09-09-2019, 08:22 AM
(09-07-2019, 05:00 PM)taramarie Wrote:(09-07-2019, 09:33 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:(09-06-2019, 08:04 AM)taramarie Wrote:(09-06-2019, 07:08 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Could the cycle be that simple -- hormones in their own cycle?
No far more complex things going on of course. But then again I totally don't believe in this theory anyway.
Or could it be that the hormone cycle is a consequence of position in the saeculum? Could it be a feedback mechanism?
Typically every stage of the saeculum has at least three generations of adults with influence from workers starting families to geezers wielding the last vestiges of power and influence in society.
Sometimes we confuse cause and effect.
Early motherhood is a norm when bread-winning husbands are paid well and non-working wives are common... and teenage marriage becomes economically viable due to a commonness of good pay for unskilled labor. But get hard times and people defer marriage and childbearing, because hardship the economic norm and women must go to work to ensure that two low incomes can be equivalent to one solid income. Low breast-feeding rates may relate to the "scientific" (really, commercial) advocacy of using cow's milk or baby formulas instead of relying upon breast milk. Alcohol and drug consumption fall off as they become old-hat and more infamous for ruin than delightful for fun. (Drug overdoses and people dying of binge drinking in their thirties make an effective warning to find fun and enlightenment by other means). In a 3T, people still rely upon hedonism because they are so spiritually-dead or spiritually-nuked that there is nothing else. When hedonism fails -- about when an economic bubble bursts (1857, 1929, 2008) -- then comes the time of the locust, the 4T.
Above all, populist nationalism appears when "stay-the-course" classical liberals have created extreme economic failure by telling people to go ahead and invest in bubbles that ultimately devour capital and quit giving a rate of return on capital. Or as Will Rogers put it during the early stages of the Great Depression: people were concerned about the rate of return on their capital when they instead should have been concerned about the return of their capital. Populist nationalism often results in scapegoating of what had recently been model minorities (like the definitive model minority, German Jews under Antichrist Hitler). The "model minorities" get the blame for what a bubble did even if the model minorities had nothing special to do with it.
As said I don't believe in that, but believe other things are going on here. I seriously don't believe in a hormone theory regarding generations.
As I think of it, hormones are more likely effect than cause, but they may intensify behaviors within the generational cycle. We may have a feed-back loop, at least temporarily.
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.