skipped an archetype like time before last?

[Tim Randal Walker]

You are welcome.

[Mikebert]

(04-19-2019, 06:20 AM)sbarrera Wrote: I think maybe this Crisis doesn't feel Crisis-y enough but there are signs:

Growing populism/authoritarianism
Culture has become bland/predictable
Extreme factionalism - basically we are in a civil war, just not a shooting war
And the demographic bust, if not economic bust

These seem to be weak tea. S&H defined 4Ts are times of structural change. Such change is fundamental, which means involving the base, or "root" of society. The word radical comes from the Latin word for root, as in striking at the root of the problem. That means the defining trait of a 4T is radical change to the institutions of society (a 2T in contrast would feature radical change to belief systems, but not institutions). 

Changes in popular culture are not the stuff of 4Ts. Factionalism is the stuff of 3Ts, as is rising authoritarianism in both 3T and 4Ts (e.g. Mussolini 1922, Pilsudski 1926, Kai-shek 1926, Hitler 1933, Franco 1936 etc.).

[Tim Randal Walker]

Something else that I recall from a thread. Generations in the Civic role tend to alternate between Public Empires, and Private Empires. Public Empires-think of Republicans founding the U.S. government, or G.I.s and the New Deal. Private Empires? The first thing that comes to mind is big business, but the Progressives, I believe, were into founding (technically private) institutions with public purposes.

If the Milleninals are not blunted by Xers, I can see them behaving-not like empowered Heros-but like Progressives on steroids.

[Mikebert]

(04-20-2019, 02:00 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: Something else that I recall from a thread.  Generations in the Civic role tend to alternate between Public Empires, and Private Empires.  Public Empires-think of Republicans founding the U.S. government, or G.I.s and the New Deal.  Private Empires?  The first thing that comes to mind is  big business, but the Progressives, I believe, were into founding (technically private) institutions with public purposes.

If the Millenials-even if not empowered by the 4T-are not blunted by Xers, I can see them behaving-not like empowered Heros-but like Progressives on steroids.

The GIs didn't really found the New Deal, they were too young. Mostly it was the Lost aged 33-50 and 38-55, respectively, who played that role. In contrast the Republicans were older during the 1789-1800 formative years of the American government, with one of them becoming president at its end.

[TheNomad]

(04-19-2019, 09:57 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(04-19-2019, 06:20 AM)sbarrera Wrote: I'd say the youngest Millennials are still only 13; the Artist archetype is a way off from adulthood.

What about Millennials disqualifies them from the Hero archetype? I think they are matching it. They still have time for a political movement; they won't likely get a war to fight in like the GIs had but that is because nuclear weapons have ended mass-scale conflict like the CW/WW era experienced.

I think maybe this Crisis doesn't feel Crisis-y enough but there are signs:

Growing populism/authoritarianism
Culture has become bland/predictable
Extreme factionalism - basically we are in a civil war, just not a shooting war
And the demographic bust, if not economic bust

People looking for old music and underground music seems different than the last 4T. I do this myself. I'm born in 1986 but am unaware of the vast majority of songs in this decade. I have almost no idea at all. I don't think there is a one true pop culture. I see this as the ultimate age of the niche. Civics are supposed to be mainstream in culture but what I see happening is most people hate the pop charts so they look for music on their own and just ignore the pop culture spewed by the mass media. People around my age are doing this a lot. The current mass produced culture seems irrelevant today when everyone just goes into their niche culture and searches for everything. This is the opposite of the big monoculture that's supposed to happen.

Amazing..... this sounds exactly like still X culture, not Millennial.  Is that even possible?

[TheNomad]

(04-19-2019, 09:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: We are 1850s redux. The authors thought that was a 3T too and gave the 4T only 5 years. But it was the 4T, and so it today. That explains everything and no revision is needed.

Sorry to ask this but can you explain that?  I've not been able to grasp how archetype was "skipped".  I do the numbers in my head and seems strange.  Because if G.I. generation were Heroes, and they were born at turn of that century, CW was only about 20 years prior.  What was skipped, when, and exactly?

