(11-11-2016, 10:13 PM)disasterzone Wrote:(11-11-2016, 09:58 AM)Marypoza Wrote:(11-11-2016, 09:40 AM)Mikebert Wrote: Some time ago, I think at the old site I posted on several historical cycle comparisons for this election. One of them was influenced by the Turchin cycle model, and the other used the S&H model.
Here’s the S&H (here I am using Marc Lamb’s concept of a 40 year repeating unit)
Reagan = T Roosevelt
Bush I = Taft
Clinton = Wilson
Bush II = Harding/Coolidge
Obama = Hoover/early FDR
Clinton = later FDR
Here’s what you get using the Turchin cycle
Clinton = Cleveland
Bush II = T Roosevelt-Taft
Obama = Wilson
Trump = Harding-Coolidge
The focus of the first is the idea that we be 4T, and so the presidents since Reagan should reflect a 3T transition to a 4T. The focus of the second is that the current period resembles the crisis phase of the secular cycle. We have high levels of immigrants that are provoking a backlash from native-born Americans. Recall that the Republican elected in 1920 promised to return America to normalcy. The one elected in 2016 promises a return to sunnier times of the past. America sharply restricted immigration over 1921-24. Trump promises to do the same. Then there was a significant progressive minority fed up with both parties who had flocked to the banner of Socialist Eugene Debs in elections in the teens and 1920. This time there was a popular socialist who has a picture of Debs in his Senate office. The new Republican administration began a program of tax reform involving lowering rates that maintained revenues and got rates down to 24% by 1929. Trump has a plan begin another such process. The Republican administration installed in 1920 was initially popular while the stock market rally that began in 1921 continued. This changed after stocks began to fall.
Now I was aware of how eerily similar these two periods seem. But I discounted it because it pretty much throws out S&H, and Clinton was almost certainly going to win, as predicted by the S&H-based models. Well, that didn’t happen.
Throwing out S&H allows for new predictions. Instead of the coming recession being a 1937-38 analog, with resolution of the inequality issue a few years after under president Clinton, it is going to be an analog to 1920-21. With Trump as Harding. (Harding was famously corrupt and had a thing for the ladies too). There is a difference now, as the market is already very overvalued, whereas it was undervalued in 1920. Assume Trump succeeds in restricting immigration and trade (as achieved under Harding to Hoover) before the crash consumes his administration. We may see a telescoping of the entire 1920-1932 period into one term. How can Congressional Republicans deny him these things if he threatens to hold rallies for their primary opponents in 2018 if they do?
If this happens it gets very interesting.
-- interesting indeed, we'll have to see how this rolls. But you have explained why the Hillary candidacy was "off", for lack of a better word. In the 1990s we had the Clinton co-presidency, 80 yrs before that it was Woodrow & Edith Wilson. Hillary is not Eleanor Roosevelt, she's Edith Wilson. Had the DNC not rigged their primary & manipulated the repug primaries (per their own emails via wikileaks) had they not sabotaged Bernie's campaign & instead ran him in the general, we would have our FDR. lnstead we got the Donald
This changes everthing
(11-11-2016, 03:09 PM)Mikebert Wrote: I don't think Trump can be a grey champion because I don't think there are any. Trumps election more or less puts the final nail in the coffin from the generation theory. The theory holds that the Awakening creates raises issue or creates belief systems that influence the prophet generation coming of age, who then later put these ideals into practice later in life during a 4T when they are known as grey champions. S&H call the 2T the New Consciousness, which certainly seems a reference to the late sixties and early 1970's. Both candidates were age 22 in 1968-69, right in the middle of this. So this fits age-wise. But DST theory and empirical data shows that the core issue resolved in 4T is problems stemming from elite proliferation caused by high economic inequality.
How can Trump deal with this? Many ways have been used in the past.
[1A] in early 1066 England had a Saxon king and a Saxon elite. According to Domesday, by 1086 England had a Norman king and a Norman elite and population was rising after centuries of stagnation.
[1B] Fifty years earlier the Danes had conquered England too, but they left the Saxon elites in place. Guess which invasion was the 4T?
[2A] After Henry VI went insane the country fell apart and a 30 year civil war began, on which the popular series Game of Thrones is based. At the end of the conflict the entire ruling House had been wiped out leaving one man in power, who proceeded to craft a legislative agenda to prevent future challenges to the state. Population growth resumed and prosperity ensued.
[2B] Half a century earlier civil war had also wracked the nation, but had been put down by the able and charismatic son of the aging king, who later went on to win renown in external conquests only to suffer an untimely death leaving an infant son on the throne. Which civil war was the 4T?
[3A] A civil war led to the execution of Charles I and the abolition of the monarchy and establishment of a republic, than soon devolved into a military dictatorship. Upon the dictator's death he was succeeded by his son, but he was unable to gain the support of the elite and the monarch was restored.
[3B]A generation later a foreign invader with substantial domestic support displaced the monarch replacing it with a new one that shared power with Parliament. A flurry of reforms created an environment conducive to economic growth, which provided many new opportunities for elites. After decades of stagnation, population growth resumed as the economy improved. Which event was the 4T?
[4A]An isolated portion of the English state became increasingly frustrated with limits on territorial expansion, monetary policy, and regulation of commerce, and rebelled. The won and expelled pro-English elites. After a brief chaotic period they implemented a flurry of reforms created an environment conducive to economic growth, which provided many new opportunities for elites.
[4B]A generation later two rival factions of the successful revolutionaries settled differences in governance in a peaceful fashion preserving the status of all involved. Which event was the 4T?
In each of these there is one choice where the problem of elite numbers was not addressed, either through reduction in numbers or through expansion of opportunities and one where the status quo was maintained. The former are the 4Ts. The answers above are 1A, 2A (Wars if the Roses), 3B (Glorious Revolution), 4A (American Revolution.
As we moved into the industrial age, the problem of elite proliferation was addresses by confiscating the property of elites so as to reduce their status, making their lower strata blend into the middle classes or gentry. For example the Civil War 4T stripped Southern elites of three fifths of their wealth by emancipation, converting an American aristocracy into a mere gentry.
The Depression and WW II 4T used high taxes on top elites, legalization of labor actions and wartime "command economy" policies to reduce elite incomes substantially, converting their lower tier members into mere upper middle class.
Something along these lines must happen during this turning for it to be a 4T. If it doesn't happen, then it is not a 4T. Can anyone make a case for how elite reduction along the lines of what I described above could happen in today's world (I don't think Trump is going to emulate William the Conqueror).
Maybe Donald is what will usher us into the 1T. Oddly enough I notice a lot of 1T attitudes now.
The 4T cannot end until the problem of excess elites is solved. This problem is why people and angry and until it is resolved, they will just get angrier at whoever is in control--symbolized by which party has the presidency. It has been going steadily downhill. Bush inherited the surplus and a nation at peace. Trump will inherit a nation at war and a deficit. Trump is dealt a worse hand than Bush got. Like Bush, Trump has only Republican policy options to choose from because he has a Republican Congress. He can pass a lot of stuff, just like Bush could but it all has to come from the same basket of Republican 3T policies. Republicans often hold power in 3Ts and so they tend to have a collection of 3T policies. Republic experience with 4T success dates from the Civil War, but they were a Blue party, concentrated in the NE. Updated versions of these policies are not suitable for a Red party.
Do you think Bush wanted the Afghan & Iraq wars to turn out like they did or the economy to crash? All of these probably could have been avoided if the right policies had been pursued. But these policies are not in the basket, so they cannot be used. Trump has the same basket as Bush, but starting out from a worse position. So no, the 4T is not going to end anytime soon.