What Will Come of This 4T?

[Eric the Green]

(04-21-2020, 02:00 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: People try things in a 4T. Major reforms find opposition from entrenched elites more intent on protecting their privilege an sybaritic indulgence by supporting mean-spirited, reactionary causes that dehumanize a society. At the milder level that means Trump in America or Bolsonaro in Brazil, people who hold people not already filthy-rich in contempt. At worst they use their power to bring about a Hitler who promises to make the common man responsible to irresponsible only to people like themselves -- aristocrats, executives, financiers, and industrialists... the contemporary equivalents of medieval nobility. Contrary to the meaning of the word noble, there is nothing noble in people who see no human suffering in excess if it serves their power, indulgence, and greed. At a low level such people are but common criminals if they survive at a low level and gangsters if they are more economically successful.    

I probably attribute this to the fact that 4Ts are not times of unity, as is sometimes supposed just because FDR did so well in unifying the country. But it's always a conflict between the progressive and authoritarian/reactionary forces in society, and the authoritarian side can come from abroad too.

Quote:

Quote:Populists are never right wing. Populism means power to the people, not power to the prejudiced.

Sorry, Eric -- that is the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

Some truly shady characters have called their ideologies populist. Populism needs humane values to have any attractiveness to me. Hypocrisy is commonplace on the extreme Right, as with Hitler's anti-human crime syndicate calling itself the National-Socialist German Worker's Party. Take out the "German" and "National" parts of the title and one has a frequently-used title for extreme-left (really Communist) parties. The most extreme-right political party in France in the late 1930's, a cadre of defeatists who welcomed Hitler to 'cleanse' France of what the French extreme right (fascists, antisemites, and people with a fondness for the pre-1789 France) called themselves the Parti Populaire Français.  Supposedly it was for the "French people" and claimed to call for freeing France from 'alien' and 'foreign' influences on French life (I interpret this to mean French Jews). This party was populist, but without humanizing qualities much like the dominant elite in the demonic regime that conquered France in 1940. 

I have no desire to 'free' my country from the influence of model minorities who differ from me in appearance, culture, or religion. I would far prefer to join such people than endure poverty or endorse stupidity... let alone plunder and kill. Maybe we Americans get through the political mess that we now have because we have multiple "model minorities". 

Populism without humane values and respect for the creative potential of the intellect is as vile as socialism without democracy. Populism without humanism gave the Germans Hitler; socialism without democracy gave the Russians Stalin and the Chinese Mao. One might as well have traditionalist conservatism as either a populism without human values or socialism without democracy.  

I very much prefer the original definition, which was entirely based on the Populist Party of the previous Awakening. From it came all the reforms of the last saeculum, and it reappeared in the McGovern campaign. Just because some tyrants and demagogues claim to be populist, does not at all mean that they are. Such pretenders always confuse the people with false names and slogans, just as Trump does today. Only populism as originally defined brings power back to the people. The false versions do not. Instead they use the prejudices of deceived people to create tyranny. That's not populism at all; just demagoguery.

Quote:

Quote:We just barely opened up the Awakening when it was squashed and unfairly discredited. More Awakening along the same line as the sixties would be wonderful. It was peace and love, care for the Earth, respect the rights of all people, awakening to spiritual and sensory awareness. We need much more of this; the USA is too commercial and materialist. We need a renaissance. We need to come alive. We have the potential, because so much from the past and from the world is available to us at our fingertips to inspire us, but commercialism ties us down and keeps us focused on making money. The USA needs much-more powerful Awakenings. Most countries and peoples past and present are much more awake all through their saecula.

I can't say that the Boom Awakening on the whole was more benign than harmful. From it came the reactionary 'born-again' movement in Christianity... one of the most mindless, authoritarian, and reactionary causes possible but with the obnoxious self-righteousness that allowed people to do horrible things under the delusion that such was good. Maybe the 2040's will be less nasty when the last people who remember those who lived in the Gay 'Nineties'. Maybe we can tell the up-and-coming youth of Gustav Klimt and Gustav Mahler. Better than LSD! 

As I have said before, calling a turning by the name of only one generation that was involved is not very accurate. The S&H term is Consciousness Revolution. That is a good term for it. Before the last 2T, American society had very little awareness that it was even conscious. Everything was explained physically. The reason LSD was good is that it cut through this blind spot and opened Americans to spiritual pursuits.

The gay nineties era did also include movements like New Thought and Theosophy, which were much greater in those days than they are today. No LSD was required. Europe had modern arts and hypersensitive culture, partly powered by opium and stuff. It was a very transformative time, but as you imply, more so in Europe than the USA. In due course it was swallowed up and even taken over by the right-wing nationalist movements. Industrial society was very powerful then and overwhelmed contrary trends.

I can't get with Mahler though, I have to admit. Most of his middle and later symphony movements are incoherent, and certainly don't evoke transcendent experience in the way that the greatest 18th/early 19th century composers did, or that the impressionists and nationalists of the late 19th century did either.

The born again movement was a different part of the Awakening, involving entirely different people and different regions of the country (what we now call the red states). Of course I agree with you about how nasty and harmful it was, although it was partly based on the same stuff that happened in the previous awakening as well. Traditional religion is a part of every Awakening, although in the transcendental era it probably happened mostly in the 1T, the early 1800s. The 1950s arguably saw something similar as well. The reactionary part of the 2T awakening of course in no way came from the counter-cultural part; these are two different cultures. The former was very much a reaction against the latter, in fact. It was a counter-awakening.

The counter-culture itself was by no means without limits and problems, and we had lessons to learn. A cultural revolution has collateral damage of many kinds. The LSD tore through the limited consciousness of American society, and that break can never be entirely sown back. The cat is out of the bag; transcendental awareness is now part of society. It was dangerous for some people to take LSD without proper set and setting, however. Only the positive aspects really count in the long run, and are worth reconnecting to. Be sure and review my post about the great Awakenings, and follow the links. These are truly the formative movements that shaped our lives, and they are not strictly limited to second turning periods as defined by Strauss and Howe.
http://generational-theory.com/forum/thr...l#pid50881