[Eric the Green]

(04-20-2019, 03:47 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(04-19-2019, 09:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: We are 1850s redux. The authors thought that was a 3T too and gave the 4T only 5 years. But it was the 4T, and so it today. That explains everything and no revision is needed.

Sorry to ask this but can you explain that?  I've not been able to grasp how archetype was "skipped".  I do the numbers in my head and seems strange.  Because if G.I. generation were Heroes, and they were born at turn of that century, CW was only about 20 years prior.  What was skipped, when, and exactly?

The Civil War was 35-40 years before the birth of the first GI Generation member, according to Strauss and Howe. What they did was a bit strange. They called it the Civil War anomaly. They and some of their readers say it was because the Civil War Crisis came too suddenly and was over quickly, so there was no time for a Hero Generation, and so the civil war soldiers were not "heroes" and the civic archetype was "skipped" in that saeculum. I guess they felt that the civil war happened because the civic viewpoint was missing.

But actually, what they did was extend the preceding prophet generation to 30 years. That is longer for a generation than in any saeculum, including the longer ones from before modern times. The Transcendental Generation was supposed to be from 1792 to 1822. They made it that long, it appears, so they could brand Abraham Lincoln as a "prophet" instead of a "nomad."

I think there was something strange about that saeculum, but I don't think it's as anomalous as they say. Various posters here over the years have proposed alternate dates that smooth out the generations and the turnings. The common element in these is usually to either include the 1850s in the civil war 4T (which I favor) or include the Reconstruction Era in it (which shortens the following saeculum instead of shortening the civil war saeculum as S&H did).

The 1850s was a decade of attempted compromise, and putting off the inevitable conflict. It was a time of poor presidential leadership, especially by Democrats who enabled Dixie's oppression. Polarization was complete, and increased throughout the decade, and actions were muddled and confused. It followed an unnecessary war of conquest in 1846-48, which brought new states into the Union and exploded the debate over which states were to be free and which slave. Also overseas there was a famine in 1846 and a chain of revolutions in 1848 that increased immigration into the USA and consequent fears of foreigners. The Know-Nothing Party (also known as the American Party) ran Fillmore for president on an anti-immigrant platform. I don't know if they passed out red hats. But according to wikipedia, "Know Nothing candy, Know Nothing tea, and Know Nothing toothpicks appeared." The industrial revolution was revving up in America, which was altering the economy and its technology and increasing insecurity among people accustomed to the old ways. This followed a severe depression abroad in 1846-48 which affected the USA as well. You can see some resemblance to the 2010s here. And people are not sure that we are even in a 4T today, which parallels Strauss and Howe's decision to label the 1850s as 3T when it was actually the early 4T.

Such anomaly as occurred I explain by the inherent division of the country between Yankee and Dixie, in which the former was modern industrial and the latter medieval agricultural. Something of that split continues today between blue and red, much as that of 1860 was between blue and gray. But the fact that half the country then was a medieval agricultural aristocracy was slowing down the saeculum, even though the modern democratic and industrial half wanted to surge forward. Modern progress was just getting going in the world, and democracy was just getting established and was facing stern resistance since the Revolution (French/American/Industrial/Romantic). 

It took some time for the Revolution to win, and in fact it's still going on here and around the world. But the transition which the anomaly represented and the Civil War decided was that between a modern saeculum of 80-84 years for the USA and a medieval one of about 100 years. The turnings and generations cycles had to be speeded up as progress speeded up. The modern saeculum involves all the people, with longer life-spans, whereas the medieval/ancient type only involved 2 living generations and only the upper class. Most people in the ancient and medieval saecula did not participate in historic events and did not change their lifestyle or location or experience generation gaps. The Civil War was the moment when the modern faster saeculum took hold for the entire country after it consolidated with and defeated the medieval, aristocratic half. Of course the residue from that division remains, and right now the residual medieval half of our country has ruled it for some 40 years now. Thus we stand at the edge of another decision of whether to go forward or be held back.

