Does this Crisis echo the Glorious Revolutuon?

[Eric the Green]

(01-06-2017, 10:59 AM)SomeGuy Wrote:

Quote:I wrote that intentionally. No, George III Dubya Bush was a "King," who ordered up needless wars that killed thousands; Obama was merely a "president." Black Prince, maybe; but in England he died before Richard II took over.

The amazing thing I guess is that we live in a country where it's possible for the president to order a war, and the people, the congress and the media just blindly go along; enough of them anyway.

So, blind partisanship then?  Got it.  Don't really care, I really just wanted to make the Black Prince bit since we were doing the whole government-as-monarchy bit, although there is no real connection between Obama and old Ed.

Quote:Of course Reagan as Oliver Cromwell is ridiculous; Reagan was the counter-revolution, not the revolution. Lyndon Johnson was the appropriate parallel.

The trouble with that is that S & H dates that cycles Awakening from about 1621 to 1649, and its 3T from 1650 to 1675.  This would place Cromwell pere et fils at the beginning of the 3T (they actually called that turning Reaction & Restoration), not the high point of the 2T.  Although, Oliver Cromwell was the leader of the New Model Army during the ECW, which was definitely 2T.  Which then makes the whole thing completely different, it would be like if Bill Ayres or Huey Newton actually led the Revolution they wanted to in the 1970s, then became president in the 80s, only for the Republicans to come back in 10 years later and rule consistently ever since.  Even if you try to push the 3T start to 1660 with the Restoration (which then raises the question of where you date the 2T), it still doesn't line up in any coherent way with what actually happened in this saeculum.

Quote:The point that emerges though, is that both countries and 4T times are at a place where a parliament needs to take over from the king.

The reassertion of war-making and other sorts of authority by Congress over the White House WOULD be an interesting parallel with the Glorious Revolution, and one can fairly easily imagine situations where that came about.  However, it doesn't seem to be in the cards at the moment, and so we should probably wait and see how things turn out before making that explicit comparison, at least as far as this board is concerned.

I wouldn't subscribe to the idea that parallels have to be exactly-timed to be relevant. The double rhythm shows this; if the 4T began in 1675, then the Glorious would fit too. The climax and real change only came in the later portion of the 4T in the case of the civil war 4T (1850s) and today, whereas in the other two it came early. That's of course if you accept the progressive idea, as mikebert does, that real progressive change happens in 4Ts. I know, that's a "partisan" notion. But the idea of Reagan parallel to Cromwell just doesn't fit by anyone's standards, I don't think.

I of course add the planetary cycles to the idea of finding parallels, and in this case the parallel of Uranus opposite Pluto in 1649 (climax of revolution cycle) = Cromwell (and more extreme movements like the levellers), and Uranus conjunct Pluto in 1965-66 (beginning of revolution cycle) = Lyndon Johnson and his era (and Huey Newton/Black Panthers), fits very well.

But it's true, the change to a parliamentary system hasn't happened yet, of course. But perhaps the Glorious adds to the support of my proposal and prediction of what may happen. It may be too drastic a change for Americans to make, conservative as we are. But we can expect some systemic changes in this 4T, and somehow restraining the president's ability to start wars (or even issue drone strikes against US citizens, as Obama did against that Al Qaeda cleric and his family in Yemen) would seem to me to be on peoples' minds after the events of this saeculum.