Quote:In my own experience and recollection, most of the GI Generation members did not think like Beats or hippies or other non-conformists until the time of the Beats or later in the 2T. There were pioneers from older generations quietly doing work which would contribute to the Awakening later, such as Hoffman who invented LSD, and psychologists like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow and philosophers like Alan Watts. Many GIs, especially younger ones, experienced the Awakening when it came around 1966, just as younger folks did, and changed their lives because of it. Others hung on to the old ways and defended them against their Boomer children.

(10-14-2016, 03:33 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

Quote:In my own experience and recollection, most of the GI Generation members did not think like Beats or hippies or other non-conformists until the time of the Beats or later in the 2T. There were pioneers from older generations quietly doing work which would contribute to the Awakening later, such as Hoffman who invented LSD, and psychologists like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow and philosophers like Alan Watts. Many GIs, especially younger ones, experienced the Awakening when it came around 1966, just as younger folks did, and changed their lives because of it. Others hung on to the old ways and defended them against their Boomer children.

I know most didn't, but how did the ones who did cope during the era? As in people severely marginalized and on the sidelines because they didn't think like the majority or people who thought the society oppressed them. Did they drink a lot to cope or take lots of prescription drugs? I heard a lot of people like that had to constantly numb themselves during the era.

(10-14-2016, 03:30 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 08:34 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote: I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.

An example is someone upset that their solution to the 4T wasn't taken because things went a totally different way than what they think should have happened. It could be someone who was the loser in a war in some cases and now on the demonized side, other cases it could be someone who wanted a solution that the people rejected, even if they weren't at war with the other ideology at the time. Like a person who wanted the South to succeed from the union and was still angry at Abraham Lincoln. Or maybe even someone who was angry that communism wasn't used as the solution to the great depression and wished they had that type of a revolution in the US.

(10-14-2016, 04:47 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 03:33 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

Quote:In my own experience and recollection, most of the GI Generation members did not think like Beats or hippies or other non-conformists until the time of the Beats or later in the 2T. There were pioneers from older generations quietly doing work which would contribute to the Awakening later, such as Hoffman who invented LSD, and psychologists like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow and philosophers like Alan Watts. Many GIs, especially younger ones, experienced the Awakening when it came around 1966, just as younger folks did, and changed their lives because of it. Others hung on to the old ways and defended them against their Boomer children.

I know most didn't, but how did the ones who did cope during the era? As in people severely marginalized and on the sidelines because they didn't think like the majority or people who thought the society oppressed them. Did they drink a lot to cope or take lots of prescription drugs? I heard a lot of people like that had to constantly numb themselves during the era.

I would expect those who were ahead of the curve in the 1T were exceptional folks, who thought outside the box and were ready to question convention. I think they were usually healthy people who didn't have to depend on addictions at all. The era itself was numbing, but most people did not even know they were being numbed down, as it were. They just conformed.

But some of these folks, who were conforming, and not questioning or pioneering, were the ones who had problems. Death of a Salesman types, men in the gray flannel suits keeping up with the Joneses. Most of them repressed their anxieties and feelings of emptiness, as many of them still do. I don't know if alcoholism rates were higher than in other turnings; maybe not. The guys often killed themselves with smoking though. There were certainly repressed abuses within families. People who were different were repressed too. Most people didn't even have a concept of these differences, that are so openly discussed today in a "politically correct" way. The victims suffered, usually silently; sometimes just bullied and teased. They mostly stayed quiet and just repressed their feelings, and went along as best they could. To compensate for all this superficiality and repression, there was also more of a sense of belonging then; not in any intimate or fulfilling way, but joining a club or a church or being taken care of at work kept people from feeling too isolated or left out. Advancing materially substituted for deeper fulfillment, at least for those who were white guys. "Guys like us we had it made; those were the days!" Some good movies to go to as well, and some TV shows worth watching. And at the end of the 1T, an increasing sense of futurism and humanitarian concern was felt that people could identify with and even participate in. Those who had been bullied began to come out.

(10-14-2016, 10:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 03:30 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 08:34 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote: I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.