I look upon the civil war generations as hybrids, and sub-generations, myself, and retain the basic S&H dates for them, and redate the turnings to smooth those out and include the 1850s as part of the 4T.

[Eric the Green]

(04-20-2019, 01:35 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: Quoting from a pbrower post to Current Anomaly:  Five Generations Alive.  Note the letter designations for generational archetypes:  I = Idealist, R = Reactive, C = Civic, and A = Adaptive.

"...the Progressive generation, which had initially been brought up with many Civic characteristics, found its proclivities blunted as the Gilded took on the Civic role.  The Progressive Generation took on an Adaptive character."

The generations as they are described after the Civil War:

"Transcendental (I ousted, and having taken on some R traits)

"Gilded (C in practice but with some residual R traits)

"Progressive (A in practice but with some residual C traits)

"Missionary (I, with little ambiguity)"

I agree, and I think to some extent these hybrid traits were developed during the civil war or during the entire circa 1850-1865 4T as well.

[AspieMillennial]

(04-20-2019, 03:44 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(04-19-2019, 09:57 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(04-19-2019, 06:20 AM)sbarrera Wrote: I'd say the youngest Millennials are still only 13; the Artist archetype is a way off from adulthood.

What about Millennials disqualifies them from the Hero archetype? I think they are matching it. They still have time for a political movement; they won't likely get a war to fight in like the GIs had but that is because nuclear weapons have ended mass-scale conflict like the CW/WW era experienced.

I think maybe this Crisis doesn't feel Crisis-y enough but there are signs:

Growing populism/authoritarianism
Culture has become bland/predictable
Extreme factionalism - basically we are in a civil war, just not a shooting war
And the demographic bust, if not economic bust

People looking for old music and underground music seems different than the last 4T. I do this myself. I'm born in 1986 but am unaware of the vast majority of songs in this decade. I have almost no idea at all. I don't think there is a one true pop culture. I see this as the ultimate age of the niche. Civics are supposed to be mainstream in culture but what I see happening is most people hate the pop charts so they look for music on their own and just ignore the pop culture spewed by the mass media. People around my age are doing this a lot. The current mass produced culture seems irrelevant today when everyone just goes into their niche culture and searches for everything. This is the opposite of the big monoculture that's supposed to happen.

Amazing..... this sounds exactly like still X culture, not Millennial.  Is that even possible?

Of course it's possible. The mainstream music culture is so bad today that people are doing anything they can to opt out of it. A popular saying now is "There's more great music around than in any other time period. You just have to look for it." They say things like "Top 100 is supposed to be shit. The good stuff is underground." Mainstream radio for determining music taste is dead.

[Eric the Green]

(04-20-2019, 06:09 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(04-20-2019, 03:44 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(04-19-2019, 09:57 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(04-19-2019, 06:20 AM)sbarrera Wrote: I'd say the youngest Millennials are still only 13; the Artist archetype is a way off from adulthood.

What about Millennials disqualifies them from the Hero archetype? I think they are matching it. They still have time for a political movement; they won't likely get a war to fight in like the GIs had but that is because nuclear weapons have ended mass-scale conflict like the CW/WW era experienced.

I think maybe this Crisis doesn't feel Crisis-y enough but there are signs:

Growing populism/authoritarianism
Culture has become bland/predictable
Extreme factionalism - basically we are in a civil war, just not a shooting war
And the demographic bust, if not economic bust

People looking for old music and underground music seems different than the last 4T. I do this myself. I'm born in 1986 but am unaware of the vast majority of songs in this decade. I have almost no idea at all. I don't think there is a one true pop culture. I see this as the ultimate age of the niche. Civics are supposed to be mainstream in culture but what I see happening is most people hate the pop charts so they look for music on their own and just ignore the pop culture spewed by the mass media. People around my age are doing this a lot. The current mass produced culture seems irrelevant today when everyone just goes into their niche culture and searches for everything. This is the opposite of the big monoculture that's supposed to happen.

Amazing..... this sounds exactly like still X culture, not Millennial.  Is that even possible?

