There Will Not Be A Triumphant End To This Turning

[galaxy]

revolution: country united against external enemy
depression/wwii: country united against internal enemy who is not a person or group of people/country united against external enemy

civil war: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common
2008-202?: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common

Again and again, race proves to be this nation's Achilles heel. Add a racial dimension to the crisis (such as...a black president and a resulting huge increase in political polarization in 2010, for example) and it's all over.

This Cold Civil War will end with resignation, not glory. We should all pray that 1/6/21 was the climax.

[pbrower2a]

(06-07-2021, 07:20 PM)galaxy Wrote: revolution: country united against external enemy
depression/wwii: country united against internal enemy who is not a person or group of people/country united against external enemy

civil war: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common
2008-202?: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common

Again and again, race proves to be this nation's Achilles heel. Add a racial dimension to the crisis (such as...a black president and a resulting huge increase in political polarization in 2010, for example) and it's all over.

This Cold Civil War will end with resignation, not glory. We should all pray that 1/6/21 was the climax.

If this Crisis ends with COVID-19, then it ends with a whimper. Which side in the cultural Cold War prevails will depend upon who is in charge at the end. One side will be far more successful in economics, especially in meeting basic human needs that go beyond an animal level of survival. 

The "Cultural Marxists" as the Right calls them, are far more effective in offerings of convincing entertainment. Their opposite number, who offers traditions of economic hierarchy, white male domination, and right-wing religion, offers something so stale that one can accept it only if it precludes all else. 

If I am a politician and I have the choice between winning over equal numbers of ignoramuses or sophisticated, educated people, then with whom do I go if I have no ethical commitment? The latter. They are less likely to be convinced by a specious argument. Some people ask what such a slogan as "Make America Great Again" means. One frequent poster in recent weeks put the emphasis on what constitutes "America", and that seemed to mean people who act much like and believe much like he. To be sure all persons have some room for improvement in character and behavior, but that does not mean that people with a different heritage from mine need conform to mine if they are to be good 'Americans'. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments establish that some people who look very different from their recent masters are no less American than their former masters. 

I have a confessions to make. First, my musical tastes better suggest the old Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Holy Roman Empire, or Wilhelmine Germany than they do "America". Need I become a country music fan to be truly American?  

There is no single "American" tradition.  

We are going to find what works and what doesn't. Pragmatic assessment of results will decide what succeeds and what fails. Maybe the valid hierarchy will be more intellectual than ethnic. J S Bach isn't for everyone.   

"Race" will be confusing. Interracial marriage and adoption may be less commonplace than it seems because it is often so striking where it is, but the children of 'mixed' families will have to define themselves. The one-drop rule that once defined privilege and subjection in law is becoming less workable even with respect ot whites and blacks. Example:



This well-known singer, Carly Simon, would qualify as "black" under the one-drop rule. Two of her grandparents were Ashkenazi Jews, one was a German gentile, and a fourth was a half-Spanish, half-black Cuban. Go figure -- or do you need to?

Some parts of America deal far better with ambiguity than do others.

[galaxy]

(06-08-2021, 10:15 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-07-2021, 07:20 PM)galaxy Wrote: revolution: country united against external enemy
depression/wwii: country united against internal enemy who is not a person or group of people/country united against external enemy

civil war: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common
2008-202?: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common

Again and again, race proves to be this nation's Achilles heel. Add a racial dimension to the crisis (such as...a black president and a resulting huge increase in political polarization in 2010, for example) and it's all over.

This Cold Civil War will end with resignation, not glory. We should all pray that 1/6/21 was the climax.

If this Crisis ends with COVID-19, then it ends with a whimper. Which side in the cultural Cold War prevails will depend upon who is in charge at the end. One side will be far more successful in economics, especially in meeting basic human needs that go beyond an animal level of survival.

