British Cycles 6 Turnings

[Eric the Green]

(10-30-2019, 08:10 AM)Hintergrund Wrote: I dunno. Looks shoehorned to me, just for the sake of having saecula of more equal length.

Why does neoliberalism start in 1973? Except in Chile and some universities it wasn't exactly widespread. Some deregulation started under Carter, and Keynesianism was bankrupt, that's for sure, but I wouldn't say it really took off before Reagan.

What signs of an Awakening were there in 1877, instead of 1886?

Why do you start the Transcendental Awakening twenty years earlier than S&H?

Finally, your "Turnings" can be as short as ten years or as long as 17 years.

You shouldn't have started with a list of Turnings/Generations, but by collecting material to show why your Turnings/Generations are different.

In short: Not even amateur historian.

I haven't looked at Jessquo's ideas yet, but it sounds like you make good points. Discussion is good though

Basically I think the civil war anomaly, though still an anomaly to an extent, is better resolved by seeing that the 1850s were part of the 4T, just like the 2010s have been, and adjusting back from there. What was happening was that The West since the Enlightenment and Revolution was shifting the ongoing spiral process of change and progress (the saeculum) into a higher and faster gear. It took longer for such people as the racist society in Dixie to be taken along for the ride. The saeculum is like a hurricane that is becoming more well-defined with stiffer winds in modern times.

In affect, I think the S&H scheme (by making the pre-18th century seacula longer than the modern) takes account of the great shift of the Revolution, which created a different society with a greater thrust of movement than the royalist and religious society of the agricultural ages going back to classical times and beyond (the Romans having first conceived or first perceived and named the saeculum). Making all the saecula before 1700 the same length does not take account of this observation.