Of course it's possible. The mainstream music culture is so bad today that people are doing anything they can to opt out of it. A popular saying now is "There's more great music around than in any other time period. You just have to look for it." They say things like "Top 100 is supposed to be shit. The good stuff is underground." Mainstream radio for determining music taste is dead.

Agreed.

[Marypoza]

(04-20-2019, 05:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-20-2019, 03:47 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(04-19-2019, 09:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: We are 1850s redux. The authors thought that was a 3T too and gave the 4T only 5 years. But it was the 4T, and so it today. That explains everything and no revision is needed.

Sorry to ask this but can you explain that?  I've not been able to grasp how archetype was "skipped".  I do the numbers in my head and seems strange.  Because if G.I. generation were Heroes, and they were born at turn of that century, CW was only about 20 years prior.  What was skipped, when, and exactly?

The Civil War was 35-40 years before the birth of the first GI Generation member, according to Strauss and Howe. What they did was a bit strange. They called it the Civil War anomaly. They and some of their readers say it was because the Civil War Crisis came too suddenly and was over quickly, so there was no time for a Hero Generation, and so the civil war soldiers were not "heroes" and the civic archetype was "skipped" in that saeculum. I guess they felt that the civil war happened because the civic viewpoint was missing.

But actually, what they did was extend the preceding prophet generation to 30 years. That is longer for a generation than in any saeculum, including the longer ones from before modern times. The Transcendental Generation was supposed to be from 1792 to 1822. They made it that long, it appears, so they could brand Abraham Lincoln as a "prophet" instead of a "nomad."

I think there was something strange about that saeculum, but I don't think it's as anomalous as they say. Various posters here over the years have proposed alternate dates that smooth out the generations and the turnings. The common element in these is usually to either include the 1850s in the civil war 4T (which I favor) or include the Reconstruction Era in it (which shortens the following saeculum instead of shortening the civil war saeculum as S&H did).

The 1850s was a decade of attempted compromise, and putting off the inevitable conflict. It was a time of poor presidential leadership, especially by Democrats who enabled Dixie's oppression. Polarization was complete, and increased throughout the decade, and actions were muddled and confused. It followed an unnecessary war of conquest in 1846-48, which brought new states into the Union and exploded the debate over which states were to be free and which slave. Also overseas there was a famine in 1846 and a chain of revolutions in 1848 that increased immigration into the USA and consequent fears of foreigners. The Know-Nothing Party (also known as the American Party) ran Fillmore for president on an anti-immigrant platform. I don't know if they passed out red hats. But according to wikipedia, "Know Nothing candy, Know Nothing tea, and Know Nothing toothpicks appeared." The industrial revolution was revving up in America, which was altering the economy and its technology and increasing insecurity among people accustomed to the old ways. This followed a severe depression abroad in 1846-48 which affected the USA as well. You can see some resemblance to the 2010s here. And people are not sure that we are even in a 4T today, which parallels Strauss and Howe's decision to label the 1850s as 3T when it was actually the early 4T.

Such anomaly as occurred I explain by the inherent division of the country between Yankee and Dixie, in which the former was modern industrial and the latter medieval agricultural. Something of that split continues today between blue and red, much as that of 1860 was between blue and gray. But the fact that half the country then was a medieval agricultural aristocracy was slowing down the saeculum, even though the modern democratic and industrial half wanted to surge forward. Modern progress was just getting going in the world, and democracy was just getting established and was facing stern resistance since the Revolution (French/American/Industrial/Romantic). 

It took some time for the Revolution to win, and in fact it's still going on here and around the world. But the transition which the anomaly represented and the Civil War decided was that between a modern saeculum of 80-84 years for the USA and a medieval one of about 100 years. The turnings and generations cycles had to be speeded up as progress speeded up. The modern saeculum involves all the people, with longer life-spans, whereas the medieval/ancient type only involved 2 living generations and only the upper class. Most people in the ancient and medieval saecula did not participate in historic events and did not change their lifestyle or location or experience generation gaps. The Civil War was the moment when the modern faster saeculum took hold for the entire country after it consolidated with and defeated the medieval, aristocratic half. Of course the residue from that division remains, and right now the residual medieval half of our country has ruled it for some 40 years now. Thus we stand at the edge of another decision of whether to go forward or be held back.

