No more Millennial children

[Kinser79]

(01-20-2018, 12:06 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: I'm not so sure that the generational boundaries are so fixed as Howe and Strauss put them until the Crisis defines them.

That is perhaps one of the most retarded things you've ever said PBR...and you've said some real doozies in your day.  Generations are formed by their time and place in the historical arch.  Considering Human biology indicates that most people baring war, famine, or pestilence will live into their 80s the four stages of the human life cycle can be more or less divided evenly into 20 year blocks.

Circumstance can retard the progression from one turning to the next certainly but not much more than a half-decade since the industrial revolution.  The longer pre-industrial saeculum is irrelevant unless one plans on destroying all the products of industrialism in some sort of global dark age.

Quote:The generational boundary between the GI and the Silent  Generations was not established until World War II. People born in 1924 could get some glory out of World War II; those born in 1925 rarely could.

It was just as rare for a 1924 cohort to gain any glory in WWII.  Most of that cohort that served in that war were either never deployed or were casualties.  As the Grandson and Nephew of Combat Veterans of WWII, Korea and Vietnam I can tell you there is no glory to be found in war.  In the words of my Grandfather a 1919 Cohort and survivor of many battles in Europe "War is mud, blood and death.  You fight for the man in the fox hole next to you, as he fights for you.  Mom, apple pie and the flag is at best tacky propaganda the recruiter uses to get you into the door--and that assumes you're not just drafted."

I would say that the cut off point was found in hindsight, which is how the cut off points for generations usually are determined.  Generational cut off points are lagging indicators at best.  That being said I've seen little argument against my general model I've presented.

Quote:Had WWII dragged on a couple years longer,

I'm not interested in discussing alternative-history with you in this particular subforum.  I'm pretty sure Dan created an Arts and Literature subforum where we can discuss fiction.

TL;DR:  Not an argument.

Quote:We are in a Crisis even if we manage to avoid an apocalyptic war.

Indeed, which is a major criticism I have of the Generational Dynamics model proposed by Xenakis.  From reading his books it seems that he insists that 4Ts always, ALWAYS, feature an apocalyptic war.  My argument is that this is not the case because the presence of a saeculum wherein such a war was avoided falsifies the statement that 4T "ALWAYS" feature an apocalyptic war.

I will say that such wars are more common in 4Ts but I view that particular hypothesis as false as the hypothesis that All Swans have White feathers.  Since swans with Black Feathers exist the statement "All Swans have white feathers" must therefore be false.  Even if swans with with white feathers are far more common than swans with black feathers.

Quote:We have yet to see the first of the Homeland generation (most likely pop musicians, child stars, and athletes) establish any semblance of a character -- yet. We don't see a change in voting patterns so far as was clear in 1980 (when the youngest of all voters, the first Generation X voters, strongly supported Ronald Reagan and his rightward trend to the surprise of those with the conventional wisdom of the time).

We've debated the Election of 1980 previously and I've already demonstrated this statement to be false.  In 1980 the youngest demographic of voters was still boomer dominated.  The only cohort in that election that could be considered Xer (and usually aren't by Xers or themselves actually) would be 1962 cohorts.

I'm not interested in walking you through the statistics again.  I suggest looking at the last time we discussed the election of 1980 using the search feature of the forum.  Or you could continue with your usual methodology and present non-arguments

Quote:In November the youngest voters will still be born in 2000; voters in the 2020 Presidential election will include people born as late as 2002. We will also start seeing superstar athletes making major-league baseball and hockey teams this year. But so far even the absence of an obvious break between the Millennial and Homeland youth may reflect that the Silent followed the GI lead in patterns of life even if they could not quite experience the empowerment that GI adults knew.

This only indicates that you expect that legacy cultural outlets are still relevant.  Zeds are already producing music which is widely distributed.  Have already started in journalism.  And already regularly post on political topics.  All of these can be found on various online sources.  Minds and Bitchute have the most as they are rising platforms though declining platforms such as Facebook and Youtube also feature Zed produced content.  

