(08-31-2021, 03:47 AM)justpassingthrough Wrote: It's been several years since Ipostedranted here, and my views on the cyclical theories have continued to evolve. The thought I have now is that today bears a startling resemblance to the late 1970s. And that leads me to think that if you want to know what a "Crisis" is going to look like, you have to look at the end of the preceding "Awakening". Meaning, this is not a replay of the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, or WWII, as we all speculated for years. If you had to give this Crisis a name, the best one available is probably "Jimmy Carter". On steroids.
Awakening era? Do you see any Boom-like or Missionary-like behavior in the Millennial Generation? Do you see them taking it out on Boomers except if the Boomers have done grave misconduct? Do you see any countercultural activity? Do you see them reaching for the stars with their minds but not with engineering plans? OK, they have rejected Donald Trump... but then again, you are talking about someone discreditable, a pompous fool.
Joe Biden is on the Silent/Boom cusp. Somehow people his age don't become President, but he is still only four years older than Donald Judas Iscariot Trump. If he is to be a disaster as President in accordance with the generational theory, then the analogue would not be to Jimmy Carter at the tail end of the last Awakening Era but instead to James Buchanan, who utterly bungled the run-up to the Civil War by appeasing the slave-owning interests at every turn and giving up when those interests decided that they could get no more. I have yet to see Biden appeasing any questionable interests. He has not shown sympathy figured in the Capitol Putsch or the Michigan Plot. (The Michigan Plot was some Militia types who are accused of plotting to kidnap the Governor of Michigan to lynch her for pushing masks, store closures, and social distancing to prevent the spread of the dangerous COVID-19 virus. Trump opposed that, and so did that Militia group).* We can consider ourselves fortunate that the plot was foiled or that it isn't as bad as the media tell us that it was. Joe Biden has been quiet about the Michigan plot and the Capitol Putsch, likely expecting the courts to settle it.
Your theories on the generational theory have evolved into something completely out of line with any orthodox explanation. We know what an Awakening Era looks like, and nothing after about 1985 resembles an Awakening Era. In the early 1980s the only Awakening was of the Religious Right in part as the Born-Again movement. Jesus Freaks, that sort of thing. It was arch-conservative, and it also coincided with many Boomers adopting country music as "theirs". The final phase of the Boom Awakening was arch-conservative in politics and culture. To be sure, orthodoxy in the context of some school of thought may itself be wrong and even demonstrate how wrong the theory is, especially if the theory is itself bunk.
Accepting that the first four years of the Reagan Presidency are part of some reactionary phase of an Awakening among Boomers that made possible the shift of most of the white South (Mountain and Deep) from Democratic-leaning to Republican-leaning as well as hostile to science in any struggle between science and fundamentalist beliefs can explain much. Such is a huge shift in the culture of much of America. Such a trend can either spread, consolidate, or reverse; it could even be a topic for a thread of the theory and its interpretation. Maybe we liberals have missed something because we cannot understand Christian Protestant fundamentalism adequately because we see it more alien to our minds than we see people different in other things.
Quote:I think it would be fair to call WWI the end of the previous Awakening, and WWII was the climax of the Crisis. The technologies and totalitarian ideologies that produced WWII were born in the preceding Progressive Era, and produced WWI, the USSR, eugenics, human flight, prohibition, and so on by the end of that Awakening.
When the Missionary Awakening ended seems murky to me. It could be the Panic of 1907, which preceded the First World War by seven years. European cycles are not quite like ours, but that may not explain everything. The glorious expressions of late-wave Impressionism, early expressionism, the last music of Gustav Mahler, and some daring poetry and literature may have been a cover for some nasty tendencies in European politics. Except for the Balkans and the establishment of a united Germany and a united Italy, the European map of 1913 looks much like that of 1816. Much was still a settlement of the post-Napoleonic world. Many national groups were under the harsh rule of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Russia and wanted out. Technology had advanced, and so did productivity. Even so, much of the political arrangement was rotten.
World War I was a Third Turning war during a degenerate stage of the cycle. (If one is to speak of a Regeneracy, then most likely such is an escape from its antithesis, a Degeneracy) European cycles were not together in 1914; Russia was in approaching dangerous stage between a 3T and a 4T, when a nation is most seriously polarized into opposing camps that seek the elimination of each other, when political consensus is falling apart, when leadership is at its least competent, and social cohesion is disintegrating. Leaders have excessive confidence in their ability, and that is proved catastrophically wrong. A Crisis war that starts at such a time, as did the American Civil War, becomes carnage. Russia was roughly sixty years from its last Crisis Era by the "teen" years of the twentieth century, the last Crisis being the Crimean War. Sixty years from the end of a Crisis Era puts one at the beginning of the next one.