I look upon the civil war generations as hybrids, and sub-generations, myself, and retain the basic S&H dates for them, and redate the turnings to smooth those out and include the 1850s as part of the 4T.

-- your description of the CW saeculum split btween medieval ancient types & modern industrial types reminds me of a post David made about this current saeculum being split btween the wingnutz being stuck in the 3T while the rest of us are moving on into the 4T

Btw, l don't think S&H drew out the Transcendentals 30 yrs 2 include  Abraham Lincoln, who was born in 1809. S&H could of ended the Transcendentals in 1810 if that was the case

[TheNomad]

(04-20-2019, 05:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-20-2019, 03:47 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(04-19-2019, 09:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: We are 1850s redux. The authors thought that was a 3T too and gave the 4T only 5 years. But it was the 4T, and so it today. That explains everything and no revision is needed.

Sorry to ask this but can you explain that?  I've not been able to grasp how archetype was "skipped".  I do the numbers in my head and seems strange.  Because if G.I. generation were Heroes, and they were born at turn of that century, CW was only about 20 years prior.  What was skipped, when, and exactly?

The Civil War was 35-40 years before the birth of the first GI Generation member, according to Strauss and Howe. What they did was a bit strange. They called it the Civil War anomaly. They and some of their readers say it was because the Civil War Crisis came too suddenly and was over quickly, so there was no time for a Hero Generation, and so the civil war soldiers were not "heroes" and the civic archetype was "skipped" in that saeculum. I guess they felt that the civil war happened because the civic viewpoint was missing.

....

But actually, what they did was extend the preceding prophet generation to 30 years. That is longer for a generation than in any saeculum, including the longer ones from before modern times.

I look upon the civil war generations as hybrids, and sub-generations, myself, and retain the basic S&H dates for them, and redate the turnings to smooth those out and include the 1850s as part of the 4T.

I think I accept lengthening the bracket.  The numbers seem to add up eventually.  80 years is never just '80' but 70-90.

Adjusting the bracket to 1850s, I'm still unclear since the G.I. is named as Hero, right?  They are born in the 20th century.  Not during the war or before it.  I know not too much about that culture, but still trying to know what, exactly, was "skipped" there.

[Eric the Green]

Nothing was skipped in the 20th century. The hero generation that came of age during the civil war was skipped, according to S&H. The nomad Gilded generation was followed by the adaptive/artist Progressives.

[Eric the Green]

(04-20-2019, 11:51 PM)Marypoza Wrote:

(04-20-2019, 05:17 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(04-20-2019, 03:47 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(04-19-2019, 09:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: We are 1850s redux. The authors thought that was a 3T too and gave the 4T only 5 years. But it was the 4T, and so it today. That explains everything and no revision is needed.

Sorry to ask this but can you explain that?  I've not been able to grasp how archetype was "skipped".  I do the numbers in my head and seems strange.  Because if G.I. generation were Heroes, and they were born at turn of that century, CW was only about 20 years prior.  What was skipped, when, and exactly?

The Civil War was 35-40 years before the birth of the first GI Generation member, according to Strauss and Howe. What they did was a bit strange. They called it the Civil War anomaly. They and some of their readers say it was because the Civil War Crisis came too suddenly and was over quickly, so there was no time for a Hero Generation, and so the civil war soldiers were not "heroes" and the civic archetype was "skipped" in that saeculum. I guess they felt that the civil war happened because the civic viewpoint was missing.

But actually, what they did was extend the preceding prophet generation to 30 years. That is longer for a generation than in any saeculum, including the longer ones from before modern times. The Transcendental Generation was supposed to be from 1792 to 1822. They made it that long, it appears, so they could brand Abraham Lincoln as a "prophet" instead of a "nomad."