My own political views (ideologically centrist but voting strongly Democratic, because I view the Republicans as rapidly becoming terrifyingly authoritarian) are probably biasing me here, but I have begun to wonder if Donald Trump's death (likely during the next decade because of the state of his health) might mark the end of the 4T. It's clear that the end of the pandemic won't do it - that would be a 12-year turning, which is far too short - and it looks like the Republican Party is trapped in some kind of Trumpist holding pattern until he dies. Surely even his supporters here recognize how unusual this is. Usually when a party loses an election, it changes. After losing 2008, the Republicans couldn't get away from Bush fast enough, and after losing 2016, Democrats started trying to be simultaneously populist and technocratic to appeal to their rapidly shifting coalition.
But the Republicans after losing 2020? They're doubling down on what they were doing before, desperate for the critical Trump endorsement in the primaries, and there's no sign that this will stop anytime soon. Perhaps when he's gone we can finally get some depolarization going, which might be the end of the crisis, but if it is, the nation will feel relief, not victory. It will be a Crisis that was survived, not defeated.

[Eric the Green]

(06-07-2021, 07:20 PM)galaxy Wrote: revolution: country united against external enemy
depression/wwii: country united against internal enemy who is not a person or group of people/country united against external enemy

civil war: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common
2008-202?: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common

Again and again, race proves to be this nation's Achilles heel. Add a racial dimension to the crisis (such as...a black president and a resulting huge increase in political polarization in 2010, for example) and it's all over.

This Cold Civil War will end with resignation, not glory. We should all pray that 1/6/21 was the climax.

Jan 6, 2021 will not be the climax. It is more likely equivalent to April 12-13, 1861.

We are a country divided against itself, and the blue side must win, thus making a triumphant end to the 4T, or we lose our country. That has always been the choice. Every 4T. A battle that will determine if a nation conceived in liberty can long endure. The climax will be circa 2025, according to the cosmic cycles and the normal saeculum length. The end will come in 2028 or 2029 when we enter the 1T, however it will be a less peaceful and consensual 1T than the 1950s; more like the 1870s.

[Eric the Green]

(06-08-2021, 01:18 PM)galaxy Wrote:

(06-08-2021, 10:15 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-07-2021, 07:20 PM)galaxy Wrote: revolution: country united against external enemy
depression/wwii: country united against internal enemy who is not a person or group of people/country united against external enemy

civil war: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common
2008-202?: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common

Again and again, race proves to be this nation's Achilles heel. Add a racial dimension to the crisis (such as...a black president and a resulting huge increase in political polarization in 2010, for example) and it's all over.

This Cold Civil War will end with resignation, not glory. We should all pray that 1/6/21 was the climax.

If this Crisis ends with COVID-19, then it ends with a whimper. Which side in the cultural Cold War prevails will depend upon who is in charge at the end. One side will be far more successful in economics, especially in meeting basic human needs that go beyond an animal level of survival.

My own political views (ideologically centrist but voting strongly Democratic, because I view the Republicans as rapidly becoming terrifyingly authoritarian) are probably biasing me here, but I have begun to wonder if Donald Trump's death (likely during the next decade because of the state of his health) might mark the end of the 4T. It's clear that the end of the pandemic won't do it - that would be a 12-year turning, which is far too short - and it looks like the Republican Party is trapped in some kind of Trumpist holding pattern until he dies. Surely even his supporters here recognize how unusual this is. Usually when a party loses an election, it changes. After losing 2008, the Republicans couldn't get away from Bush fast enough, and after losing 2016, Democrats started trying to be simultaneously populist and technocratic to appeal to their rapidly shifting coalition.
But the Republicans after losing 2020? They're doubling down on what they were doing before, desperate for the critical Trump endorsement in the primaries, and there's no sign that this will stop anytime soon. Perhaps when he's gone we can finally get some depolarization going, which might be the end of the crisis, but if it is, the nation will feel relief, not victory. It will be a Crisis that was survived, not defeated.

