects of internal versus external
>   crisis wars and the effects of development level?

It's an interesting question, but the problem is that the phrase
"first world country" is purely political.

Is China a "first world country"?  They're the second largest economy
in the world, but they claim, for political reasons, that they're an
"underdeveloped country," so that they can continue to blame the
United States for every problem in the world.  Is India a "first world
country"?  Is Russia?

So I'll give you a useful working definition of "first world country":
A first world country is one whose political development has advanced
to the point where all the issues involving tribes and ethnic groups
in its population have been resolved to the point where they no longer
have tribal or ethnic crisis civil wars.

I don't think that's a very useful definition of "first world"; economic development would be better.  With a more useful economic definition, whether or not China is a first world country now, they were certainly not at the time of their last crisis war.

It may be a useful definition of some other demarcation, perhaps between politically primitive and politically advanced.  However, the Russian Civil War wasn't tribal or ethnic, and yet their subsequent history was marked with bloody crackdowns and purges.

One thing that might be needed for a first world economy is a free market economy.  In that case the causality might go the other way:  ethnic, tribal, or political crackdowns would tend to prevent or erode a free market as economic actors pandered to the people in power rather than putting their own interests first.

As far as I can tell, though, the crackdowns aren't particularly limited to the awakening period.  I'm not sure they really fit into a generational theory.

(11-22-2017, 11:55 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-22-2017, 12:34 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]It's an interesting question, but the problem is that the phrase
"first world country" is purely political.

Is China a "first world country"?  They're the second largest economy
in the world, but they claim, for political reasons, that they're an
"underdeveloped country," so that they can continue to blame the
United States for every problem in the world.  Is India a "first world
country"?  Is Russia?

So I'll give you a useful working definition of "first world country":
A first world country is one whose political development has advanced
to the point where all the issues involving tribes and ethnic groups
in its population have been resolved to the point where they no longer
have tribal or ethnic crisis civil wars.

I don't think that's a very useful definition of "first world"; economic development would be better.  With a more useful economic definition, whether or not China is a first world country now, they were certainly not at the time of their last crisis war.

Except for rural poverty, China seems to have the odd combination of an advanced economy but a backward political order. That is an anomalous condition, the sort of contradiction that Hegel would recognize for having a need of resolution.
 

Quote:It may be a useful definition of some other demarcation, perhaps between politically primitive and politically advanced.  However, the Russian Civil War wasn't tribal or ethnic, and yet their subsequent history was marked with bloody crackdowns and purges.

Which

1. the sociopathic personalities of Lenin and Stalin made bloody crackdowns and purges a certainty, and

2. ignores the nationalist struggles to escape centralized rule from Moscow. Let us remember that the Moldovans, Poles, Lithuanians, Latvians, and Finns succeeded in seceding from Russia. The Ukrainians and peoples from the Transcaucasus region and Central Asia were not so successful, The Whites would have nothing of any splintering of the Russian Empire that they intended to restore. Lenin firmly believed that in the chaos at the end of World War I, that world revolution would create one world socialist republic in which Soviet Russia would be primus inter pares.

3. Social classes formed blocks of people analogous to 'tribes', as Russia was, by 1917, a classic example of a failed state. Masrxist explanations of how capitalism worked applied very well to Russia.

Quote:One thing that might be needed for a first world economy is a free market economy.  In that case the causality might go the other way:  ethnic, tribal, or political crackdowns would tend to prevent or erode a free market as economic actors pandered to the people in power rather than putting their own interests first.

Is a free market economy the result of progress or something from which a consumer society forms? Of course, there is no modern example of a pure free-market economy. A capitalist order can be a brutal taskmaster, and pure plutocracy is no democracy. I can easily imagine a capitalist order in which 95% of the people are obliged to suffer for a minuscule fraction of the public. I see ominous trends in American politics, and the perverse personality of Donald Trump is a symptom and not a cause.

Economic elites which deem their own gain, indulgence, and power as social priorities imply that those elites have become intensely selfish and demanding. Such was the norm of medieval times. The melding of elitist economics with Bolshevik ruthlessness constitutes fascism, typically a perversion of democratic processes into a command order. Of course the pathology developed slowly in America, with lobbyists becoming the real power in the legislative branch, and with anti-intellectualism becoming an indelible part of the political culture. People may want to believe, as Isaac Asimov described the anti-intellectual, that "my ignorance is as good as your science".  Never mind that science has given us bigger crop yields and labor-saving machinery that make the consumer gadgets into trivialities by contrast. It may be possible that the political divide in America is not so much between rich and poor as it is between those who respect the mind and those who think the mind a haven for heresy and debauchery.