An example is someone upset that their solution to the 4T wasn't taken because things went a totally different way than what they think should have happened. It could be someone who was the loser in a war in some cases and now on the demonized side, other cases it could be someone who wanted a solution that the people rejected, even if they weren't at war with the other ideology at the time. Like a person who wanted the South to succeed from the union and was still angry at Abraham Lincoln. Or maybe even someone who was angry that communism wasn't used as the solution to the great depression and wished they had that type of a revolution in the US.

They end up on McCarthy's list or the equivalent.

(10-15-2016, 03:05 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 10:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 03:30 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 08:34 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote: I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.

An example is someone upset that their solution to the 4T wasn't taken because things went a totally different way than what they think should have happened. It could be someone who was the loser in a war in some cases and now on the demonized side, other cases it could be someone who wanted a solution that the people rejected, even if they weren't at war with the other ideology at the time. Like a person who wanted the South to succeed from the union and was still angry at Abraham Lincoln. Or maybe even someone who was angry that communism wasn't used as the solution to the great depression and wished they had that type of a revolution in the US.

They end up on McCarthy's list or the equivalent.

What happens if the wrong side wins? Like the Nazis win instead of America or if the South wins instead of the North?
What happens in the 1T?

(10-15-2016, 05:30 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 03:05 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 10:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 03:30 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 08:34 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.

An example is someone upset that their solution to the 4T wasn't taken because things went a totally different way than what they think should have happened. It could be someone who was the loser in a war in some cases and now on the demonized side, other cases it could be someone who wanted a solution that the people rejected, even if they weren't at war with the other ideology at the time. Like a person who wanted the South to succeed from the union and was still angry at Abraham Lincoln. Or maybe even someone who was angry that communism wasn't used as the solution to the great depression and wished they had that type of a revolution in the US.

They end up on McCarthy's list or the equivalent.

What happens if the wrong side wins? Like the Nazis win instead of America or if the South wins instead of the North?
What happens in the 1T?

By definition, the side that wins is the right side.

If it happens to be more authoritarian than the U.S. ended up being, well, the Soviet Union in the 1950s is probably a good model. The "wrong side" ended up in gulags or purged.

(10-15-2016, 06:02 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 05:30 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 03:05 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 10:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-14-2016, 03:30 PM)disasterzone Wrote: <post was here>

Eric Wrote:Dixie, the Nazis, the British, etc.; they were the wrong side. And everyone knew it; and increasingly so as we get closer to today. At least in The West. The Soviets could be seen at least as idealistic, compared to the Nazi invaders, although both were horrific. Now, the red states are the wrong side, and Islamic jihadists are the wrong side. They will be defeated too. 4Ts always take us forward; not backward as today's Republicans whether Trumpsters or Ryanists still want to do.

Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?


In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.

Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up.



At least until later in the 1T, when they start to peek through the cracks, and then the new non-conformists with some new and different ideals come out big-time in the 2T.

(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?

Quote:

Quote:In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.

Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up.

(10-15-2016, 08:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?

It's obvious red states are wrong. They are the reactionaries, clinging to the past of trickle-down, dog-whistle economics, racism, militarism, climate science denial, traditional cultures and prejudice. Not everyone in red states (of course) but the predominant political trends there.


Yeah pretty much.  But whadda bout blue states which are running fiscally in the deep red?

Who's gonna pony up for this pension plan?

Quote:

Quote:In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.

Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up.

No, in the 1T, the millies may tell their new prophet children to shut up. But the 1T trend is for relaxing parentage by the civics.

Lot's of ppl will be telling old Boomers to shut up.

The Boom may be too old; most of them will voluntarily shut up. Maybe some won't.

Y'all haven't closed the pieholes yet.


But X may tell Millies and new artists to shut up.

Only special snowflake Milles have to shut up.

Quote:It's mostly not generational, except that Xers are the dominant elders in a 1T and tell everyone else to shut up and get off my lawn. Mostly though, everyone is telling the non-conformists and radicals to shut up. I don't see too much basis for saying which generation is telling which to shut up, except maybe that predominantly the Nomads are telling that to everyone else because as elders they want relief, peace and quiet, and those who speak up the loudest (prophets) are mostly in the cribs or the old folks homes and are thus "absent." So goes the theory. If you're right, Rags, it's because the Boom will have stayed as young as they wished to.

