01-07-2017, 05:12 PM
Quote:Now the 4T turning in the American nation (which has always been their focus*) have been distinctive.
And yet they did acknowledge that Britain in fact had a saeculum, as did Germany and others whose politicians they referenced in T4T. And the model clearly fits for them, too, which means that what I mentioned was in fact a 4T.
Quote:Big events like 911 can serve as 4T triggers, but the fact that the Bush-inaugurated changes were not retained by successors like the Reagan, FDR or Lincoln changes were argues against a 4T starting in 2001.
Are there still troops in Iraq and Afghanistan? Is the War on Terror still going on? Is Gitmo still open? Drones still in used to engage in targeted killings? Remind me, was TARP put in place under Bush or Obama? How about Snowden? What administration did his defection take place during?
I am not convinced of a 2001 or 2003 start date, but it would be absurd to say that his policies weren't retained.
Quote:Obama came in as an anti-Bush and not as a continuation like Bush I/Clinton or Truman/Eisenhower did after Reagan and FDR, respectively.
I was unaware that that was a fourth turning requirement.
Quote:Trump and the entire Republican party has very much promised to undo the Obama era. Do you think they are lying? It seems perfectly reasonable to me that Trump plans on undoing the Obama changes as much as possible and starting his own new program.
And yet simply getting rid of those policies isn't so simple, is it? Look at the kerfluffle over the Republican plans for Obamacare. They still have to replace it with something, don't they?
To what extent did FDR really act as a continuation of Hoover?
Quote:If he is not lying (and I see no reason to believe that he is) Trump will be the start of a new era. His election, a surprise like 911 and the financial crisis, is a potential trigger. If what he does gets traction with the public (and this will take some time to happen) the THAT would be a regeneracy. If so, it will follow a short period after the trigger just like the
A regeneracy does not immediately follow a trigger! IF Trump and the Republican's overwhelming capture of government, after an intense period of political competition, does end up as a regeneracy, and we precede to a crisis climax in a few years, how then does that contradict the theory as laid out by S & H?
I know, this is the bit where you start trotting out a bunch of dates in the 2030s and talk about how if things follow THAT course the theory is invalidated, but we're not there yet, are we?
Remind me again what year Churchill was elected?