Quote:As far as I can tell, though, the crackdowns aren't particularly limited to the awakening period.  I'm not sure they really fit into a generational theory.

Maybe Awakening-era crackdowns indicate that the leadership that has recently been micro-managing everything has become desperate to preserve its command-and-control ways. I think of the Soviet suppression of the Prague Spring and of the Chinese Cultural Revolution.

There was no shortage of right-wing rhetoric in America calling for a crackdown against the people who challenged the post-WWII consensus of cultural conformity and mindless consumerism. Such went practically nowhere.

Here's an additional observation.

Over the years I've written about many examples of how crisis civil
wars begin. Usually the ethnic clashes begin in the previous
Awakening era, and they're resolved by some sort of peace agreement.
The peace agreement falls apart after a few months or a couple of
years, and there are new clashes, so the cycle repeats. Throughout
the Unraveling and the post-Unraveling portion of the next Crisis era,
there are alternating periods of clashes and peace agreements, with
each period of clashes worse than the previous one. Finally, there's
a new regeneracy, and there's a full-scale civil war.

That describes what happens BEFORE a crisis civil war involving tribal
or ethnic groups, and in recent years we've developed new observations
about what happens AFTER a crisis civil war involving tribal or ethnic
groups. These new observations show that violent government
crackdowns begin in the next Awakening era after the civil war, just
as the new Prophet generation begins making anti-government protests.

So now further research could be possible to paste these two sets of
observations together, and get a complete picture of how one
generational crisis civil war leads to the next one, from the point of
view of generational theory. Using this technique, it might also be
possible to identify factors that determine how likely it is that
there will be the next crisis civil war.

I would like to be able to say that if we figure this out, then we
might come up some policy recommendations that any country could use
after an ethnic or tribal crisis civil war to prevent the next one,
but after 15 years of doing this, and almost 6,000 articles and
Generational Dynamics analyses, I've become so thoroughly fatalistic
that I don't think I believe that any political policies have any
effect on anything, and that political objectives are never more than
pure wishful thinking, and that what's going to happen is going to
happen, irrespective of what the politicians do.

The discussions on awakenings connected, for me, with a transition that is happening from leading edge to trailing edge millenials. I wonder if another way of viewing the awakening is as a transition from dogmatic leading edge civics to more open minded trailing edge civics. Full post in the millenial forum here:

http://generational-theory.com/forum/thread-3595.html

*** 24-Nov-17 World View -- India and China support Burma (Myanmar) on Rohingya ethnic cleansing for business reasons

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Burma makes farcical agreement with Bangladesh to take back Rohingya refugees
  
• China proposes farcical three-point solution to Rohingya crisis
  
• India and China support Burma on Rohingya ethnic cleansing for business reasons
  

****
**** Burma makes farcical agreement with Bangladesh to take back Rohingya refugees
****


A Rohingya girl in a Bangladesh refugee camp, her face covered in 'thanaka', a comestic makeup paste widely used in the region, made from ground bark (AP)

Ethnic cleansing "clearance operations" by Burma's (Myanmar's) army
have driven some 620,000 ethnic Rohingyas from Rakhine State into
Bangladesh, threatening to destabilize the entire region. Burma and
Bangladesh have now reached an agreement to return the Rohingyas
starting in three months, but only after all the appropriate forms
have been filled out for each one.

Burma's Buddhist army has been conducting atrocities on Muslim ethnic
Rohingyas in Rakhine State since 2012. In November of last year, the
United Nations found that Burma's army was "killing men, shooting
them, slaughtering children, raping women, burning and looting houses,
forcing these people to cross the river" into Bangladesh. Satellite
images showed that Burma's army was burning down entire villages where
Rohingyas had lived for decades, in order to perform ethnic cleansing
-- "cleanse" Rakhine State of all Rohingyas.

The attacks were led by Buddhist monk Ashin Wirathu and his "969
movement," where 969 is a historic Buddhist sign, referring to the
nine qualities of Buddha, the six qualities of Buddha's teaching, and
nine qualities of the Buddhist community. 969 is supposed to promote
peace and happiness, although Wirathu's 969 movement is a vehicle
promoting violence. And now the Burma's army is apparently taking
over the movement with ethnic cleansing.