The path has been lit.  

(10-15-2016, 08:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?

It's obvious red states are wrong. They are the reactionaries, clinging to the past of trickle-down, dog-whistle economics, racism, militarism, climate science denial, traditional cultures and prejudice. Not everyone in red states (of course) but the predominant political trends there.

Quote:

Quote:In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.

Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up.

No, in the 1T, the millies may tell their new prophet children to shut up. But the 1T trend is for relaxing parentage by the civics.

The Boom may be too old; most of them will voluntarily shut up. Maybe some won't. But X may tell Millies and new artists to shut up.

It's mostly not generational, except that Xers are the dominant elders in a 1T and tell everyone else to shut up and get off my lawn. Mostly though, everyone is telling the non-conformists and radicals to shut up. I don't see too much basis for saying which generation is telling which to shut up, except maybe that predominantly the Nomads are telling that to everyone else because as elders they want relief, peace and quiet, and those who speak up the loudest (prophets) are mostly in the cribs or the old folks homes and are thus "absent." So goes the theory. If you're right, Rags, it's because the Boom will have stayed as young as they wished to.

(10-15-2016, 10:41 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 08:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?

It's obvious red states are wrong. They are the reactionaries, clinging to the past of trickle-down, dog-whistle economics, racism, militarism, climate science denial, traditional cultures and prejudice. Not everyone in red states (of course) but the predominant political trends there.

Quote:

Quote:In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.

Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up.

No, in the 1T, the millies may tell their new prophet children to shut up. But the 1T trend is for relaxing parentage by the civics.

The Boom may be too old; most of them will voluntarily shut up. Maybe some won't. But X may tell Millies and new artists to shut up.

It's mostly not generational, except that Xers are the dominant elders in a 1T and tell everyone else to shut up and get off my lawn. Mostly though, everyone is telling the non-conformists and radicals to shut up. I don't see too much basis for saying which generation is telling which to shut up, except maybe that predominantly the Nomads are telling that to everyone else because as elders they want relief, peace and quiet, and those who speak up the loudest (prophets) are mostly in the cribs or the old folks homes and are thus "absent." So goes the theory. If you're right, Rags, it's because the Boom will have stayed as young as they wished to.

What would happen to a Civic who felt the times bullied them so they fought back even harder? As in reacted like their children's generation to their generation, reacted to things as they happened instead of afterwards?

(10-15-2016, 11:11 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 10:41 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 08:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?

It's obvious red states are wrong. They are the reactionaries, clinging to the past of trickle-down, dog-whistle economics, racism, militarism, climate science denial, traditional cultures and prejudice. Not everyone in red states (of course) but the predominant political trends there.

Quote:

Quote:In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.

Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up.

No, in the 1T, the millies may tell their new prophet children to shut up. But the 1T trend is for relaxing parentage by the civics.

The Boom may be too old; most of them will voluntarily shut up. Maybe some won't. But X may tell Millies and new artists to shut up.

It's mostly not generational, except that Xers are the dominant elders in a 1T and tell everyone else to shut up and get off my lawn. Mostly though, everyone is telling the non-conformists and radicals to shut up. I don't see too much basis for saying which generation is telling which to shut up, except maybe that predominantly the Nomads are telling that to everyone else because as elders they want relief, peace and quiet, and those who speak up the loudest (prophets) are mostly in the cribs or the old folks homes and are thus "absent." So goes the theory. If you're right, Rags, it's because the Boom will have stayed as young as they wished to.

What would happen to a Civic who felt the times bullied them so they fought back even harder? As in reacted like their children's generation to their generation, reacted to things as they happened instead of afterwards?

Millies will get their way as the 4T proceeds. Then they will be middle aged and will be the builders, mostly content to ride the new consensus. There's always individual exceptions to the trends. Civic non-conformists will have the same fate as new artist or older Xer non-conformists in the 1T.

(10-15-2016, 11:50 PM)disasterzone Wrote: What is the fate of the new artist and the nomad non-conformists in the 1T?

Also, isn't it also possible that there isn't any one new consensus but maybe two of them? It could be if the US keeps polarizing like this. The consensus might be way different in one state than another.

