The Groupthink I invoke does not rely on belief system. It is anti belief system regarding procedure. It may actually be a backlash to values-driven stalemate and stalling that arrives at a pointless battle of
A
or
B
the Groupthink I am talking about does not SAY anything. It is not aligned automatically with anything. I think it might be an implosion of ideals as a route to governance. It ONLY identifies the biggest problems............ AS PROBLEMS.......... and sets out to address a solution. If someone in the group shouts out they cannot be for this or that reform because they don't believe in that type of reform, they are pretty much already outside the group. The group does not want them involved.
Why? Because that person is approaching the problem from a belief system not solution-oriented. Therefore, possibly identifying the problem AS a problem with the group, but holding the process up due to their values. THAT WILL BECOME UNACCEPTABLE.
At the moment, I think back to abortion in 1973.................. that was not a decision made by radical hippies. I do not view that landmark as some surge into values. That decision was made due to very staunch justices of the time who I would guess were probably Heroes of the first of the 20th century. The authors name JFK as identifying "Americans born in this century" and let's guess (I am not doing research on my own time) a justice is a good 70-years old... and remember, the Artist works in conjunction with the Hero with these types of things..... anywhere from 50-70+ years of age. The judges who decided that case. If someone wants to look up the bench of that time I am interested.
The Prophet archetype was NOT involved in this ruling. At first glance, abortion LOOKS or MAY LOOK like a VERY values-driven thing. It was not. The bench who was of that age may have looked deeply into the idea:
"we left all this STRUCTURE for our children and grandchildren, now we have to apply moral freedom for them with this."
And then voted accordingly. A freedom none of them were able to touch in the 1930s through the 1960s when THEY were having children. Not that it was a smack on themselves and bearing children, they wanted to give their offspring that power to choose. That decision was not made in a heated argument. It was that cool blue Groupthink mentality.
THEREFORE, that makes - to me - the abortion ruling a very level-headed decision not made by values-driven Prophet but very Groupthinky Heroes and maybe Artists. That decision could not be made currently. Our political climate (forget the current bench, I am speaking now of POLITICAL CLIMATE) would not allow such and landmark ruling. I don't believe it could.
People would be flinging themselves into pyres on the national mall, there would be unification of churches marching in streets. LOOK AT NOW ANYWAY you have governors banning abortion locally and forcing women to go across state lines. And local ppl trying even harder to implement their own vision. Their own ideology.
Only in the cool pot of Groupthink could such a thing happen.
The justices of that court are very old, yes. So, take the idea of that ruling backward. When were the Hero and Artist archetypes at full power in America? I would guess off my head that might be around the 1950s and 1960s? When said ppl are at peak age and power. What was America at that time?
Strong
Cohesive
Boring
Drunk?
Samey
New/Refreshed on the surface and dying inside?
How did that all happen? We went through the last Crisis arm of the Saeculum in GDI and WWII, the Hero fought in the war and suffered while being directed by the Prophet (or those in the older archetype), they aged with Artists into the 40s and 50s and 60s and had children. They came to power in Groupthink which allowed basically all the major refreshments to our nation, building roads and bridges, passing landmark legislation......... all the things we NOW absolutely cannot make happen. It only happens when everybody agrees on what the problems are and goes after them without passion or prejudice. There are no loud mouths or preachers. There are only worker ants. When THOSE people raise their children (Prophets and Nomads), those children do not like it.
They don't care the huge bank of marble was built downtown, they want to rock and they want to smoke weed. They don't care what the elders made -- to save them, btw, to get through the Crisis -- they only care about "being free" and "finding themselves".
Hero and Artist know little about those things. Artists maybe, because the authors describe Artist as having a real relationship and admiring of their grandparent generation. (*)And while Nomad loves the culture brought by the Prophet, doesn't have much love for the self-absorbed Prophet OR the rather bland Artist who is strongly held-to-account in Grouthink by the Hero.
(*) my opinion, not derived from the authors.
Prophet hates all of them and cannot understand them. Prophet is doing its own thing from the beginning. It hates its parents and grandparents and rebels against them.............. rebels against EVERYTHING that came before it. And I would dare say, Prophet hates its children in the way the authors describe creating the latch-key child, forcing kids to grow up quick so it can be a convenience to them, etc. Hate might be strong, but for this exam it works.
Then Prophet ages and we get to now, where Prophet is the big bad on the street, knocking down the Other with his big stick, A vs B and the rest of us are yawning and see the walls breaking and the road falling apart and gets pissed.
Fact: The authors say in plain words: For the Prophet, every experience is new as if it happened to only them. No experience prior to them is believed until they, themselves, experience it.
That's great when the culture is completely stuffed full with marshmallow and you can't move. You want ppl that break the mold, defy expectation and create NEWNESS. But that turns stale and deadly when they are in charge. Like a cute lion cub, you can pet it in youth but it might eat you when it's older. We suffer much under the rule of Prophet. He needs to learn when it's time to step away from that primary leadership role.
I might add, the authors in The 4th Turning talk about the very end of the Crisis:
(my words) The Prophet holds onto power until the last moment, and with a final explosion of essence, then hands over the reigns to Nomad who picks up with pragmatism and the unification of Hero and Artist to support.
^^ is as close to exact words as I can recall. If this is the right time, we might see the current president ending soon, to be replaced by someone younger? I really thought that was going to be Pete, but since the only other choice is Joe, we will have 4 more of the current and THEN the above will happen. Personally, I dont wanna wait that long. Had this Crisis happened 6 months ago, I believe Pete would be coming to town.
