[Bob]In the 4T there are clear problems that have to be solved, major efforts being undertaken, and a significant turnover in values.[/quote]
[Mike]I’ve been thinking along these lines. For example I have a plot of America economic inequality since the early 18th century. Economic inequality began significant declines around 1780, 1865, and 1929. These dates are associated with political moments in 1775-89, 1861-77 and 1931-47. These political moments are special in that each was accompanied a transformation of the state so fundamental as to be termed a new republic. These periods are similar to the ends of the process that causes secular cycles which typically involve state collapse and reformation, starting a new cycle (see page 14 of link). So they are solutions to the problem raise by the secular cycle process (inequality).
That is, the mere existence of high levels of inequality and a political moment = 4T.
[Bob]Come the 1T, people are tired of values change and upheaval, are very satisfied with the status quo, and ready to suppress anyone not fitting into the new normal. There is a temptation to believe that what has been achieved is kinda sorta perfect, and the enemies of perfect ought to be kept in their proper perfect place.
Boomers and other prophets grew up seeing their culture as less than perfect, even if the elder generations are trying real hard to pretend that it is perfect. Such generations see with clear eyes things like slavery, gender inequality, racial inequality, pollution and other social issues that their parents are trying to pretend don't exist or should be allowed to continue to exist….
[Mike]I think what you are getting at is during the 1T young people see the problems with the elder-created world and develop a moral position wrt it. But don’t all younger generations do this? Why the spiritual aspect?
As for 4Ts, Inequality was a huge problem one hundred years ago. The country heaved with unrest that peaked over the 1918-1922 period, with Red Summer, the Red Scare, the West Virginia Miners war and scores of major riots leading to the deaths of thousands for internal conflict. It was a revolutionary situation to which the American authorities responded as did the British to similar situations around 1800, and 1848. Revolution did not happen in 1920, but just a dozen years later a political revolution happened that achieved much of what populists had asked for in 1896 and a fair amount of the things on the socialist wish list.
Why did change happen in 1932 (with no threat of revolution) and not in 1920 with a real threat? Why did not American authorities in the 1920’s pull a Bismarck and try to buy off the socialists? The S&H answer is they were not in the mood to do this because they were of a recessive generation, who came of age during the Gilded conservative era. When a new generation, forged in the heat of the Social Gospel, came to power in 1932, they were in the mood.
That is, the fires of the 2T feed directly into the conflict of the 4T. This is a key S&H concept.
But why was there a Social Gospel to fire them up in their youth? How come the response to the spirit-dead 1T is an awakening, whereas there is not similar response to the spirit-dead 3T? Could the spiritual awakening be the default political moment? That is when inequality is not yet at crisis levels (using secular cycle concepts), then a political moment ends up as an awakening.
This works for saeculum II, but not saeculum I. For the latter there are no dominant versus recessive generations, just one kind (e.g. gray champions are Nomads). Also the secular cycle is longer than a saeculum, which means there are 4Ts like the Armada 4T where inequality is not yet a problem--yet there is a 4T, or the Plague 4T where inequality is very much the problem and yet the 4T delivers no resolution, the secular cycle drags along for an additional saeculum before the problem of excess elites is solved by the Wars of the Roses 4T.
With the exception of a handful of turnings (Norman Invasion 4T, Wars of the Roses 4T, Glorious 4T) all the political moments are the same, except for certain religious ones like the Cistercian ca 1100-1125, the Mendicant ca 1200-1225, the Hussite (ca. 1405-1435), the Reformation (ca 1525-1550) and the Puritan (ca 1630’s-1660) all of which correspond to what S&H call a 2T. How the hell does that happen?
[Mike]I’ve been thinking along these lines. For example I have a plot of America economic inequality since the early 18th century. Economic inequality began significant declines around 1780, 1865, and 1929. These dates are associated with political moments in 1775-89, 1861-77 and 1931-47. These political moments are special in that each was accompanied a transformation of the state so fundamental as to be termed a new republic. These periods are similar to the ends of the process that causes secular cycles which typically involve state collapse and reformation, starting a new cycle (see page 14 of link). So they are solutions to the problem raise by the secular cycle process (inequality).
That is, the mere existence of high levels of inequality and a political moment = 4T.
[Bob]Come the 1T, people are tired of values change and upheaval, are very satisfied with the status quo, and ready to suppress anyone not fitting into the new normal. There is a temptation to believe that what has been achieved is kinda sorta perfect, and the enemies of perfect ought to be kept in their proper perfect place.