Thanks for your input. You could be right. I think a relief may be enough, but more than how we feel about it, what steps were taken to meet actual challenges that we face will determine if there was "victory" or even "relief" or not. Have we turned the corner on replacing fossil fuels? Have we learned not to pollute and encroach so much on Nature, thus causing so many pandemics and disasters? Have racism, inequality/poverty and neo-liberal ideology been sent on a decline? Are we ready to relinquish our go-it-alone imperialism? Are we ready to finally do something about our gun obsession and the resulting numbing beat of ongoing massacres? Have we rescued democracy from the many old and new threats to it? Have we been able to somehow help any of the peoples now rising up for democracy around the world? Have we learned to distinguish between truth and lies again as the age of Trump, QAnon, 9-11 "truth", Agenda 21, anti-vaxxers and chemtrails recedes, and have we mastered social media and cyber warfare? Has the Republican Party, and not just Trump, been put into a tailspin of defeat so it can no longer block all action? How well we meet these concerns will tell us if we achieved a victory, or we just go on like we are now. If we do that, then no matter how we might feel about Trump being here or not, we will have lost, and lost badly. And the USA as we know it will not long survive. Nor will world civilization as we know it. We can't solve all these problems in the next 10 years, but we must reverse the current trends and return to progress. 4Ts are times to choose. Go into Drive, or into Reverse. Blue or red. The choice is on the ballot, and depends further on full participation by our new civic generation, and all of us. And on the defeat of any armed resistance by the right-wing.

[Eric the Green]

I think a very decisive moment will be Nov.2022. We must discuss this often and meet it head on. Right now, the lie is being spread that the Democrats have the House, the Senate and the presidency and thus we should be able to solve our problems. That is a lie. People need to begin to understand civics and be informed. The filibuster still exists. The majorities in congress are razor thin. Action is still being blocked by McConnell and Manchin (the phony Democrat who represents a cherry-red state). If people do what they did in 1994 and 2010, and blame Democrats for not getting things done, then progress will stall again. That is just what the Republicans want. Stall everything, and fool the voters into thinking it's the Democrats who stalled.

The voters, especially millennials, must not be fooled again. They must come out and vote Democratic. They must stand with Biden and not turn and run away, like was done to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. They must know where to put the blame. Not on the Democrats who were blocked, but the Republicans for blocking it. The cosmic indicators say it is time to end this stalemate; this polarization and these pendulum swings, and restart progress. The 40-plus year regression of Reaganomics and trickle-down neo-liberalism must end. Democrats must gain, not lose seats in 2022; enough so the filibuster can be defeated or reformed, DC and PR be given representation, the Supreme Court packed or reformed, HR1/For the People Act passed, etc.

[pbrower2a]

(06-08-2021, 01:18 PM)galaxy Wrote:

(06-08-2021, 10:15 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(06-07-2021, 07:20 PM)galaxy Wrote: revolution: country united against external enemy
depression/wwii: country united against internal enemy who is not a person or group of people/country united against external enemy

civil war: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common
2008-202?: country divided against itself, intense identity politics/"culture war," people from the two sides feel like they no longer have anything in common

Again and again, race proves to be this nation's Achilles heel. Add a racial dimension to the crisis (such as...a black president and a resulting huge increase in political polarization in 2010, for example) and it's all over.

This Cold Civil War will end with resignation, not glory. We should all pray that 1/6/21 was the climax.

If this Crisis ends with COVID-19, then it ends with a whimper. Which side in the cultural Cold War prevails will depend upon who is in charge at the end. One side will be far more successful in economics, especially in meeting basic human needs that go beyond an animal level of survival.

My own political views (ideologically centrist but voting strongly Democratic, because I view the Republicans as rapidly becoming terrifyingly authoritarian) are probably biasing me here, but I have begun to wonder if Donald Trump's death (likely during the next decade because of the state of his health) might mark the end of the 4T. It's clear that the end of the pandemic won't do it - that would be a 12-year turning, which is far too short - and it looks like the Republican Party is trapped in some kind of Trumpist holding pattern until he dies. Surely even his supporters here recognize how unusual this is. Usually when a party loses an election, it changes. After losing 2008, the Republicans couldn't get away from Bush fast enough, and after losing 2016, Democrats started trying to be simultaneously populist and technocratic to appeal to their rapidly shifting coalition.

The weakening, if not the complete fade-out, of the Republican Party would decide much for a very long time.  Donald Trump is of course an ethical calamity with a huge following. I see him having been one of the least effective Presidents except for 'coloring' a time with his extreme ideology. Foreign policy? The rest of the world largely chose the safer course of waiting him out rather than confronting him. Major legislation? He may have had an agenda that would have had to wait until the second term until perfect circumstances of big R majorities in both Houses of Congress would have the ability to steamroller everything, including perhaps some Constitutional Amendments. 