I think there was something strange about that saeculum, but I don't think it's as anomalous as they say. Various posters here over the years have proposed alternate dates that smooth out the generations and the turnings. The common element in these is usually to either include the 1850s in the civil war 4T (which I favor) or include the Reconstruction Era in it (which shortens the following saeculum instead of shortening the civil war saeculum as S&H did).

The 1850s was a decade of attempted compromise, and putting off the inevitable conflict. It was a time of poor presidential leadership, especially by Democrats who enabled Dixie's oppression. Polarization was complete, and increased throughout the decade, and actions were muddled and confused. It followed an unnecessary war of conquest in 1846-48, which brought new states into the Union and exploded the debate over which states were to be free and which slave. Also overseas there was a famine in 1846 and a chain of revolutions in 1848 that increased immigration into the USA and consequent fears of foreigners. The Know-Nothing Party (also known as the American Party) ran Fillmore for president on an anti-immigrant platform. I don't know if they passed out red hats. But according to wikipedia, "Know Nothing candy, Know Nothing tea, and Know Nothing toothpicks appeared." The industrial revolution was revving up in America, which was altering the economy and its technology and increasing insecurity among people accustomed to the old ways. This followed a severe depression abroad in 1846-48 which affected the USA as well. You can see some resemblance to the 2010s here. And people are not sure that we are even in a 4T today, which parallels Strauss and Howe's decision to label the 1850s as 3T when it was actually the early 4T.

Such anomaly as occurred I explain by the inherent division of the country between Yankee and Dixie, in which the former was modern industrial and the latter medieval agricultural. Something of that split continues today between blue and red, much as that of 1860 was between blue and gray. But the fact that half the country then was a medieval agricultural aristocracy was slowing down the saeculum, even though the modern democratic and industrial half wanted to surge forward. Modern progress was just getting going in the world, and democracy was just getting established and was facing stern resistance since the Revolution (French/American/Industrial/Romantic). 

It took some time for the Revolution to win, and in fact it's still going on here and around the world. But the transition which the anomaly represented and the Civil War decided was that between a modern saeculum of 80-84 years for the USA and a medieval one of about 100 years. The turnings and generations cycles had to be speeded up as progress speeded up. The modern saeculum involves all the people, with longer life-spans, whereas the medieval/ancient type only involved 2 living generations and only the upper class. Most people in the ancient and medieval saecula did not participate in historic events and did not change their lifestyle or location or experience generation gaps. The Civil War was the moment when the modern faster saeculum took hold for the entire country after it consolidated with and defeated the medieval, aristocratic half. Of course the residue from that division remains, and right now the residual medieval half of our country has ruled it for some 40 years now. Thus we stand at the edge of another decision of whether to go forward or be held back.

I look upon the civil war generations as hybrids, and sub-generations, myself, and retain the basic S&H dates for them, and redate the turnings to smooth those out and include the 1850s as part of the 4T.

-- your description of the CW saeculum split between medieval ancient types & modern industrial types reminds me of a post David made about this current saeculum being split between the wingnutz being stuck in the 3T while the rest of us are moving on into the 4T

Btw, l don't think S&H drew out the Transcendentals 30 yrs to include  Abraham Lincoln, who was born in 1809. S&H could (have) ended the Transcendentals in 1810 if that was the case

That's true. The earlier generations were also longer than more recent generations. It was some kind of transition to speed up the saeculum.

[pbrower2a]

Howe and Strauss put people born until 1821 in the Transcendental Generation. Such allows him to put Grant and Hayes in the Gilded Generation.

Does he want to put Fyodor Dostoevsky in the Transcendental Generation?

[AspieMillennial]

(04-23-2019, 12:40 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Howe and Strauss put people born until 1821 in the Transcendental Generation. Such allows him to put Grant and Hayes in the Gilded Generation.

Does he want to put Fyodor Dostoevsky in the Transcendental Generation?

There are personalities of all kinds born in a generation. Just because someone doesn't have the same personality as the generation or views doesn't mean they're a different generation.

[David Horn]

(04-22-2019, 10:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Nothing was skipped in the 20th century. The hero generation that came of age during the civil war was skipped, according to S&H. The nomad Gilded generation was followed by the adaptive/artist Progressives.