(10-15-2016, 11:50 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 11:11 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 10:41 PM)disasterzone Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 08:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?

It's obvious red states are wrong. They are the reactionaries, clinging to the past of trickle-down, dog-whistle economics, racism, militarism, climate science denial, traditional cultures and prejudice. Not everyone in red states (of course) but the predominant political trends there.

Quote:Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up.

No, in the 1T, the millies may tell their new prophet children to shut up. But the 1T trend is for relaxing parentage by the civics.

The Boom may be too old; most of them will voluntarily shut up. Maybe some won't. But X may tell Millies and new artists to shut up.

It's mostly not generational, except that Xers are the dominant elders in a 1T and tell everyone else to shut up and get off my lawn. Mostly though, everyone is telling the non-conformists and radicals to shut up. I don't see too much basis for saying which generation is telling which to shut up, except maybe that predominantly the Nomads are telling that to everyone else because as elders they want relief, peace and quiet, and those who speak up the loudest (prophets) are mostly in the cribs or the old folks homes and are thus "absent." So goes the theory. If you're right, Rags, it's because the Boom will have stayed as young as they wished to.

What would happen to a Civic who felt the times bullied them so they fought back even harder? As in reacted like their children's generation to their generation, reacted to things as they happened instead of afterwards?

Millies will get their way as the 4T proceeds. Then they will be middle aged and will be the builders, mostly content to ride the new consensus. There's always individual exceptions to the trends. Civic non-conformists will have the same fate as new artist or older Xer non-conformists in the 1T.

What is the fate of the new artist and the nomad non-conformists in the 1T?

Also, isn't it also possible that there isn't any one new consensus but maybe two of them? It could be if the US keeps polarizing like this. The consensus might be way different in one state than another.

Quote: pid='10482' dateline='1476457316']
Indeed, the 4T typically ends because further humiliation and subjection of the defeated becomes unwise. Although the Allies saw fit to execute Holocaust perpetrators, Axis war criminals, and wartime traitors to Allied countries, they did not see fit to punish the low-ranking soldier who did not choose what army or navy he was to join.

(10-23-2016, 02:12 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [quote=

Quote: pid='10482' dateline='1476457316']
Indeed, the 4T typically ends because further humiliation and subjection of the defeated becomes unwise. Although the Allies saw fit to execute Holocaust perpetrators, Axis war criminals, and wartime traitors to Allied countries, they did not see fit to punish the low-ranking soldier who did not choose what army or navy he was to join.

-- & a few of them made out very well in the 1st T. Werner von Braun, for example, got to run NASA

Quote:http://www.space.com/20122-wernher-von-braun.html
… "In 1960, von Braun and his team left the employ of the Army to join the newly formed National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Serving as director of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama, von Braun oversaw the development of the Saturn I, IB, and V. The Saturn V rocket lifted all of the Apollo lunar missions into space.”…

(10-24-2016, 10:03 AM)radind Wrote:

(10-23-2016, 02:12 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [quote=

Quote: pid='10482' dateline='1476457316']
Indeed, the 4T typically ends because further humiliation and subjection of the defeated becomes unwise. Although the Allies saw fit to execute Holocaust perpetrators, Axis war criminals, and wartime traitors to Allied countries, they did not see fit to punish the low-ranking soldier who did not choose what army or navy he was to join.

-- & a few of them made out very well in the 1st T. Werner von Braun, for example, got to run NASA

A small clarification: Although von Braun was the driving force for the NASA program, he was actually  the director of the Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville AL.

Quote:http://www.space.com/20122-wernher-von-braun.html
… "In 1960, von Braun and his team left the employ of the Army to join the newly formed National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Serving as director of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Alabama, von Braun oversaw the development of the Saturn I, IB, and V. The Saturn V rocket lifted all of the Apollo lunar missions into space.”…

(10-27-2016, 12:31 PM)FLBones Wrote: Well, it's like it says in the 4T book, those outside of the mainstream culture feel stifled by the conformity. They may also be prone to prosecution as was the case with McCartyhism. During the last 1T, the red scare set about a socially conservative climate which the 50s are known for. The 1920s however was a decade where the social climate became more and more liberal.