In 2008 Dubya took a complete exit from political influence. Donald Trump has done nothing of the sort. He has sought to commit America to his contention that he was cheated of a 'rightful'  victory in 2020. He still has his fanatical loyalists in power in the GOP hierarchy and many of the political figures personally loyal to him. This is a high-stakes gamble, one with huge potential of rewards and with the possibility for ruin for which others will pay. That sort of gamble can be supremely lucrative, but it is horrible business. Whether one admires the banking and insurance industries or loathes them, one must recognize their essential purpose of ensuring that those who make the bets put as much of their wealth at risk as is possible. Basically -- show the collateral and protect those who stand to lose. 

Ignoring the "vigorish", someone can in theory put $200 on a 200-1 horse race and end up with $40,000. For many people, 40 grand can solve lots of problems. At the least the bettor risks only his own money. Donald Trump has been more a gambler than an investor, and he has ordinarily had others assuming much of the risk on his behalf.   

But -- someone like Trump goes into politics only with the intention of paying off others with some economic agenda that burns others not in a position in which to make gains. That is one-sided politics that offers hardships to everyone not an Insider while offering huge rewards for Insiders.        

Quote:But the Republicans after losing 2020? They're doubling down on what they were doing before, desperate for the critical Trump endorsement in the primaries, and there's no sign that this will stop anytime soon. Perhaps when he's gone we can finally get some depolarization going, which might be the end of the crisis, but if it is, the nation will feel relief, not victory. It will be a Crisis that was survived, not defeated.

They are doubling down, enhancing the rewards but ensuring that the people who pay in the event of a failure are not stakeholders in a victory. This will fail badly to get the desired ends for the Insiders. Perhaps in the forthcoming 1T people will follow what I consider the basic rule of a sound capitalist order: in a well-working capitalist system, only capitalists as investors can get rich. The second is that only the capitalists take risks, and then with their own assets with borrowings to get them over the top. Good capitalism isn't gambling or corrupt dealings. 

Maybe there will be more capitalists. A strong economy characteristic of a 1T will create openings for small-scale investors whose rewards are modest. That's how small business has made America great (note well: Trump's idea of how to Make America Great Again has himself as the focus). I look at the failures in retailing and I see potential openings for small-scale retailers and restaurateurs who see the interstices that bureaucratic behemoths left behind to fill the gaps. Remember well that bureaucratic bloat typically arrives toward the end of the lifecycle of a corporation. (I have a thread on the cycle of birth to death, and the venerable Sears represents what corporate death looks like. Bureaucracy is cost without gains of profit. This follows the tendency for top management of an organization to believe that it can grow its way out of a problem (well, the problems grow faster, and the potential gain from consolidating a market is far slighter than it looks), then establishing controls to keep things from falling apart. 

Toward the end of the run, even marketing and engineering become bureaucratic; those activities are ill-suited to bureaucracy.

[Captain Genet]

I agree that deaths of polarizing boomer politicians, like Trump, Putin, Netanyahu or Poland's Kaczynski, will mark the definite end of millennial saeculum.

[Eric the Green]

(06-08-2021, 05:13 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I think a very decisive moment will be Nov.2022. We must discuss this often and meet it head on. Right now, the lie is being spread that the Democrats have the House, the Senate and the presidency and thus we should be able to solve our problems. That is a lie. People need to begin to understand civics and be informed. The filibuster still exists. Republicans control the majority of state legislatures, and they use them to pass restrictive voting laws. The majorities in congress are razor thin. Action is still being blocked by McConnell and Manchin (the phony Democrat who represents a cherry-red state). If people do what they did in 1994 and 2010, and blame Democrats for not getting things done, then progress will stall again. That is just what the Republicans want. Stall everything, and fool the voters into thinking it's the Democrats who stalled.

The voters, especially millennials, must not be fooled again. They must come out and vote Democratic. They must stand with Biden and not turn and run away, like was done to Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. They must know where to put the blame. Not on the Democrats who were blocked, but the Republicans for blocking it. The cosmic indicators say it is time to end this stalemate; this polarization and these pendulum swings, and restart progress. The 40-plus year regression of Reaganomics and trickle-down neo-liberalism must end. Democrats must gain, not lose seats in 2022; enough so the filibuster can be defeated or reformed, DC and PR be given representation, the Supreme Court packed or reformed, HR1/For the People Act passed, etc.