American leadership in 1861 and Russian leadership in 1914 had their differences, but in Russia it was far worse. Russia had little support for middle-of-the-road politics, with the country centrifugally dividing into the extreme Right associated with the Tsar and his most bloodthirsty flunkies and the revolutionary socialists, most importantly the Bolsheviks. Lenin was the most extreme figure of the Left to have lived to that time. I need not go into the details of the collapse of the incompetent Romanov court, but I can say that once Nicholas II was overthrown in a bourgeois coup, the leadership was in an impossible position of establishing a new social order during a military calamity. Within a few months, Lenin's Bolsheviks stormed the Winter Palace where the elected parliament legislated... and took over. (a hint: when I saw the Capitol Putsch I saw the October Revolution in Russia 1917 as an analogue). The Hard Right (the Whites) that had been shoved aside became the predominant opposition to Lenin's new "socialist" regime known as the "Reds" and shoved the few Russian moderates aside. The Whites saw the Reds as callous, amoral, ruthless, murderous thugs, which is exactly how the Reds saw the Whites. For once they were right about each other. Both would have exterminated the other side to the last person and symbol. I need not go on here about Russia, as the rest is basic history.
OK, so what made Marxism-Leninism and the Soviet Union possible? The rottenness of Imperial Russia, a political order that allowed no democracy, saw industrialization solely as a means of enriching elites and creating military prowess, and treated its large Jewish minority badly enough that many of them gravitated to the most ferocious ideology against the Romanov dynasty and its retainers: Marxism. Of course, Karl Marx himself had written his Communist Manifesto in 1848 and Capital late in his life. He gets credit or blame for offering some core ideas to Lenin.
Quote:So we have been, stupidly, for years, predicting something that looks like past Crises. When we already know what the issues are. All you have to do is look at the 1960s and 1970s. Mao-inspired neo-Marxist identity politics, cultural revolution and terrorism, economic and cultural decline, the disintegration and demoralization of American society, and of American geopolitical standing, allowed by widespread narcissistic hedonism, greed and corruption. That's Boomers. Always has been, always will be.
Most of us recognize that the last three American Crises are quite different. The American Revolution was a colonial revolt against a distant King who sought to micromanage affairs in the Colonies contrary to the abilities and desires of 'his' subjects. Until the American Revolution the British Crown had largely left the thirteen colonies from Maine (then a part of Massachusetts) to Georgia do much on their own. America got anarchy with its independence and established a Constitution to unite the former colonies by a lawful federal system. The America Civil War would determine whether a united America could survive with slavery that made a mockery of American claims to freedom and democracy. The Second World War would determine whether the demonic Axis Powers would rule the world or be obliterated.
Obviously Americans need not concern themselves with attaining independence this time. That is settled. Slavery is not an issue this time. Obviously we are not going to have Germany, Italy, and Japan as enemies. .
Quote:Economic crashes, pandemics, and technological disruption are the kinds of things that happen throughout history. What is unique to the current moment is the response to those things by the current generational constellation. S&H often seemed to suggest that these generations would "rise to the occasion" and become something they never were before. Nope. Boomers are Boomers. This is the world they created. In response to the 2008 crash (which I now commit to as the beginning of the 4T), the preceding Awakening imposed itself on the world in full force, in the form of Barack Obama. He was the embodiment and messiah of everything the Awakening was about. So instead of fixing the economy, we got Obamacare and anti-American, intersectional identity politics. And now we fly BLM and rainbow flags at American embassies while the world laughs at us.
Financial panics of 1857, 1929, and 2008 left no question that business as usual was no longer possible. Those came at the end of 3T's and presaged great trouble. People can tolerate much nastiness when a speculative boom distracts people from social rot with plentiful easy money from simply buying real estate. But those speculative booms devour capital that might otherwise be invested in plant and equipment, research and development, or in the formation of small business. Expecting a speculative boom to go well is like feeding lobster to the ravenous end of your pooch and expecting it to come out the other end of the dog as something precious. When the Crash comes, everything rotten becomes obvious. A hint: Satan Incarnate took over Germany as the result of such an economic meltdown.
Barack Obama is not a Boomer. He is more like the typical President who follows a Crisis Era. Just consider how Obama matches up to Eisenhower in their four elections and how poorly the 1976 (Carter versus Ford) predicts the results of Obama's Presidential elections:
Quote:It may be premature, but I expect historians to hold Eisenhower and Obama similar in quality.