Boomers and other prophets grew up seeing their culture as less than perfect, even if the elder generations are trying real hard to pretend that it is perfect. Such generations see with clear eyes things like slavery, gender inequality, racial inequality, pollution and other social issues that their parents are trying to pretend don't exist or should be allowed to continue to exist….
[Mike]I think what you are getting at is during the 1T young people see the problems with the elder-created world and develop a moral position wrt it. But don’t all younger generations do this? Why the spiritual aspect?
As for 4Ts, Inequality was a huge problem one hundred years ago. The country heaved with unrest that peaked over the 1918-1922 period, with Red Summer, the Red Scare, the West Virginia Miners war and scores of major riots leading to the deaths of thousands for internal conflict. It was a revolutionary situation to which the American authorities responded as did the British to similar situations around 1800, and 1848. Revolution did not happen in 1920, but just a dozen years later a political revolution happened that achieved much of what populists had asked for in 1896 and a fair amount of the things on the socialist wish list.
Why did change happen in 1932 (with no threat of revolution) and not in 1920 with a real threat? Why did not American authorities in the 1920’s pull a Bismarck and try to buy off the socialists? The S&H answer is they were not in the mood to do this because they were of a recessive generation, who came of age during the Gilded conservative era. When a new generation, forged in the heat of the Social Gospel, came to power in 1932, they were in the mood.
That is, the fires of the 2T feed directly into the conflict of the 4T. This is a key S&H concept.
But why was there a Social Gospel to fire them up in their youth? How come the response to the spirit-dead 1T is an awakening, whereas there is not similar response to the spirit-dead 3T? Could the spiritual awakening be the default political moment? That is when inequality is not yet at crisis levels (using secular cycle concepts), then a political moment ends up as an awakening.
This works for saeculum II, but not saeculum I. For the latter there are no dominant versus recessive generations, just one kind (e.g. gray champions are Nomads). Also the secular cycle is longer than a saeculum, which means there are 4Ts like the Armada 4T where inequality is not yet a problem--yet there is a 4T, or the Plague 4T where inequality is very much the problem and yet the 4T delivers no resolution, the secular cycle drags along for an additional saeculum before the problem of excess elites is solved by the Wars of the Roses 4T.
With the exception of a handful of turnings (Norman Invasion 4T, Wars of the Roses 4T, Glorious 4T) all the political moments are the same, except for certain religious ones like the Cistercian ca 1100-1125, the Mendicant ca 1200-1225, the Hussite (ca. 1405-1435), the Reformation (ca 1525-1550) and the Puritan (ca 1630’s-1660) all of which correspond to what S&H call a 2T. How the hell does that happen?
(05-04-2016, 08:01 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I might try a classic turning answer.
In the 4T there are clear problems that have to be solved, major efforts being undertaken, and a significant turnover in values.
Come the 1T, people are tired of values change and upheaval, are very satisfied with the status quo, and ready to suppress anyone not fitting into the new normal. There is a temptation to believe that what has been achieved is kinda sorta perfect, and the enemies of perfect ought to be kept in their proper perfect place.
Boomers and other prophets grew up seeing their culture as less than perfect, even if the elder generations are trying real hard to pretend that it is perfect. Such generations see with clear eyes things like slavery, gender inequality, racial inequality, pollution and other social issues that their parents are trying to pretend don't exist or should be allowed to continue to exist.
At least that's my perspective as a Blue Boomer. I carried a live draft card. The ladies of my generation had coat hangers as the obvious option. The lakes and rivers of my youth stank. The perfect America's Golden Age of the 1950s wasn't perfect at all. If you grew up in this era, this was painfully obvious.
If you grew up after this era, it is not so painfully obvious. If one hasn't had to live through a time of blindness and moral bankruptcy, one might not understand the intense feelings and values of those who have.
Contemplate the notion of a live draft card, of being compelled to fight to maintain a dictatorship disliked by it's people. Meditate on a coat hanger. Really think about what it must have been like to have been a slave. These are situations that for the most part don't exist anymore, issues that have never touched more recent generations. The boomers? We saw it. We lived it. We fought over it. Those who weren't there don't understand. Some might use the word 'moralistic' as disparaging, as an undesirable trait. They don't get it. Not having been there, they aren't apt to get it.