[Eric the Green]

(06-09-2021, 04:15 AM)Captain Genet Wrote: I agree that deaths of polarizing boomer politicians, like Trump, Putin, Netanyahu or Poland's Kaczynski, will mark the definite end of millennial saeculum.

No, it won't. The radical right wing has controlled the Republican Party for 40 years. The defeat of neo-liberal ideology, as well as Trump nationalism and racism, will mark the definite end of millennial saeculum. Silents and Gen Xers have supported these ideologies as much as, or more than, Boomers have.

The tyrannical leader of Poland today is named Duda. He is an Xer, not a Boomer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrzej_Duda

The Republicans are tied to Trump today. He has a huge base in the Party as its charismatic leader. But he is also their greatest problem, because he is so personally-defective. He can threaten those who criticize him with primary defeat at the hands of his base, so Republican politicians cave in. But many more independent-minded people see how horrible his policies and behavior are, and understand that he threatens democracy and foments ethnic strife. So, should I as an opponent of Trump root for him to fade away and lose his leadership of the Party? Or should I hope it continues since he turns so many people off?

I don't know. If Trump loses his leadership of the Party, then if the Republican Party regains some of the never-trumpers and those Trump has turned off, then the neo-liberal philosophy will remain untouched and reborn and will just keep the country shackled. Many politicians who have deserted Trump, still embrace neo-liberal ideology. Ah, there's the rub!

Neo-liberalism defined here: https://youtu.be/jOuzABjrAo4

[pbrower2a]

Should this Crisis Era result in electoral changes that disenfranchise people on such questionable principles as property ownership or income or voting become distorted into some extreme mockery of democracy (let us say, employers vote on a worker's behalf, then the result will be anything but triumphant. Major changes in the way people do things -- from politics to labor-management relations to inter-ethnic interactions.

I can imagine the Trump Court messing things up badly, as by allowing State legislatures to decide a state's vote if it dislikes the popular result.

A society that freezes malign reforms at the end of a Crisis Era sets itself up for the perversity blowing up in the faces of the Leadership the next time. Obviously I hope for the best so that we can avoid the worst

[David Horn]

(06-10-2021, 03:10 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(06-09-2021, 04:15 AM)Captain Genet Wrote: I agree that deaths of polarizing boomer politicians, like Trump, Putin, Netanyahu or Poland's Kaczynski, will mark the definite end of millennial saeculum.

No, it won't. The radical right wing has controlled the Republican Party for 40 years. The defeat of neo-liberal ideology, as well as Trump nationalism and racism, will mark the definite end of millennial saeculum. Silents and Gen Xers have supported these ideologies as much as, or more than, Boomers have.

The tyrannical leader of Poland today is named Duda. He is an Xer, not a Boomer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrzej_Duda

The Republicans are tied to Trump today. He has a huge base in the Party as its charismatic leader. But he is also their greatest problem, because  he is so personally-defective. He can threaten those who criticize him with primary defeat at the hands of his base, so Republican politicians cave in. But many more independent-minded people see how horrible his policies and behavior are, and understand that he threatens democracy and foments ethnic strife. So, should I as an opponent of Trump root for him to fade away and lose his leadership of the Party? Or should I hope it continues since he turns so many people off?

I don't know. If Trump loses his leadership of the Party, then if the Republican Party regains some of the never-trumpers and those Trump has turned off, then the neo-liberal philosophy will remain untouched and reborn and will just keep the country shackled. Many politicians who have deserted Trump, still embrace neo-liberal ideology. Ah, there's the rub!

Neo-liberalism defined here: https://youtu.be/jOuzABjrAo4

I agree up to a pint, but let's be honest.  The GOP was the business party from the very start, and was, at that time, considered the liberal party. We may be a full saeculum away from ending that link, because it's both self funded and powerful. Just look at the outrage from the Republicans over the leak of Billionaire tax return data.  It easy to see where loyalty lies when politicians take a firm stand, and protecting the interest of the rich and powerful is a core tenet of the GOP. Trump and his minions just brought that to the surface for all to see -- and, heaven help us, it's popular!

[Tim Randal Walker]

The electoral system(s) in the USA have certain implications.