Despite the great differences in curriculae vitae, Eisenhower and Obama seem to have something very much in common: both are members of Reactive generations. 60-ish Reactives (George Washington, John Adams, Grover Cleveland, Harry Truman, and Dwight Eisenhower) may be the best sorts of leaders that Reactive leaders can be: cautious, mellow, respectful of precedent, and more trusting in legality than in the contemporary passion. Even if Barack Obama is one of the youngest Presidents ever elected and won't reach or surpass 60 as President (barring an amendment to undo the 22nd Amendment) he seems to act like someone in his sixties.
(The worst Reactive leaders are amoral, angry, cynical, bigoted leaders with an agenda of seeking revenge against real and imagined personal enemies -- like Adolf Hitler and Mao Zedong, puppets of tyrannical leaders such as Vidkun Quisling and Mátyás Rákosi, and such brutal functionaries of tyrants as Andrei Vishinsky and Lavrenti Beria). When all is said and done, I think that the Obama and Eisenhower Presidencies are going to look like good analogues. Both Presidents are chilly rationalists. Both respect legal precedents more than they trust legislation and the transitory will of the people in states. Both are practically scandal-free administrations. Both started with a troublesome war that both found their way out of. Neither did much to 'grow' the strength of their Parties in either House of Congress.
The definitive moderate Republican may have been Dwight Eisenhower, and I have heard plenty of Democrats praise the Eisenhower Presidency. He went along with Supreme Court rulings that outlawed segregationist practices, stayed clear of the McCarthy bandwagon, and let McCarthy implode.
gray -- did not vote in 1952 or 1956
white -- Eisenhower twice, Obama twice
deep blue -- Republican all four elections
light blue -- Republican all but 2008 (I assume that greater Omaha went for Ike twice)
light green -- Eisenhower once, Stevenson once, Obama never
dark green -- Stevenson twice, Obama never
pink -- Stevenson twice, Obama once
No state voted Democratic all four times, so no state is in deep red.
(This site uses the very old red for Democrats and blue for Republicans... I do not make waves about that in that website).
To be sure, one would expect any winning President to win almost entirely states that FDR won in 1936 (all then voting except Vermont and Maine), that Nixon won in 1972 (all but Massachusetts), or Reagan won in 1980 (all but Minnesota). But the overlay between Obama and Eisenhower fits far better includes all four such states that FDR, Nixon, and Reagan won in nearly-complete wins of the entire USA. As another coincidence, Eisenhower was the first Republican to win Virginia since 1928 (24 years) and Obama was the first Democrat to win the Old Dominion since 1964 (44 years) -- and both won the state twice.
Now, Carter vs. Obama:
If anyone has any doubt that the Presidential Election of 1976 is ancient history for all practical purposes:
Carter 1976, Obama 2008/2012
Carter 1976, Obama twice red
Carter 1976, Obama once pink
Carter 1976, Obama never yellow
Ford 1976, Obama twice white
Ford 1976, Obama once light blue
Ford 1976, Obama never blue
....As you can see, Carter lost a raft of states (among them California, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, Connecticut, Vermont, and Maine) that Democratic nominees for President have not lost after 1988, and some states (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and New Mexico) that Democrats have not LOST in Presidential wins. On the other side, Carter was the last Democrat to win Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, or Texas. Barring a major realignment of the states in partisan identity or an electoral blowout, Republicans are unlikely to win more than a state or two in white and Democrats are unlikely to win more than a state or two in yellow for the next couple of decades..
Obama may be awkward in the generational theory, but so is Biden, for where they are placed. It is possible that Obama delayed or even forestalled the damage that one expects from the long economic meltdown that follows a panic at the end of a speculative boom. Maybe America did not do the structural reforms necessary to establish the sort of political order and economic policies necessary for a better America starting with the economy, like having a tax system that favors small businesses instead of corporations on the brink of death from bureaucratic bloat and the inability to innovate their way out of decay. But such is what Americans wanted in 2009 and 2010 and when they got it, the moneyed interests had the means with which to buy the political process. Those interests can express themselves with the quip that the oil billionaire H.L. Hunt expressed:
I believe in the Golden Rule: he who owns the gold makes the rules.
... Most countries have "socialized medicine", and even we do to some extent, with the military and with Medicare. If you wonder about Medicare, it is because the elderly were typically without funds for paying their medical bills. Free Enterprise was delighted to "socialize" medical care of the elderly. Obama missed out on the Boom Awakening, for better or worse. He long kept us guessing on what his favorite music is.
If you want to give blame for identity politics -- those were already in place long before Barack Obama became President.