After several years of these atrocities by Burma's army, Rohingya
activists have formed the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), which
attacked 8 Burmese police posts in October of last year. These
attacks provoked a wave of deadly "clearance operations" by Burma's
army, and forced tens of thousands of Rohingyas to flee the violence
into Bangladesh.

On August 25 of this year, ARSA conducted coordinated attacks on 30
police outposts and an army base. This became a major violence
trigger for the entire Burmese army. Whereas the "clearance
operations" by Myanmar's army previously appeared to be reasonably
disciplined, after August 25 they became extremely undisciplined and
disorganized, to the point of mass bloody chaos, with the results
that thousands fled across the border to Bangladesh each day.
There are now around 620,000 Rohingya refugees in refugee camps
in Bangladesh.

Burma's "clearance operations" of Rohingyas is also creating
a diplomatic problem for the Pope, who is scheduled to visit
Myanmar on November 26 to December 2. The Pope is being
cautioned not even to use the word "Rohingya," for fear that
Burma's army will turn from murdering and cleansing Rohingyas
to murdering and cleansing the Christian minority, particularly
the 700,000 Roman Catholics.

On the other hand, if the Pope says nothing, then he risks his moral
authority, in the same way that Pope Pius XII lost his moral authority
for not criticizing the Nazi Holocaust. According to Father Thomas
Reese, an analyst at Religion News Service:

<QUOTE>"He risks either compromising his moral authority or
putting in danger the Christians of that country.

I have great admiration for the pope and his abilities, but
someone should have talked him out of making this
trip."<END QUOTE>

On Wednesday, for the first time, the US administration raised the
threat of targeted sanctions against Burmese officials, when Secretary
of State Rex Tillerson referred to the "horrendous atrocities" as
"ethnic cleansing" of Rohingyas. This has raised fears of a backlash,
with the result that the US embassy in Myanmar on Thursday suspended
official travel to parts of Rakhine until 4 December and warned
citizens against visiting the areas.

The agreement that Burma and Bangladesh have reached for the return of
refugees looks to me like a joke. There are 620,000 refugees, and the
number is still growing every day. Return of refugees won't begin for
three months, and then only when forms have been filled out, submitted
to the Burma military, and approved. This is clearly a stalling
maneuver by Burma, and signing it is an act of desperation by
Bangladesh, who are still overwhelmed by the waves of refugees.
Reuters and News24 (Bangladesh) and Reuters and Sydney Morning Herald

****
**** China proposes farcical three-point solution to Rohingya crisis
****

Last week, China said that Myanmar and Bangladesh should shut out the
international community from interfering in the Rohingya crisis, but
then offered itself to interfere by mediating between the two
countries. According to Chinese state media, China offered a
three-phase solution to the "Rakhine issue," without mentioning
the Rohingyas:

• "The first phase is to achieve a ceasefire so that local
  residents can no longer be displaced. Through joint efforts, the
  ceasefire has been in place." This is evidently not true, since
  hundreds of Rohingyas are still crossing the border from Rakhine into
  Bangladesh each day.
  
  
• "Second, the international community should encourage Myanmar
  and Bangladesh to keep communication in a bid to find a feasible
  solution to the issue, he said. The two countries have reached an
  initial agreement on repatriation of refugees fleeing to Bangladesh
  from Myanmar." This is the agreement that I described above, and
  characterized as a joke.
  
  
• "The third phase is to find a long-term solution. Stressing
  that poverty is the root cause of turbulence and conflict, the Chinese
  foreign minister called on the international community to support
  poverty alleviation efforts in Rakhine state."

China's third phase is particularly farcical. There's poverty in
every country in the world, but it doesn't result in hundreds of
thousands of refugees. The "Rakhine issue" is not caused by poverty.
It's caused by Buddhist monks, members of the so-called religion of
peace (Buddhism), and Burma's Buddhist army committing war crimes,
raping, torturing and killing innocent civilians, not because of
poverty, but because the Burmese vitriolicly hate the Rohingyas and
would like to exterminate them.

China should understand this, because it has conducted similar
operations in the past, with its Han Chinese army committing
atrocities against its hated Buddhist Tibetans in China.