There tend to be a pair of large, diverse "big tent" parties, plus a sizable number of swing voters. By broadening its appeal to some of the swing voters, a party may be able to eke out an electoral victory. I think swing voters are over looked by those who think Trump was cheated out of a second term.

[Eric the Green]

(06-12-2021, 11:13 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-10-2021, 03:10 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(06-09-2021, 04:15 AM)Captain Genet Wrote: I agree that deaths of polarizing boomer politicians, like Trump, Putin, Netanyahu or Poland's Kaczynski, will mark the definite end of millennial saeculum.

No, it won't. The radical right wing has controlled the Republican Party for 40 years. The defeat of neo-liberal ideology, as well as Trump nationalism and racism, will mark the definite end of millennial saeculum. Silents and Gen Xers have supported these ideologies as much as, or more than, Boomers have.

The tyrannical leader of Poland today is named Duda. He is an Xer, not a Boomer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrzej_Duda

The Republicans are tied to Trump today. He has a huge base in the Party as its charismatic leader. But he is also their greatest problem, because  he is so personally-defective. He can threaten those who criticize him with primary defeat at the hands of his base, so Republican politicians cave in. But many more independent-minded people see how horrible his policies and behavior are, and understand that he threatens democracy and foments ethnic strife. So, should I as an opponent of Trump root for him to fade away and lose his leadership of the Party? Or should I hope it continues since he turns so many people off?

I don't know. If Trump loses his leadership of the Party, then if the Republican Party regains some of the never-trumpers and those Trump has turned off, then the neo-liberal philosophy will remain untouched and reborn and will just keep the country shackled. Many politicians who have deserted Trump, still embrace neo-liberal ideology. Ah, there's the rub!

Neo-liberalism defined here: https://youtu.be/jOuzABjrAo4

I agree up to a pint, but let's be honest.  The GOP was the business party from the very start, and was, at that time, considered the liberal party. We may be a full saeculum away from ending that link, because it's both self funded and powerful. Just look at the outrage from the Republicans over the leak of Billionaire tax return data.  It easy to see where loyalty lies when politicians take a firm stand, and protecting the interest of the rich and powerful is a core tenet of the GOP. Trump and his minions just brought that to the surface for all to see -- and, heaven help us, it's popular!

I have never quite understood how the rich class's theory could so dominate the people and the politicians for over 40 years and counting, so that no progress is possible in all that time. Surely a 4T is the time for such spells to stop. Our cold civil war pits those who support it against those who are against it. It is time to fight and win the battle. I admit, I don't know if our side is up to it. Many reasonable people think that the red vs. blue battle is just a partisan division and doesn't mean anything. If too many people sit on the sidelines and don't even vote in Nov.2022, the battle could be lost.

I know that the power of Trump cannot be underestimated. He only really lost the presidency in 2020 by about 43,000 votes, thanks to our system. So, whether it would be better for us if he went away, or kept control of his Party, is an unanswered question for me.

[Eric the Green]

(06-10-2021, 10:32 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Should this Crisis Era result in electoral changes that disenfranchise people on such questionable principles as property ownership or income or voting become distorted into some extreme mockery of democracy (let us say, employers vote on a worker's behalf, then the result will be anything but triumphant. Major changes in the way people do things -- from politics to labor-management relations to inter-ethnic interactions.

I can imagine the Trump Court messing things up badly, as by allowing State legislatures to decide a state's vote if it dislikes the popular result.

A society that freezes malign reforms at the end of a Crisis Era sets itself up for the perversity blowing up in the faces of the Leadership the next time. Obviously I hope for the best so that we can avoid the worst

The anglo-american saeculum and 4T has never resulted in malign reforms, except perhaps later in the 1T as after the civil war when many of the reforms were retracted. I suspect we cannot afford to lose and settle for malign reforms in this 4T. We are going to either face up to the fight, or lose our country and probably civilization itself. There can be no "next time" and no salvation from a failed fourth turning, unless a benign foreign power (like the USA itself was after WWII) conquers the USA and makes the needed reforms for us. Seems an unlikely prospect.

All of us who are concerned will need to be active in getting the millennials out to vote in Nov.2022.

[Tim Randal Walker]

"...a Crisis that was survived..." leading to a weak 1T?