A
or
B
the Groupthink I am talking about does not SAY anything. It is not aligned automatically with anything. I think it might be an implosion of ideals as a route to governance. It ONLY identifies the biggest problems............ AS PROBLEMS.......... and sets out to address a solution. If someone in the group shouts out they cannot be for this or that reform because they don't believe in that type of reform, they are pretty much already outside the group. The group does not want them involved.
Why? Because that person is approaching the problem from a belief system not solution-oriented. Therefore, possibly identifying the problem AS a problem with the group, but holding the process up due to their values. THAT WILL BECOME UNACCEPTABLE.
At the moment, I think back to abortion in 1973.................. that was not a decision made by radical hippies. I do not view that landmark as some surge into values. That decision was made due to very staunch justices of the time who I would guess were probably Heroes of the first of the 20th century. The authors name JFK as identifying "Americans born in this century" and let's guess (I am not doing research on my own time) a justice is a good 70-years old... and remember, the Artist works in conjunction with the Hero with these types of things..... anywhere from 50-70+ years of age. The judges who decided that case. If someone wants to look up the bench of that time I am interested.
The Prophet archetype was NOT involved in this ruling. At first glance, abortion LOOKS or MAY LOOK like a VERY values-driven thing. It was not. The bench who was of that age may have looked deeply into the idea:
"we left all this STRUCTURE for our children and grandchildren, now we have to apply moral freedom for them with this."
And then voted accordingly. A freedom none of them were able to touch in the 1930s through the 1960s when THEY were having children. Not that it was a smack on themselves and bearing children, they wanted to give their offspring that power to choose. That decision was not made in a heated argument. It was that cool blue Groupthink mentality.
THEREFORE, that makes - to me - the abortion ruling a very level-headed decision not made by values-driven Prophet but very Groupthinky Heroes and maybe Artists. That decision could not be made currently. Our political climate (forget the current bench, I am speaking now of POLITICAL CLIMATE) would not allow such and landmark ruling. I don't believe it could.
People would be flinging themselves into pyres on the national mall, there would be unification of churches marching in streets. LOOK AT NOW ANYWAY you have governors banning abortion locally and forcing women to go across state lines. And local ppl trying even harder to implement their own vision. Their own ideology.
Only in the cool pot of Groupthink could such a thing happen.
The justices of that court are very old, yes. So, take the idea of that ruling backward. When were the Hero and Artist archetypes at full power in America? I would guess off my head that might be around the 1950s and 1960s? When said ppl are at peak age and power. What was America at that time?
Strong
Cohesive
Boring
Drunk?
Samey
New/Refreshed on the surface and dying inside?
How did that all happen? We went through the last Crisis arm of the Saeculum in GDI and WWII, the Hero fought in the war and suffered while being directed by the Prophet (or those in the older archetype), they aged with Artists into the 40s and 50s and 60s and had children. They came to power in Groupthink which allowed basically all the major refreshments to our nation, building roads and bridges, passing landmark legislation......... all the things we NOW absolutely cannot make happen. It only happens when everybody agrees on what the problems are and goes after them without passion or prejudice. There are no loud mouths or preachers. There are only worker ants. When THOSE people raise their children (Prophets and Nomads), those children do not like it.
They don't care the huge bank of marble was built downtown, they want to rock and they want to smoke weed. They don't care what the elders made -- to save them, btw, to get through the Crisis -- they only care about "being free" and "finding themselves".
Hero and Artist know little about those things. Artists maybe, because the authors describe Artist as having a real relationship and admiring of their grandparent generation. (*)And while Nomad loves the culture brought by the Prophet, doesn't have much love for the self-absorbed Prophet OR the rather bland Artist who is strongly held-to-account in Grouthink by the Hero.
(*) my opinion, not derived from the authors.
Prophet hates all of them and cannot understand them. Prophet is doing its own thing from the beginning. It hates its parents and grandparents and rebels against them.............. rebels against EVERYTHING that came before it. And I would dare say, Prophet hates its children in the way the authors describe creating the latch-key child, forcing kids to grow up quick so it can be a convenience to them, etc. Hate might be strong, but for this exam it works.
Then Prophet ages and we get to now, where Prophet is the big bad on the street, knocking down the Other with his big stick, A vs B and the rest of us are yawning and see the walls breaking and the road falling apart and gets pissed.
Fact: The authors say in plain words: For the Prophet, every experience is new as if it happened to only them. No experience prior to them is believed until they, themselves, experience it.
That's great when the culture is completely stuffed full with marshmallow and you can't move. You want ppl that break the mold, defy expectation and create NEWNESS. But that turns stale and deadly when they are in charge. Like a cute lion cub, you can pet it in youth but it might eat you when it's older. We suffer much under the rule of Prophet. He needs to learn when it's time to step away from that primary leadership role.
I might add, the authors in The 4th Turning talk about the very end of the Crisis:
(my words) The Prophet holds onto power until the last moment, and with a final explosion of essence, then hands over the reigns to Nomad who picks up with pragmatism and the unification of Hero and Artist to support.
^^ is as close to exact words as I can recall. If this is the right time, we might see the current president ending soon, to be replaced by someone younger? I really thought that was going to be Pete, but since the only other choice is Joe, we will have 4 more of the current and THEN the above will happen. Personally, I dont wanna wait that long. Had this Crisis happened 6 months ago, I believe Pete would be coming to town.