I don't think that professional sports figures will have quite the impact in the 21st century that they did in the 20th simply due to changing tastes and media platforms.  Hockey is irrelevant except in Canada and maybe Psudo-Canada where you live.  Baseball has been declining in popularity for two generations now.  And the latest antics of NFL players have spelled the doom for feetsball.  (I won't call the "game" that consists of running two feet, falling down and getting a concussion football--there is an other more civilized game played by far more Xers, Millies and Zeds that has that name.)

I think you're inability to see a demarcation the generational line already is due to looking for the wrong things in the wrong areas.  It could be a manifestation of your self-proclaimed ASD, but more likely it is just plain old Boomer Pigheadedness.

Quote:But note well -- this Crisis must end well for anything analogous to the last one.

True, but irrelevant. The S&H name "High" is unfortunate.  After all Last Time Round both Germany and Japan had 1Ts at around the same time as the US but neither era would be considered a "high".  The same is true of France and Britain.  I typically divide 1Ts into two phases:  Resolutions (of the previous era) and Expositions (of the new era).  This is far more accurate as it does not require the nation (not to be confused with the state--see Marxism and the National Question by J.V.Stalin on the definition of what a nation is and is not [and no I've found no one better yet]) undergoing a 4T to emerge victorious.  After all the nature of 4Ts dictate that someone has to lose.  It is after all a prerequisite for someone to win.

Quote:As such I typically break down the turnings with the current 4T starting around 2006.

One of the few things I agree with you on actually.  This necessitates therefore that the very youngest Millies would have to have been born no later than the 2003-2004.  I would argue that perceptions of Zed/Millie similarities can largely be attributed to the fact that X in general still has dominance in the Child Rearing institutions and in Culture generally.  Boomers may still dominate politics but as I've stated previously politics is a lagging indicator.

Quote:But heck, I am 62. I was born closer to the horse-and-buggy era than to the legalization of same-sex marriage. How long ago was that? Johannes Brahms and Giuseppe Verdi were still alive, and Victoria was Her Britannic Majesty... and "red" on a map meant "British rule or influence".

Brahms died in 1897 and was long dead before you were born.  Verdi died in 1867 and was dead longer and Victoria ceased being "Her Britannic Majesty" in 1901 when she croaked.  All of these people were dead at least a half century before you were born.  So comparatively speaking you're probably in the middle between them and Obergefell V. Hodges ruling.

Both of us have lived in times where "red" on maps indicated British Rule or Influence.  I have access to a 1982 Atlas that still used that color scheme.  Strictly speaking the British Empire still exists though it is now limited to British Overseas Dependencies such as the Fawklands and some insignificant islands.  The Commonwealth of Nations has largely replaced the Empire and will grow in influence due to Brexit.  Britain's future (and having been there I know) lies with trade with the Commonwealth and her Rebellious Daughter with which a saeculum long Special Relationship has been established.

Brexit was the UK largely unshackling itself from a corpse.  It appears that they learned from their German Cousins after all.  The EU is Soviet in Form and Austro-Hungarian Empire in function.

Quote:I may be an influence upon kids who will be approaching the ends of their careers in the 2070s or 2080s. Maybe those kids will grow old in an era in which cancer and prion diseases are things of the past.  

I doubt that.  You would have to have reproduced which you did not, or adopted, which I would argue you should not.  And I say this as someone who has an adopted son, even if we finally formalized that after his 18th birthday and it was largely irrelevant at that point legally.

 

Quote:There will be wars and rumors of wars -- and the Crisis might this time be great reorganizations of the world to prevent an apocalyptic war. People will be scared -- and in view of North Korean nukes, we are all more scared of those than we are of British, French, Pakistani, Indian, Russian, and Chinese nukes -- or for that matter, our own. Xenakis believes that the world operates on a materialistic clockwork that overpowers human wishes and abilities. Of course I would like to disagree with him on that. But I used to believe that we Americans were too wise and decent to vote for an amoral demagogue for President and give him an obedient Congress.

There are many things with which to disagree with Xenakis on.  Materialism is not one of them.  As for the President and the Congress all I have to say is:

H. L. Menken Wrote:Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.