Or how the mega-saeculum is subdivided.

Those of you who've been on this board and the old one know that I subscribe to a mega-saeculum theory.  This theory is similar to but unique from other such theories.  Firstly I not only have a mega-saeculum and the recognized saeculum, but also micro-turnings within each turning of the saeculum.

I've tried to explain this at various times in the past, not always with success.  I also fully believe that there will be some degree of historical push back on my views (particularly those with clear ideological and cultural bias against my theory in particular).  First we should examine each component part of the Mega-Saeculum, Saeculum and the micro-turnings.  Next we will examine the two themes of sacula within a mega-saeculum.  Some have likened the regular swing of these two themes as a driver of the mega-saeculum but rather I think they are counter-weights to keep things intact.  Finally it should be firmly realized that while the symbology of a circle may in fact be used, the reality of history is that it more like a series of spirals.  The old saying "you can't step into the same river twice" rings true.

THE MEGA-SAECULUM

Generally speaking a mega-saeculum is the expansion of the recognized saeculum system over the course of many saecula.  This pattern in so far as we can tell always manifests itself in a series of four saecula, which in turn are composed of four turnings themselves composed of four micro-turnings.

Given there is some debate as to the length of a saeculum history seems to indicate that there are two recognized saeculum lengths.  Approximately 100-120 years for a pre-industiralized society and around 80 years for an industrialized society.  It remains to be seen if a post-industrial society can ever be formed as anything more than the smoking crater of where an industrialized society used to be.

As I won't discuss in detail the length of saecula here suffice it to say that this issue has been studied in depth by others and that I would agree that there is in fact a Saeculum A for pre-industiral societies and a Saeculum B for industrial societies.  The times for both are approximate and a variation of less than a full generation (approximately 20 years based on human biology) is not considered substantial enough evidence to promote the idea that there may be a Saeculum C.

As such Mega-Saecula wherein all or most of the saecula contained within it are Saeculum A's such a mega-saeculum would be between 400 and 480 years in duration.  Historians who proposed cyclical historical models prior to S&H seem to settle in the 500 years range.

As such one can propose a late middle ages mega-saeculum lasting from about 900 C.E. to approximately 1400 C.E.  I would argue that the Late Middle ages really ended some time shortly after the Black Death years of the 1350s, in a Mega-Crisis that lasted until around 1400 C.E. with the break down of the feudal system in Western Europe.  Since I wish to focus primarily on modern times we will not concern ourselves with saecula prior to 1400 C.E.  Also almost two full mega-saecula on from that turning point the Late Medieval Mega-Saeculum is not terribly important for our work here.

A Mega-Saecula wherein  all or most of the saecula contained within it are Saeculum B's would be between 280 and 320 years in duration.

Each Mega-Saeculum is composed of four distinct parts.  These parts are of course saecula and they follow a distinct pattern.

A Mega-Resolution/Exposition (or a first turning--commonly called a High amongst students of S&H) [It closes out the previous Mega-Saeculum and sets up the following Mega-Saeculum]

A Mega-Awakening (or a second turning)  [in a traditional plot timeline as you'd learn about in school this can be likened to rising action or rather the start of the rising action--the ideas of the mega-saeculum are usually birthed in this part]

A Mega-Unraveling (or third turning)  [A stasis point among two or more main ideas that are relevant to the mega-saeculum for example parliamentarian-ism verses divine right of kings]

A Mega-Crisis (or fourth turning) [a period of rapidly rising action until a climax point is hit and then rapidly falling action to the next Mega-Resolution/Exposition]

The Mega-Saeculum constitutes the first wheel.

THE SAECULUM

By and large my theories about the saeculum itself are contained in the works of S&H except for two main points.

First that the first turning is not necessarily a "High".  First turnings need not be triumphant, or even victorious.  Some are, some are not.  This is why I tend to use the terms Resolution-Exposition (R/E) or simply first turning, or even more simply 1T.

Second, is their apparent absence of a Civic Generation within the Civil War Saeculum.  While it appears that they did not detect it, I would argue that there is one, however, it mostly died out on the fields in such places as Gettysburg, Chickamauga and Chancellorsville.  It was noted in the Great Power Saeculum which followed it by many that some would use "the bloody shirt" so as to obtain power.  That is to say that by virtue of being a veteran of the Civil War they expected deference.  A clear civic trait in the following saeculum. 

Just to reiterate the works each saeculum is composed of four turnings.

A Resolution-Exposition turning.  Serves the same purpose as the pattern in the Mega-Saeculum.
An Awakening turning.  Serves the same purpose as the pattern in the Mega-Saeculum
An Unraveling turning.  Serves the same purpose as the pattern in the Mega-Saeculum
A Crisis Turning.  Serves the same purpose as the pattern in the Mega-Saeculum.

The Saeculum composes the second wheel.

THE TWO-STROKE REGULATOR

Over the years much has been written about a pattern that appears within Mega-Saecula.  It is assumed by some to be a driving force within the mega-saeculum.  While that is possible, I do not think it to be probable.  Rather I would take it to be a regulator so as to maintain equiliberium within the mega-saeculum.

Some use the terms Apollonian and Dionysian to describe the two strokes of the regulator.  I prefer the terms Advancement (as it deals primarily with material advances) and Atonement (as it often deals with cultural including religious issues and movements).

Advancement Saeculum

Adaptive: Comes of age in an emerging cultural consensus, feels free to start questioning society's dominant ideologies.
Idealist: Rebels against the dominant ideological consensus of society laid down in the previous Advancement 4T.
Nomad: Is annoyed by the Prophets' ideological debates and focuses on culture.
Civic: Establishes a new ideological consensus.

Atonement Saeculum

Adaptive: Comes of age in an emerging ideological consensus, feels free to start questioning social norms and accepted spiritual truths.
Idealist: Rebels against the dominant cultural consensus of society laid down in the previous Atonement 4T.
Nomad: Is annoyed by the Prophets' cultural debates and focuses on ideological issues.
Civic: Establishes a new cultural consensus.


It should be noted that the regulator does not fit into the saeculums securely as it starts with Adaptive Generations rather than Idealist Generations.  That is to say it is an adaption to the change of the Saeculum.  It should also be noted that it appears that advancement saecula occur during the Mega-Awakening and the Mega-Crisis while atonement saecula occur during the Mega-R/E and Mega-Crisis.

Further the pattern established for the two-stroke regulator is not mine, the hypothesis as to why it exists however is. 

The Two-Stroke regulator is the third wheel and like a gyroscope it is off-set so as to help balance the whole.

TURNINGS AND MICRO-TURNINGS

I won't deal with turnings much.  S&H have done far more than is in my poor power.  Rather, I will suffice it to say that each saeculum is composed of four turnings so there are a total of 16 turnings per Mega-Saeculum.  Suffice it to say that each turning is itself composed of micro-turnings (generally of 4-7 years duration) that follow the established patterns for the Mega-Saeculum and the Saeculum.

Once one gets down to this level one really starts splitting hairs but one can see it as the progression of each turning.

chiggidy check yo self before you wreck yo self

It's no secret that 2010's is a repeat of the 1930's, but does it also do that in Music? Who's our "Benny Goodman" that we Milennials will resort to in isolation in the 2040's and 2050's? What kind of musical development awaits us accoring to the Saeculum? And what music will our coming Prophet generation revolt with? These are my questions here.

No, you're just a nutjob, latching on to conspiracy theories to fill your life with meaning.

Now that we are well into the 4th Turning, what started as a trickle is becoming an outgoing flood tide.

A 1945 Aquarian I've been working with turned in his spurs a couple weeks ago. With him, much tribal knowledge of certain embedded systems and very legacy code. He did his best to document contextual stuff that you can't get from reading normal specs, code reviews, readmes and in line comments. I joked to him, be sure not to give anyone your number, because otherwise you'll be getting some consulting gigs when you are supposed to be out in the tules duck hunting.

That was a lighter moment.

Last fall, there was some darkness. A 1944 cohort who worked for me a few years ago, then for other managers since, had gone out on disability to fight cancer. Over the holidays I saw the obituary. Ugh ...

Just today, I was going through an old issue of my college alumni mag (I had some of the paper version around in "stuff" I'm downsizing). There was a short article by a guy from the Class of '66. He was sharing his journey and his current perspective. It was good writing - the dude was an English major who'd become a prof, then went into journalism and doing a PR start up. He had a blog. Prompted by the article I looked at his blog for the first time in years. Seeing the entries suddenly stop a couple years back, I suspected the worst. My fears were confirmed when I searched him on our alumni site. He passed not long after the last blog entry.

Most people imagine that the tech industry I've been caught up in now for 30 years is a bunch of Uber riding, iPhone jockey Millennials. Sure there are companies, especially start ups, where there are many Millies. But this biz was loaded with Boomers for many years. At the larger firms there are still many Boomers. There is a never ending stream of retirements, plus, the more maudlin outcomes of illness and death.

I've stopped having lots of anger toward Boom as I age. That's a bit remarkable given how Boom were the Grey Ceiling hindering me until I was too old to be the young up and comer. For all the venom thrown their way by us Xers and increasingly, Millies, there is a lot of good in the Boom cohorts. There is so much experience and knowledge. Given the horrendous lack of Knowledge Management in most American business environments, we are going to really miss that experience and knowledge. Not everything is an iPhone ap. Even some of the stuff running the cloud is the province of Boom. Beyond the newer whiz bang, there are still many mainframes running substantial parts of the world. Keeping it all afloat is not going to be a picnic.

You misunderstand.  I am not offended, nor am I apologizing for my vote, I just don't think what you linked to counted as satire, nor was it particularly witty.  Had Eric or PBrower or Alphabet or any of the other emotionally-crippled old men who post routinely here linked to it, I probably would have passed without comment.  It was the fact that you are usually more open-minded that made me cringe when you posted something so narrowly partisan, that amounted to little more than a "blue" venting his spleen at the "reds".

I mean, to whom do you think that article was actually addressed? What was the message that the article was trying to get across? How effective do you think the rhetorical strategy chosen was in conveying said message to said audience? What elements do you feel identified the article as being satiric in intent?

And the GOP had to do nothing.....

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/03/09...estaurant/

Quote:A Californian fast food restaurant has introduced a robot that flips and cooks burgers, replacing human workers at the grill.
The Telegraph reports that the robot, named Flippy, was developed by Miso Robotics and began its first day on the job at Caliburger this week. “Much like self-driving vehicles, our system continuously learns from its experiences to improve over time,” said David Zito, CEO of Miso Robotics.

The Telegraph reports that the robot, named Flippy, was developed by Miso Robotics and began its first day on the job at Caliburger this week. “Much like self-driving vehicles, our system continuously learns from its experiences to improve over time,” said David Zito, CEO of Miso Robotics.

Zito continued, “Though we are starting with the relatively ‘simple’ task of cooking burgers, our proprietary AI software allows our kitchen assistants to be adaptable and therefore can be trained to help with almost any dull, dirty or dangerous task in a commercial kitchen — whether it’s frying chicken, cutting vegetables or final plating.”
Flippy is slightly limited in its current form; the robot can flip burgers and use built-in cameras and sensors to determine when the burger is cooked before placing the burger on a bun. However Flippy has not been developed to add sauces or condiments, a human worker must be available to perform those tasks.

This introduction of robots to the kitchen follows on the heels of restaurant chains including Wendy’s rolling out self-order kiosks to their stores.

Caliburger aims to have Flippy robots installed in 50 of their restaurants worldwide by 2019. The company stated that the benefits of using Flippy over a human worker include making “food faster, safer and with fewer errors.”

Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan_ or email him at lnolan@breitbart.com

Way, way, way back on the old forum, a few years prior to its demise, I got signed up.

I had more characters in my handle back then:

XYMOX_4AD_84.

It's a highly Atari X, highly 3T handle.

Quiz time.

What does each element signify?

(I previously stated the meanings on the old forum ... but newbs and those with poor attention spans wouldn't have gotten the 411 .... )

Great article I ran into in The Atlantic: Trump Has Caused a Civic Surge in America

Quote:There are two ways to look at the effect of Donald Trump’s presidency on American democracy. One is that he is a menace to the republic: that his attacks on journalists, federal judges, and constitutional norms undermine the rule of law. The other is that he is the greatest thing to happen to America’s civic and political ecosystem in decades.

These views are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are causally related. The president’s attacks on established institutions have triggered a systemic immune response in the body politic, producing a surge in engagement among his opponents (and also his fans).

Since the early 1970s, the nation’s civic health—from membership in civic groups to attendance at public meetings to newspaper reading—has been in steady, severe decline. Economic inequality has fed political inequality in a viciously self-reinforcing loop of disenfranchisement and concentration of clout.

But now millions of people, once cynical bystanders, are participating earnestly. In mass marches and packed congressional town meetings, Americans have taken vocal stands for inclusion. At airports and campuses and street corners they have swarmed in defense of Muslim and undocumented neighbors. Membership in the ACLU and the League of Women Voters has swelled, as have subscriptions to leading newspapers.

The ranks of Trump’s supporters, meanwhile, are filled with first-time or first-time-in-a-long-time participants in politics. He has given voice to communities long disregarded by cosmopolitan political elites. Heartened by his election and his willingness in office to buck convention, they are now rallying to his defense.

Trump has also generated a boom in popular civic education. Across the country, people are creating political clubs, discussion circles, teach-ins. My organization, Citizen University, has launched regular gatherings called Civic Saturdays—a civic analogue to church—that have drawn overflow crowds. Indivisible, an insiders’ guide to pressuring Congress, has sparked intense local organizing and activism. Google searches for the Emoluments Clause, recusal rules, and judicial review have spiked. And iCivics.org, the civics video gaming platform created by former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, has seen a doubling of game-playing this year.

This civic surge, it’s important to note, crosses ideological lines. Many principled libertarians and conservatives, troubled by Trump’s recklessness, are now cheered by rising popular interest in the ideals of liberty and limits on government power.

The conservative Federalist Society is fielding new inquiries from left and right about its Article I Project, which aims to restore congressional primacy against an overreaching executive. Civic start-ups like Free the People are sparking interest among Millennials in a hip libertarianism. The right-leaning American Enterprise Institute held a symposium recently positing that Trump’s arrival is a “Sputnik moment” for civic education.

All this energy, now visible and palpable, had been gathering long before Trump became president and has extended well beyond the borders of the United States. From the Arab Spring to the Brexit, from the Tea Party to $15 Now and Black Lives Matter, we live in an age of bottom-up power: citizens self-organizing to challenge entrenched monopolies and orthodoxies. Trump’s election itself was evidence of this.

The surge will likely outlast his presidency. Americans today are rushing to make up for decades of atrophy and neglect in civic education and engagement. But as they do so it’s important to remember that citizenship is about more than know-how. It’s also about “know-why”—the moral purposes of self-government.

Citizenship in a republic requires not just literacy in power but also a grounding in character. Power literacy means understanding systems of law, custom, and institutions—and acting with skill to move those systems. Civic character is more than personal virtue. It is about character in the collective—mutuality, reciprocity, respect, service, justice—and the prosocial ethics of being a member of the body.

Perhaps the most heartening part of today’s civic renewal is that people are exercising both power and character. They are practicing strategies of action while reckoning with questions of first principle. On campuses and public squares, they are debating the rights and responsibilities of dissent. On social media and in person, they are asking just what makes a leader legitimate and a representative truly representative.

Every time Trump acts or speaks against disfavored minority groups, they also are reminded that democracy alone—that is, a process of majority rule—is not enough. As Abraham Lincoln argued during his 1858 debates against Stephen Douglas about slavery, a democratic process is legitimate only when coupled with a moral sense. America today is beginning to rediscover its moral sense.

The president and his advisers will keep challenging moral and civic norms. Yet that is precisely why over the long term I am optimistic. As Americans have shown each other the last two months, the deepest source of this nation’s greatness and resilience is the decentralized way that citizens will reclaim their power. There are more civic antibodies here than viruses. We should thank Donald Trump for giving us the chance to prove it.

Happy Anniversary, Bull Market!  Tomorrow marks the eighth anniversary of the second-longest bull market in U.S. history, dating from the March 9, 2009 low in the major stock indices.  It's been quite a run for equity investors.  So it seems like as a good time as any to ask if the stock market is approaching the kind of "bubble" territory that might usher in the Great Devaluation, to which Strauss & Howe make frequent reference in The Fourth Turning.

I have provided links to some of the more interesting articles published, some of which provide excellent perspective with various graphics.

Disclaimer: Nothing here should be construed as trading or investment advice.  Consult your financial advisor for guidance:

Stop! This is NOT like the dot-com bubble... it’s much worse, according to this chart

The dangers lurking within the world’s ‘most deceptive’ stock market chart

Wall Street's super-charged bull faces its own March madness

Stock investors can’t bank on another 8-year bull-market bonanza

A Republican and a Democrat agree: Wall Street’s too bullish on Trump

Bull market depends on whether Trump can deliver on key promises

Of course, the above-referenced articles are limited to the stock market, leaving aside for the time being any discussion of "bubbles" in bonds, real estate, or arts & collectibles.  (And, for what it's worth, some investment advisors say that we're already in an "Everything Bubble.")  

I have a couple of questions--hopefully not rhetorical.  Do you consider the trillions in "lost" wealth, resulting from the financial crisis of 2008, to be sufficient--both in terms of magnitude and duration--to qualify as the Great Devaluation?  Or do other factors have to come into play first, such as a fiscal crisis, currency devaluation, what have you?