Many of us find the missed generation during the ACW an unnecessary manipulation needed to make other less important timings work.  I think yours or Mike Alexander's proposed generational map with no missing gens is the right way to attack this.   If all gens are present, the crisis has to take a different shape, but either an early start or late finish can be accommodated better than the missed gen.

[AspieMillennial]

(04-23-2019, 04:08 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(04-22-2019, 10:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Nothing was skipped in the 20th century. The hero generation that came of age during the civil war was skipped, according to S&H. The nomad Gilded generation was followed by the adaptive/artist Progressives.

Many of us find the missed generation during the ACW an unnecessary manipulation needed to make other less important timings work.  I think yours or Mike Alexander's proposed generational map with no missing gens is the right way to attack this.   If all gens are present, the crisis has to take a different shape, but either an early start or late finish can be accommodated better than the missed gen.

Arguably this crisis took place too early. It could be argued that the crisis really started in 2001 from September 11th.

[David Horn]

(04-23-2019, 07:42 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(04-23-2019, 04:08 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(04-22-2019, 10:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Nothing was skipped in the 20th century. The hero generation that came of age during the civil war was skipped, according to S&H. The nomad Gilded generation was followed by the adaptive/artist Progressives.

Many of us find the missed generation during the ACW an unnecessary manipulation needed to make other less important timings work.  I think yours or Mike Alexander's proposed generational map with no missing gens is the right way to attack this.   If all gens are present, the crisis has to take a different shape, but either an early start or late finish can be accommodated better than the missed gen.

Arguably this crisis took place too early. It could be argued that the crisis really started in 2001 from September 11th.

Arguable?  Yes, but not a triggering event in the normal sense.  We weren't generationally aligned or emotionally ready for a trigger, so we simply didn't react in the normal 4T manner.  Instead, we went into a 4T anguish wrapped in a 3T cocoon: a lot of sound and fury, but nothing focused on solving anything.  It's equally arguable, that we're still there.  Perhaps the threat was and still is not great enough to force our hands, so we have factional obsessions with a long list of grievances, most of which are valid to some extent.  What's lacking is any plan to constructively address them or even the will to try.  It's easier to bitch about it.  


2020 may be more of the same, or a real attempt to fix things.  We'll see.  I'm less than sanguine.

[AspieMillennial]

(04-24-2019, 01:35 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(04-23-2019, 07:42 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(04-23-2019, 04:08 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(04-22-2019, 10:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Nothing was skipped in the 20th century. The hero generation that came of age during the civil war was skipped, according to S&H. The nomad Gilded generation was followed by the adaptive/artist Progressives.

Many of us find the missed generation during the ACW an unnecessary manipulation needed to make other less important timings work.  I think yours or Mike Alexander's proposed generational map with no missing gens is the right way to attack this.   If all gens are present, the crisis has to take a different shape, but either an early start or late finish can be accommodated better than the missed gen.

Arguably this crisis took place too early. It could be argued that the crisis really started in 2001 from September 11th.

Arguable?  Yes, but not a triggering event in the normal sense.  We weren't generationally aligned or emotionally ready for a trigger, so we simply didn't react in the normal 4T manner.  Instead, we went into a 4T anguish wrapped in a 3T cocoon: a lot of sound and fury, but nothing focused on solving anything.  It's equally arguable, that we're still there.  Perhaps the threat was and still is not great enough to force our hands, so we have factional obsessions with a long list of grievances, most of which are valid to some extent.  What's lacking is any plan to constructively address them or even the will to try.  It's easier to bitch about it.  


2020 may be more of the same, or a real attempt to fix things.  We'll see.  I'm less than sanguine.

People did try to solve it but in the wrong way. People were really big on this war on terror where we would change these countries and give them democracy by knocking down their governments and invading their countries creating a power vacuum for ISIS to appear. The action of the 00s was all focused on changing these countries and giving them democracy. People thought invading these countries would save them from terrorism worldwide. I would argue 9/11 was the beginning of the 4T in some ways.