Quote:The economy is in shambles, the US is incompetent in foreign affairs and the society is disintegrating domestically, while the crusaders of the Awakening ride triumphantly over the cliff. I am deeply disturbed by the actions of the "ruling elite" over the last 13 years, and the last two years, particularly in Washington, Silicon Valley and blue state governments. But I increasingly see the real end game here being one of delusional, megalomanical narcissists slamming face first into the brick wall of reality. The response of that elite and their dutiful followers to things not going their way, to their Utopia slipping from their grasp, has been startlingly incompetent, panicked, and frenzied. They have lashed out with outrageous authoritarianism, but also cower in their bunkers, wearing three masks if they dare to go outdoors. George Orwell never foresaw Big Brother residing in San Francisco, with the thought police stomping their boot to promote non-reproductive sexuality, obesity, open borders and a senile president. But here we are.
At some point we are going to need a way in which to scale back Big Government. The Left found Big Government necessary for a Welfare State that got in the way of plutocrats who have typically sought to intensify the suffering of the poor so that the poor will work harder, longer, and under harsher conditions for less just to survive. Then the Right found that Big Government could offer rich rewards from wars for profit, the means of stifling competition to monopoly, lucrative graft, and sweetheart deals while rescuing corporate entities that would otherwise die. But when?
A hint: many medical practices depend upon Social Security and Medicaid. Many landlords profit from Section 8 housing. I can assure you that an arch-conservative general retailer such as Wal*Mart, which sells much food on food aid, much prefers that people swipe a food card for food than that they swipe food from the shelves as shoplifters.
The wave of the future in advanced industrial countries seems to be the "social market state" that recognizes that consumption drives the economy more than does production. We may be stuck with the welfare state, but crony capitalism must die.
Obviously most of us vote wrong in about half the Presidential elections, so we can't quite expect the government to do what we want all the time.
As for Orwellian stuff -- I have nicknamed FoX News Channel as the "Fox Newspeak Channel" for setting the mood (have a crime story before political news that involves anyone not reliably right-wing) for its viewers . That is a modified version of the Two Minutes Hate in Nineteen Eighty-Four. Donald Trump had a personality cult around him -- and it still has followers.
Quote:Voices from other countries, especially longstanding allies, are increasingly concerned that the US is falling apart. They are increasingly seeking to protect themselves from the fallout of the disintegration of the nation they used to look to for leadership. For others, in poorer countries, there is a rejection of "Americanism", which they used to aspire to. They'll take our money where they can get it, but any moral reputation the US used to posses is utterly gone. They see our tanks riding in with rainbow flags and say, "no thank you".
Speaking of long-standing allies... rumors are that Queen Elizabeth II found President Trump highly unpleasant. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, probably the most brilliant politician in our time, chose to wait him out. She can deal with Obama and with Biden fairly and squarely, which is the only way to do things. What is so horrible about homosexuality in itself?
Quote:I don't yet know how to contextualize Trump. That has been a bizarre episode in history, and it's possible he may run again in 2024 (and win). But he is a component of the Boomer id, sabotaged by the same afflictions of the rest of his generation. He tried to combat the dominant elite by feeding their own vomit back to them, with his own style of narcissism and self-aggrandizement. In that sense, they're all the same.
Well, I can. He is an extreme narcissist and possibly a sociopath. His type hurts people who did nothing wrong. Maybe he has learned how to appeal to people that technological progress and social change have left behind. I've seen that in the history of may countries, and it never works out well. Donald Trump is as much an elitist as anyone, and his elitist role ensures that he need never humble himself. If he dislikes what someone else tells him he turns against that person. Nobody can know it all, and Donald Trump is arrogant enough to contradict even medical experts because what he wants to believe is sacred.
The fault with the Boom Generation is in its commercial, administrative, and cultural elites. The rest of us must either avoid them to keep some dignity or defer to them for the prospect of some goodies or opportunities. The antithesis of narcissism is humility, a trait that applies to Donald Trump about as well as "warmth" applies to liquid helium. The best role in life for a Boomer not part of the elite and exempt from degradation by having a well-paying profession has been as a thing-oriented person who must rarely deal with others. Anyone else must bow and scrape to someone who thinks that his feces has a delightful aroma because it comes from his "special" anal sphincter.
Quote:I know what the end game looks like, if the nation survives. Humble traditionalism, a quest for stability and normality, and a rejection of self-righteous crusades to "Change the World ™". But I'm not at all sure as of now that it will survive. What I am 99% sure of (now, as I always have been) is that civil war is not a possibility, despite the feverish speculation of some. It looks more like the fall of the Roman Empire.
America does not have one specific tradition. It has multiple traditions, not always suitable for amalgamation into other traditions, but no less valid even if exotic. Most of us not tied to one of those cultures ends up picking and choosing. You ought to see my freezer.
*As a strict rule I do not predict the results of any criminal proceeding. I presume innocence until conviction in a court of law or in the case of deceased suspects a connection of damning evidence or testimony to the deceased as an "un-indicted co-conspirator" such as Hitler, Himmler, or Goebbels at the Nuremberg trials.
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.