[Eric the Green]

(06-12-2021, 12:28 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: "...a  Crisis that was survived..."   leading to a weak 1T?

A Crisis that was merely survived may not even have a 1T. The Crisis will just continue as the nation falls apart and dies.

[galaxy]

(06-12-2021, 12:28 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: "...a  Crisis that was survived..."   leading to a weak 1T?

Possibly. We could be headed toward more of a "reconstructing" 1T rather than a "reconstructed" 1T.

Another thing to note is that it may be that the past 1T was the anomaly. I have to think it must be pretty unusual for a Crisis to end with such a total victory as the Depression/WWII one did. S&H made some note of this in Generations, mentioning how the Missionary Generation stayed in power a long time, well into the Crisis. We may very well still be living through the aftereffects of the Civil War Anomaly (or about to exit those aftereffects).

[Tim Randal Walker]

Tthe USA seems at present to be in one of the milder 4Ts. Could such have a relatively quiet resolution; that is, ending with some reforms comparable to those in a 2T?

[pbrower2a]

(06-12-2021, 12:26 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(06-10-2021, 10:32 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Should this Crisis Era result in electoral changes that disenfranchise people on such questionable principles as property ownership or income or voting become distorted into some extreme mockery of democracy (let us say, employers vote on a worker's behalf, then the result will be anything but triumphant. Major changes in the way people do things -- from politics to labor-management relations to inter-ethnic interactions.

I can imagine the Trump Court messing things up badly, as by allowing State legislatures to decide a state's vote if it dislikes the popular result.

A society that freezes malign reforms at the end of a Crisis Era sets itself up for the perversity blowing up in the faces of the Leadership the next time. Obviously I hope for the best so that we can avoid the worst

The Anglo-American saeculum and 4T has never resulted in malign reforms, except perhaps later in the 1T as after the civil war when many of the reforms were retracted. I suspect we cannot afford to lose and settle for malign reforms in this 4T. We are going to either face up to the fight, or lose our country and probably civilization itself. There can be no "next time" and no salvation from a failed fourth turning, unless a benign foreign power (like the USA itself was after WWII) conquers the USA and makes the needed reforms for us. Seems an unlikely prospect.

All of us who are concerned will need to be active in getting the millennials out to vote in Nov.2022.

I can already predict the cause of the next Crisis, the ecological catastrophe that fully manifests itself when AGW has its worst consequences of inundating huge swaths of prime cropland in the rich alluvial plains of much of the world. Agriculture is the backbone of practically all economies, and the poorer the country, the more such is so. No technological fix can allay hunger and starvation; mass hunger topples governments of all kinds in revolution. It is best that the world do everything to forestall and mitigate the effects. Maybe there will be some sea-level rise, but if AGW happens slowly enough, then deposition of eroded soil from mountains will keep pace with rising sea levels. 

AGW will create a refugee crisis on a scale that no war or persecution has ever caused. Figure that the rich countries that might have the means for resettling people in their countries will themselves have the sort of economic distress that fosters right-wing populism. Donald Trump is a portent. If the advanced industrial world could not open their countries to Jews fleeing Nazi Germany, then just think of how tight the borders might close upon refugees from inundation and desertification!

Yes, deaths resulting from desertification and inundation as consequences of AGW will be genocide.

The more problems that a society solves before the 4T, the better goes the 4T. Trump-like pols (and Donald Trump will not be the last of his kind in America; the next one may be swifter and more resolute in the gutting of human rights in America).   I spoke of th e Trump majority on the Supreme Court. I can imagine such a court deciding that those who own the wealth have the rights and that workers do not. Such reflects Donald Trump himself, who believes that the Common Man must be responsible those who have the wealth and bureaucratic power of wealthy corporations and that those who wield the wealth and bureaucratic power owe the rest of Humanity nothing. How long will reactionary majority on the Trump-era Supreme Court last? Perhaps long enough to establish some Christian and Corporate (which is one way of saying "fascist") social order. The pretext will be economic growth... all for the Few, of course. 

We can slow AGW, but we cannot stop it in time for the Crisis of 2100 which begins around AD 2080. Yes, the timing is already all but set for the next Saeculum, including the Crisis of 2100.