Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
I'm a sceptic that the 4th Turning started in 2008
#88
David HornBob covered a lot of this already, but I'll still weigh in.  

What really constitutes change?  I'll agree that the nuts-and-bolts reforms take an inordinate amount of time, but the change of heart needed to get there happens more quickly. 
thNo it doesn't in most cases. The change in mind is an evolutionary change that takes decades. Example: the 1964 Civil Rights Act granted rights to women they didn't previous had. In response women started to support Democrats to a greater extent than before. Yet it took 20 years for the change to full play out.

Quote:You cite the last 4T, which has the unique benefit of being a crisis in a fully post-agricultural age.  We went from 12 years of GOP dominance and laissez faire economics in the 1920s to a total flip of parties, and eventually philosophy, in 1932.
Similar sharp, long-lasting changes happened as a result all prior 4Ts except for the Armada. It's the normal pattern posty-1435. As you may recall Chaz Donald and I extended the Anglo saeculum back to the ninth century some years ago. The pre-1435 4Ts were not like the later ones. Only some of them show the sharp transitions of the later ones (such as the one you note about the last one). Perhaps that is part of the reason why S&H concluded that the saeculum did not seem to operate before 1435. Actually there are clear-cut awakenings all the way back to the beginning of the second millennium, but the 4Ts are a LOT harder to discern outside of a few that do feature the sharp change (Norman Invasion 4T and the Viking 4T).

Quote:For all of that, the public gave Roosevelt unprecedented support as he tried one thing after another.  Yes, it was the war that finally resolved the problem, but the massive changes already existed before the economy was restored. Even the Lincoln era failed to grow government like the Great Depression era did. Government wasn't the solution, in and of itself.  It was, however, the indispensable tool.  The power of capital was enormous, and the countervailing power of labor was small in comparison.  At that time there was no real consumer power.  Capitalism had triggered the fall, and some other thing needed to fix it.  In my opinion, that was the essence of the last 4T.
And capitalism is a big part of the problem now.

This pandemic is trigger. It does not have to lead to 4T-like changes. Last cycle we had lots of triggers, 1873, 1893, 1907, 1919, 1929, 1941, one about every 14 years. the 4th one began the process that created the structural change. This time we've had triggers in 1971, 1987, 2001, 2008, 2020, one about every dozen years. The first four didn't trigger the structural change that characterizes a 4T. Perhaps this one will.

What I am getting at is the generational aspect of the S&H model allows one to approximately date when triggers are supposed to trigger structural change. It eliminates the first two from consideration. Generational timing identifies 2001 and 2008 as the likely 4T triggers with 2020 really being too late. We now have 19 and 12 years of hindsight with which to evaluate what happened after 2001 and 2008.

Have there been substantive structural changes or efforts to solve the problems highlighted by the trigger?

How many Amendments have been passed since 2000?  None

Has there been a major change in government structure (e,g, end of absolute monarchy, independence, conversion of a federation into a nation, six fold increase in size of the national state, rise of a dictator, establishment of a theocracy, etc.) since 2000? No.

Has there been a crisis war since 2000? No.

Has there been a civil war, revolution, or foreign invasion? No.

Has there been a critical election, or the appearance of a Skowronek Reconstructive president like FDR, Lincoln or Washington? No.

Things along these lines can still happen and likely will, but they will not have been triggered by events in 2001 or 2008. That ship has sailed. The new trigger candidate is 2020, unless a Biden administration is elected that surprises by being transformational, or Trump remains in power after January, making it 2016.

The point is a 4t start in 2016 or 2020 begins to stress the generational concept. particularly when you consider that there exists a self-conception among late adolescents and young adults that they comprise a new generation, GenZ, distinct from Millennials, whose first cohort was in 1996.  This would firmly put the 4T start generation-wise in 2001, which subsequent events have ruled out as a 4T in terms of historical impact.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: I'm a sceptic that the 4th Turning started in 2008 - by Mikebert - 06-27-2020, 02:41 PM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  There Will Not Be A Triumphant End To This Turning galaxy 33 14,900 11-22-2023, 08:47 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  War & Military Turning & Generational Issues JDG 66 5 5,355 03-24-2022, 03:01 PM
Last Post: JDG 66
  First Turning "purge" Teejay 82 47,750 03-14-2022, 09:28 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  The Civil War 4th turning Eric the Green 6 4,112 11-11-2021, 06:12 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Generational Constellation Math For The Current And Next Turning galaxy 8 3,659 11-09-2021, 01:51 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  What the next First Turning won't be like Mickey123 145 62,097 10-07-2021, 01:15 AM
Last Post: Eric the Green
  In What Turning do Neighborhood Communities come back? AspieMillennial 7 4,299 05-05-2020, 10:15 PM
Last Post: beechnut79
  Why does the Fourth Turning seem to take Forever? AspieMillennial 22 9,877 01-19-2020, 03:30 PM
Last Post: Anthony '58
  Does the UK disprove the Fourth Turning? AspieMillennial 14 6,718 01-02-2020, 12:14 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  What will happen when this turning ends? AspieMillennial 25 10,418 12-30-2019, 02:24 PM
Last Post: David Horn

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)