Basically, China's three-point proposal is a farce. Global Times (Beijing) and China's Foreign Ministry and Reuters

****
**** India and China support Burma on Rohingya ethnic cleansing for business reasons
****

In September, India's ministry of external affairs issued
a statement saying:

<QUOTE>"We stand by Myanmar in the hour of its crisis, we
strongly condemn the terrorist attack on August 24-25 and condole
the death of policemen and soldiers, we will back Myanmar in its
fight against terrorism."<END QUOTE>

India's statement made no mention of the atrocities committed by Burma
since 2012, nor the "clearance operations" that have forced 620,000
Rohingyas so far to flee the violence. As we wrote last month ( "7-Oct-17 World View -- Burma's Rohingya crisis merges with the Kashmir crisis, inflaming the entire region"
), Pakistan is siding with the Muslim Rohingyas. ARSA
is linking up with anti-Indian jihadist groups in India-controlled
Kashmir, so India officials see the Rohingyas as an existential
threat. India has also threatened to expel nearly 40,000 Rohingya
migrants it says have illegally settled in the country.

So there's a historical irony here. The ethnic cleansing and war
crimes by the Burmese have destabilized the region to the extent that
India feels that it must support the army committing the ethnic
cleansing and war crimes.

In September, Hong Liang, China's ambassador to Myanmar, made a
similar supportive statement:

<QUOTE>"The stance of China regarding the terrorist attacks
in Rakhine is clear, it is just an internal affair; the
counterattacks of Myanmar security forces against extremist
terrorists and the government’s undertakings to provide assistance
to the people are strongly welcomed.

China’s help for the Rakhine crisis is just a social obligation.
The president of the Chinese Entrepreneurs Association, the vice
president of the oil and gas pipeline project and responsible
personnel from the Kyauk Phyu Deep Sea Port Project were brought
here together with him; the company wished to provide assistance
to the displaced persons."<END QUOTE>

As with India, the Chinese never mentioned the atrocities committed by
Burma since 2012, nor the "clearance operations" that have forced
620,000 Rohingyas so far to flee the violence.

However, the Chinese statement highlights why China supports Myanmar
despite the massive ethnic cleansing and slaughter. There are large
gas reserves off the coast of Rakhine State, and China brings gas from
Kyauk Phyu on Rakhine's coast through the Myanmar-China Gas Pipeline.
This gas meets the needs of China’s Yunnan, Guizhou and Guangxi
provinces as well as that of other counties and cities. The
transportation of this gas is more important to China than the ethnic
cleansing of the Rohingyas.

India also has huge infrastructure projects in Rakhine, including the
India-funded Kaladan multi-modal project designed to provide a
sea-river-land link to its remote northeast through Sittwe port.

Both India and China fear the threat of terrorism on the Rakhine
infrastructure projects, as well as on Indian and Chinese soil.
Indian intelligence expert Major General Gaganjit Singh asks:

<QUOTE>"What if ARSA terrorists attack an Indian ship on the
Kaladan river or try blowing up parts of the Yunnan-Kyauk Phyu
oil-gas pipeline as the [separatist group United Liberation Front
of Assam] used to do in [the Indian state of] Assam? Such
scenarios cannot be discounted."<END QUOTE>

Readers may recall that in September there was a threat of war between
India and China over a border conflict in Bhutan's Doklam Plateau.
That dispute was suddenly and unexpected settled and analysts could only guess at the reasons.
Part of the speculation was that a conflict would spill
over into Kashmir or into the Indian Ocean. Now there's another
possibility: the fear that a Doklam border conflict might spill over
into the Rakhine infrastructure projects of both countries. South China Morning Post (18-Oct) and Jamestown and Global New Light Of Myanmar and CNBC

Related Articles

• Burma's Rohingya crisis merges with the Kashmir crisis, inflaming the entire region (07-Oct-2017)
  
  
• Burma's (Myanmar's) leaders may be inspired by Pol Pot's Cambodian 'Killing Fields' genocide (29-Sep-2017)
  
  
• Violence between Buddhists and Muslims in Myanmar/Burma escalates dramatically (28-Aug-2017)
  
  
• Analysts draw lessons from the China vs India Doklam border standoff (24-Sep-2017)
  
  
• Meiktila, Burma, violence has echoes of Kristallnacht (05-Apr-2013)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Burma, Myanmar, Rakhine State, Rohingyas,
Bangladesh, Clearance operations, China, India,
Buddhism, Ashin Wirathu, Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army, ARSA,
Pope Pius XII, Nazi Holocaust, Father Thomas Reese,
Rex Tillerson, Hong Liang,
Yunnan, Myanmar-China Gas Pipeline, Kyauk Phyu, Kaladan, Sittwe,
Gaganjit Singh, Bhutan, Doklam Plateau

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe