Has the regeneracy arrived?

[Eric the Green]

The degeneracy has arrived!

Will it spark a regeneracy?

[pbrower2a]

Degeneracy? this is the storm.

[Eric the Green]

(12-15-2016, 10:17 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(12-14-2016, 07:53 PM)Bourbonista Wrote: Hi, new member here, long-time fan of 4T.

Welcome!

Bourbonista Wrote:I think that the Trump election marks the beginning of the Regeneracy. The fact that most of the “establishment” media and political elites missed the strength of support for Trump among rural white voters and especially among educated suburban voters shows that Trump tapped in to a significant consensus among many Americans that the current system is irreparably broken and they are willing to bet on a crude, misogynistic, self-serving dilettante over any career politician, right or left.
But I don’t think Trump is the Grey Champion. He will precipitate the Crisis – trade war with China, Great Depression II, a likely constitutional crisis – but will not get a second term. It may be bad enough that a true Grey Champion, equal to Roosevelt or Lincoln will emerge.

God help us if not.

I agree that Trump can't be the leader we've been looking for.  He's an actor taking the biggest stage on earth -- and that's all.  His biggest contribution to this cycle may already be in the can: the Russian hacks may have selected a President.  FWIW, Hillary wasn't the right person for the job either, just better than this shameless huckster.

I'm less sanguine about the resolution of the crisis.  BHO has been a huge disappointment, and now we have The Donald.  Unlike the Republicans, who declared total war on Obama, the Dems are trying to play nice.  This is likely to be a very one-sided policy.  If we swing back to the Dems in 2020, what vision will they offer and how will they deliver?  After all, obstruction worked so well for the GOP this past cycle.

There is no hope unless the GOP implodes to such an extent that they have no power.

[TnT]

David says, "If we swing back to the Dems in 2020, what vision will they offer and how will they deliver? After all, obstruction worked so well for the GOP this past cycle."


David, your statement is basically an extrapolation of relatively current and recent behavior. Sometimes it works to extrapolate in order to predict the future. The spot we are in now with The Donald is NOT an extrapolation. I think we are in for dark days, and quantum jumps to god only knows what.

[pbrower2a]

Should Democrats win big in 2020, then such will reflect the gross failure of the Republican Party. I cannot tell you yet what the symptoms will be. There could be an economic meltdown that discredits the economic stewardship of the Republican Party. Republicans now own the economy and can't blame Democrats for any failure. There could be a military or diplomatic debacle with the military and the Trump or Pence Administration pointing fingers at each other. There could be civil unrest as the government shows callous disregard for a majority of the population.

[TnT]

One of my concerns is that the Republican Party could, based on their groundwork over the last 15-20 years, simply take control of the voting processes at the state level, such as is happening in North Carolina right now. It could become feasible in the next two years to make it impossible for the Democratic Party to win at all, much less "big."

Once that takes place, the federal level becomes theirs as well. They have a majority of the states now anyway. They may simply not give a shit what the population at large thinks any more. What are "we" going to do, anyway, break out our nickel-dime AR-15's?

Dark days ahead.

[pbrower2a]

(12-25-2016, 05:58 PM)TnT Wrote: One of my concerns is that the Republican Party could, based on their groundwork over the last 15-20 years, simply take control of the voting processes at the state level, such as is happening in North Carolina right now.  It could become feasible in the next two years to make it impossible for the Democratic Party to win at all, much less "big."

Once that takes place, the federal level becomes theirs as well.  They have a majority of the states now anyway. They may simply not give a shit what the population at large thinks any more.  What are "we" going to do, anyway, break out our nickel-dime AR-15's?

Dark days ahead.

The Republican Party has the power over the next four years to decide whether America will be democratic or despotic. It might get to the position of controlling the nominal-but-permanently-ineffective opposition if not outlawing or crushing it. Should that happen, then all the ugly demons of the American past -- the militarism, the racism, the anti-intellectualism, the elite greed, and the inequality -- come to the fore. Survival for anyone not in the elite will depend upon pliability, and happiness will be possible only for the stupid. To think independently within an authoritarian or totalitarian order is sedition if not treason.

We may still have images of Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, and FDR on our currency, but they will be irrelevant to how America does politics.

Oh, yes, the leaders will care what people think -- and those who think too far outside the prescribed orthodoxy will need to stifle that urge or emigrate to some country in which such is still possible, or die. If there is any clear lesson of twentieth-century tyrannies from the Congo nightmare of Leopold II to Iraq under Satan Hussein, there really are fates worse than death. Humanity is far more adept at creating Hell than at creating Heaven. One can no more say "This is America, and such things are impossible" any more today than the Germans could say in 1932 that a system that could rival the Mongols in murder could never appear in their country. Tyranny is tyranny, and it can fit any culture.

We are not exempt from torture chambers and murder camps just because we are Americans. The Germans proved shocked at what Hitler wrought upon America. We resist such from the first day of the trump Presidency or we risk losing everything that we have ever held precious in American life.

Qui tacet consentit.

[Eric the Green]

(12-25-2016, 05:58 PM)TnT Wrote: One of my concerns is that the Republican Party could, based on their groundwork over the last 15-20 years, simply take control of the voting processes at the state level, such as is happening in North Carolina right now.  It could become feasible in the next two years to make it impossible for the Democratic Party to win at all, much less "big."

Once that takes place, the federal level becomes theirs as well.  They have a majority of the states now anyway. They may simply not give a shit what the population at large thinks any more.  What are "we" going to do, anyway, break out our nickel-dime AR-15's?

Dark days ahead.

Democrats and other Trump opponents need to realize this. The usual mainstream "bi-partisan" compromise behavior will not cut it. Bold, virtually-ruthless resistance and bold ideas are the only way forward to success.

That's one reason why I'm thinking that the leaders the Democrats need now, are people like Michael Moore.

[Odin]

(12-25-2016, 05:58 PM)TnT Wrote: One of my concerns is that the Republican Party could, based on their groundwork over the last 15-20 years, simply take control of the voting processes at the state level, such as is happening in North Carolina right now.  It could become feasible in the next two years to make it impossible for the Democratic Party to win at all, much less "big."

Once that takes place, the federal level becomes theirs as well.  They have a majority of the states now anyway. They may simply not give a shit what the population at large thinks any more.  What are "we" going to do, anyway, break out our nickel-dime AR-15's?

Dark days ahead.

The Left's biggest enemy is ourselves. Ever since the 2T there has been a significant portion of the "New Left" that simply assumes the worst of the Democratic Party and finds any excuse to see it in a negative light and vote 3rd party or not vote at all. The poster here Maryposa is a good example of this type. Or you will have the narcissistic special snowflakes who have a delusional idea that a candidate must agree with them completely so they can "vote their conscience".

Meanwhile the Republicans will vote for a ham sandwich.

[SomeGuy]

Quote:Meanwhile the Republicans will vote for a ham sandwich.

Only if it's on white bread!

[Eric the Green]

(12-26-2016, 01:57 PM)SomeGuy Wrote:

Quote:Meanwhile the Republicans will vote for a ham sandwich.

Only if it's on white bread!

White bread is not good for you. But if that's your choice, it's your right. And it's your right to vote Republican too. But, it's not good fer ya.

It's not good for Democrats and liberals to blame and rail against each other. Let's do whole wheat instead, and support each other for the good of the whole. Health, or death. It's our lives, and it's our choice.

[Eric the Green]

The regeneracy, this time, is like 2 times ago. IF it happens, the Left/liberals will join together in a common consensus, and stop bickering with each other. Then we on the Left will be able to overcome you guys on the right, and then forge the new consensus for the 1T. The Union will win and create the new Union. That's how it works; every time.

[Ragnarök_62]

Some Guy Wrote:Only if it's on white bread!

+

Eric The Green Wrote:White bread is not good for you. But if that's your choice, it's your right. And it's your right to vote Republican too. But, it's not good fer ya.

Purple corn is good for you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_corn
http://www.rawguru.com/raw-food-recipes/....html.html



Purple Grimace ate way too much purple corn and dyed himself purple

Quote:It's not good for Democrats and liberals to blame and rail against each other. Let's do whole wheat instead, and support each other for the good of the whole. Health, or death. It's our lives, and it's our choice.

But, but, what they should do is chuck lousy positions and state positions on winners.



  There are positions that play just as bad as 7/2 offsuit.

Play hands like:

[Eric the Green]

Your guys are cute.

[TnT]

(12-26-2016, 05:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: The regeneracy, this time, is like 2 times ago. IF it happens, the Left/liberals will join together in a common consensus, and stop bickering with each other. Then we on the Left will be able to overcome you guys on the right, and then forge the new consensus for the 1T. The Union will win and create the new Union. That's how it works; every time.

Check out W.E.B. Du Bois' Black Reconstruction in America 1860-1880.  And consider that for the whole history of our country, we have not been able to erase the blot of slavery that was integral in even the formation.  I'm not convinced that any consensus was achieved during or after the ACW.  What began as a natural separation (secession) was aborted.  But that was about all.

[Eric the Green]

(01-02-2017, 03:30 PM)TnT Wrote:

(12-26-2016, 05:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: The regeneracy, this time, is like 2 times ago. IF it happens, the Left/liberals will join together in a common consensus, and stop bickering with each other. Then we on the Left will be able to overcome you guys on the right, and then forge the new consensus for the 1T. The Union will win and create the new Union. That's how it works; every time.

Check out W.E.B. Du Bois' Black Reconstruction in America 1860-1880.  And consider that for the whole history of our country, we have not been able to erase the blot of slavery that was integral in even the formation.  I'm not convinced that any consensus was achieved during or after the ACW.  What began as a natural separation (secession) was aborted.  But that was about all.

I don't disagree. There was a prevailing power established in both North and South that made the 1T of that time, but the slavery issue was certainly not resolved, nor is it resolved today. It is also an open question for me whether the North should have allowed the South to secede.

[Mikebert]

(12-14-2016, 07:53 PM)Bourbonista Wrote: Hi, new member here, long-time fan of 4T.

I think that the Trump election marks the beginning of the Regeneracy. The fact that most of the “establishment” media and political elites missed the strength of support for Trump among rural white voters and especially among educated suburban voters shows that Trump tapped in to a significant consensus among many Americans that the current system is irreparably broken and they are willing to bet on a crude, misogynistic, self-serving dilettante over any career politician, right or left.
But I don’t think Trump is the Grey Champion. He will precipitate the Crisis – trade war with China, Great Depression II, a likely constitutional crisis – but will not get a second term. It may be bad enough that a true Grey Champion, equal to Roosevelt or Lincoln will emerge.
God help us if not.

Welcome.

Your description makes 2016 sound more like a crisis trigger, not a regeneracy. After all I think most folks would see the 2016 electoral outcome as the electorate calling for change.  Change from what?  From what came before: Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama. That is change from the 3T.  I thought 2001 and 2008 were crisis triggers because big shit happened. But big shit happened around 1920, and that was no 4T.  The English Civil War was a far bigger event than the Glorious Revolution, yet it was the latter that was the 4T. 

What makes a 4T a 4T is there is a change in the trajectory of the nation's history. For example, inequality was high and real wages at starvation levels mid-17th century.  It helped set the stage for the war.  Population declined during the war and for decades after.  Times did not improve.  And then population bottomed in 1690 and began a rise, which accelerated a couple of decades later.  GDP per capita, which had been flat for a century, began to rise in the late 17th century.  Times got better. There was a sea change in the demographic and economic trajectory in a positive direction that occurred contemporaneously with the GR, not the ECW.  There were also fundamental changes in government.

American inequality peaked in 1916, declined to 1920, then rose to 1916 levels by 1929, and then went down, bottoming only in the late 1970's.  Peacetime government spending had been about 3% of GDP for half a century before 1929.  Over the next couple of decades peacetime government spending rose about six fold, as did the number of federal employees.  In the two decades after 1929, America emerged as the world hegemonic power.  These major changes in the nation's historical trajectory were contemporaneous with the 4T, not the period around 1920, despite the revolutionary zeitgeist present then.

Since 2001, or 2008, there has been no change in trajectory.  The slow-motion collapse of the middle class that has been going on for decades, continued on. This is what the 2016 election was about.  People were writing about it 25 years ago, and are saying the same things today.

[flbones too]

Inequality remained high in the last 4T up until around 1940. So by that case, you'd be saying that the last 4T didn't really start until the 40s, and that the 1930s is a continuation of the 1920s. The 1920s were 3T. In 1920 alone, there was a sharp recession and a so called "red scare". In 2001, you had the twin tower attack and the backlash against the Muslims. But society went on as usual, then you had the housing boom and birth rate rose as well. It was all very 3T and now we seem to be in a hangover in 2017, reacting against the norms of the 3T. 

IT's interesting that you think we're still in the 3T, which would mean that it'd be 33 years long now.

[David Horn]

(01-03-2017, 08:18 AM)Mikebert Wrote: American inequality peaked in 1916, declined to 1920, then rose to 1916 levels by 1929, and then went down, bottoming only in the late 1970's.  Peacetime government spending had been about 3% of GDP for half a century before 1929.  Over the next couple of decades peacetime government spending rose about six fold, as did the number of federal employees.  In the two decades after 1929, America emerged as the world hegemonic power.  These major changes in the nation's historical trajectory were contemporaneous with the 4T, not the period around 1920, despite the revolutionary zeitgeist present then.

Since 2001, or 2008, there has been no change in trajectory.  The slow-motion collapse of the middle class that has been going on for decades, continued on. This is what the 2016 election was about.  People were writing about it 25 years ago, and are saying the same things today.

So we have two choices of interpretation.  We can argue that no 4T is occurring and the theory is invalid, or opposite: that one has been underway but is failing.  Not every struggle generates a distinct winner.

It could just be that nothing is so drastically important that it forces a unified response.  Inequality is bad, but the most negatively affected are out-of-sight-and-out-of-mind.  ACW is getting worse, but it hasn't produce an environment disaster yet.  We are still more-or-less free.  The economy in general is meh.  It's hard to get wound up to fight the good fight if the fight isn't absolutely necessary.

Of course, that may still change.

[David Horn]

(01-03-2017, 09:47 AM)flbones too Wrote: Inequality remained high in the last 4T up until around 1940. So by that case, you'd be saying that the last 4T didn't really start until the 40s, and that the 1930s is a continuation of the 1920s. The 1920s were 3T. In 1920 alone, there was a sharp recession and a so called "red scare". In 2001, you had the twin tower attack and the backlash against the Muslims. But society went on as usual, then you had the housing boom and birth rate rose as well. It was all very 3T and now we seem to be in a hangover in 2017, reacting against the norms of the 3T. 

IT's interesting that you think we're still in the 3T, which would mean that it'd be 33 years long now.

H-m-m-m.  Don't discount the possibility that we all are much more sophisticated than earlier generations, and harder to shock into action.