(06-04-2018, 11:51 AM)David Horn Wrote:(06-01-2018, 08:42 PM)TheNomad Wrote: I'm perplexed by the fact that no one seems to acknowledge 911 as any part of the crisis whatsoever. Why is that? I'm starting to think some in this forum simply maybe didn't experience the aftermath of it or simply do not understand the implications of all that happened because of that. Everyone seems to agree that 2008 and the financial ruins is the crisis and yet we're waiting for War the second part of a crisis. Or that the order of the events of the crisis are wrong in that there must be a financial woe and only after that some big war. However we had those two things within six or seven years of each other we had Wars going on the same time as we had the financial crisis.
What's going on with that? Every time I ask that question no one seems to answer.
I'll say again it is almost as if the wars and complications of the aftermath of the wars were not large enough for significant enough to be considered a crisis element. And for anyone who believes that I want to hear what you have to say. I want to hear people say that the 911 wars and cultural impact in the Homeland were not significant enough to be considered part of the crisis.
The main reason 911 doesn't get the nod as the Crisis Trigger has to do with timing. The generations were not ready to take on their next roles, so they continued to act in their then current ones. That the response had 3T stamped all over it just makes the case stronger. After all, we didn't mobilize or even restart the draft. We shopped, as instructed by GWB and his minions. We sent the Praetorian Guard off to war, then decided that we needed a different, less ideological war, so we invaded Iraq. We took neither war seriously either, which is why we're still engaged 17 years later.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, we cut taxes and started a new entitlement program: Medicare Part D. We ignored Hurricane Katrina until it swamped New Orleans, then did too little to put it back together (a pattern we are following yet again today). Where in all of this is a 4T? It's not even a competent 3T.
GWB should have been the last 3T President, mucking things up for others to fix. Because he was handed a huge international incident (not a threat … al Qaida was never that) that had to be addressed, he became a quasi Crisis President. That's all.
Illustration:
Generational type Crash of '21/anarchist purge
Gilded (Civic*) 79-99 John D. Rockefeller II, Oliver Wendell Holmes
Progressive (Adaptive) 62-78 John Philip Sousa, Woodrow Wilson
Missionary (Idealist) 39-61 Henry Ford, Franklin Roosevelt
Lost (Reactive) 21-38 Harry Truman, George Gershwin
GI (Civic) 0-20 Walt Disney, Lou Gehrig
Generational type Dot-com collapse. 9/11 attack
GI (Civic) 77-100 Jimmy Carter, Thurgood Marshall
Silent (Adaptive) 59-76 Clint Eastwood, Nancy Pelosi
Boom (Idealist) 41-58 George W. Bush, Donald Trump
X (Reactive) 19-40 Barack Obama, Mike Pence
GI (Civic) 0-18 Justin Verlander, Scarlett Johansson
*by then the Gilded Generation was operating much like a Civic generation, at least in the North
In both cases the generational constellation looks like the middle half or slightly later in a 3T/Unraveling/Degeneracy. Heck, there are significant numbers of living Civic (or Civic-like) adults sticking around, and an Adaptive generation is still hanging onto some influence. Much potential for social division is still possible because the Idealist generation has yet to grow out of its age of stilettos-out debates.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.