now that I think about it, we were quite the 4T nation for a while (very briefly)

[Eric the Green]

(09-29-2021, 12:23 PM)nguyenivy Wrote:

(09-27-2021, 09:43 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-27-2021, 12:08 AM)galaxy Wrote:

(09-25-2021, 01:20 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: (the Millennial Generation is clearly Civic by now)

I'm glad someone else has noticed this. The Millennial Generation has transitioned during the last few years, and is much more obviously Civic now than it was previously. Of course it always was, but in 2014 one had to look much more closely and carefully to see it. Now it's impossible to ignore. I think the peak Civicness is probably those born between 1988 and 1996 or so. Perhaps the seemingly "stepwise" transition into this turning has stratified the generation a bit. Those born before 1988 are noticeably less collectivist and conformist, while those born 1996 and later are activists, with a general "darker" mood (that is, more cynical and less optimistic, but still just as collective), which might be partly responsible for the fact that wider society still perceives the Millennial generation as ending around 1997 or so (with the incorrect designation of memory and understanding of 9/11 as a generational fault line, rather than what it is, an intragenerational* divide).

It's clear that the 1988-1996 group are the ones "enforcing the rules of the new order." Or, at least, they're by far the most enthusiastic about it.

I hate the new order. What do I do about it? Every solution being proposed to this mess are things I hate.

Isn't the 'new order' not established until the 1T? We may not yet even know what the new order is yet. If we still have the rest of this decade (2020s) in a 4T, then there is still plenty of time for new norms to be established. I think given we are still in the pandemic, it is too early for a new order to be in place that will stick. We'll see once the pandemic is over how much of a new order in society we really have. I thought for instance that remote work was going to stick around as a permanent thing only to see many offices requiring people back on-site now (just with a vaccine in them + maybe masks for now). Society still seems to be trying to revert to pre-pandemic conventions even in instances where the new option is easier or higher quality. Remote work also allows less pollution from commuting, which ties into the other big issue we have: climate change.

George Monbiot has been describing a search for a new "narrative" that would provide guidance and motivation for a new order or new direction of society. Whether this comes in a 4T or a 1T he doesn't say, but it's clear we haven't quite found it yet. We are using old policies to meet our needs, and they are stale and unworkable now. He contrasts this with the Keynesian narrative from the 1930s and neoliberalism from the 1980s that provided the older narratives. He says that these stories or directions for society is based on the timeless narrative of the hero's journey, similar to what Joseph Campbell described. He calls it the restoration story. It is a universal story, with a common structure, but the contents change in order to meet the times. He describes this process in this TED talk.





Another explanation here: https://youtu.be/ARiaiyHrijw

Another version: https://youtu.be/jjiRUP6TWhk

This is my attempt: https://philosopherswheel.com/politics-a...0narrative The ecological principle seems to me a basis for the new order and new story developing.

Aspie's restoration story is mentioned too, and that goes back 2000 years: the Bible story or the Jesus story. For many of us though, that story also is too old and doesn't meet the needs of the time. The religious right that Aspie upholds is what many in Dixie and from older generations uphold as the needed restoration, and this story has already been told in the 1980s as part of the neoliberal story from Reagan's time, but it is largely not being accepted by his millennial generation. But something similar, a restoration of belonging, is part of what Monbiot describes.

The restoration of spirituality is part of what I think a new order needs, and many Boomers sought to provide this. But further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But meanwhile the restoration of the value of life and our interdependence on Nature and each other, as a model for organizing society, is what today's generations might agree upon as climate change and pandemics continue to spread disorder across the land.

[pbrower2a]

(09-29-2021, 12:23 PM)nguyenivy Wrote:

(09-27-2021, 09:43 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-27-2021, 12:08 AM)galaxy Wrote:

(09-25-2021, 01:20 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: (the Millennial Generation is clearly Civic by now)

I'm glad someone else has noticed this. The Millennial Generation has transitioned during the last few years, and is much more obviously Civic now than it was previously. Of course it always was, but in 2014 one had to look much more closely and carefully to see it. Now it's impossible to ignore. I think the peak Civicness is probably those born between 1988 and 1996 or so. Perhaps the seemingly "stepwise" transition into this turning has stratified the generation a bit. Those born before 1988 are noticeably less collectivist and conformist, while those born 1996 and later are activists, with a general "darker" mood (that is, more cynical and less optimistic, but still just as collective), which might be partly responsible for the fact that wider society still perceives the Millennial generation as ending around 1997 or so (with the incorrect designation of memory and understanding of 9/11 as a generational fault line, rather than what it is, an intragenerational* divide).

It's clear that the 1988-1996 group are the ones "enforcing the rules of the new order." Or, at least, they're by far the most enthusiastic about it.

I hate the new order. What do I do about it? Every solution being proposed to this mess are things I hate.

Isn't the 'new order' not established until the 1T? We may not yet even know what the new order is yet. If we still have the rest of this decade (2020s) in a 4T, then there is still plenty of time for new norms to be established. I think given we are still in the pandemic, it is too early for a new order to be in place that will stick. We'll see once the pandemic is over how much of a new order in society we really have. I thought for instance that remote work was going to stick around as a permanent thing only to see many offices requiring people back on-site now (just with a vaccine in them + maybe masks for now). Society still seems to be trying to revert to pre-pandemic conventions even in instances where the new option is easier or higher quality. Remote work also allows less pollution from commuting, which ties into the other big issue we have: climate change.

Nobody forms the new order; it forms as the situation at the end of the Crisis congeals. Alternatives vanish suddenly, in part because people are no longer seeking to change the world except to feather their nests. They have seen more than enough change, and more change is chaos. So even if the end of the 4T is effectively the establishment of a quasi-Stalinist order as in central or Balkan Europe, it at least establishes the rules that most people can live with. The Crisis itself is discredited and another one is unwelcome even if people got the best possible results. Maybe, people think, they were just lucky. Even a Stalinist regime pays people to pick up the pieces and gets people back to work. People who learned their assumptions in the Old Order learn quickly what the new norms are. (Lenin great, royal family bad).

The Crisis of 1940 ended in Germany after the Berlin Airlift, when the Soviet occupiers sponsored the formation of the German Democratic Republic as the West introduced a currency reform that allowed a free market in most things. The split between Deutschmark and Ostmark effectively split Germany for forty years -- half a Saeculum -- economically as well as politically. 

Little gets stale faster than does Revolution.

[David Horn]

(09-29-2021, 12:23 PM)nguyenivy Wrote:

(09-27-2021, 09:43 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote: I hate the new order. What do I do about it? Every solution being proposed to this mess are things I hate.

Isn't the 'new order' not established until the 1T? We may not yet even know what the new order is yet. If we still have the rest of this decade (2020s) in a 4T, then there is still plenty of time for new norms to be established. I think given we are still in the pandemic, it is too early for a new order to be in place that will stick. We'll see once the pandemic is over how much of a new order in society we really have. I thought for instance that remote work was going to stick around as a permanent thing only to see many offices requiring people back on-site now (just with a vaccine in them + maybe masks for now). Society still seems to be trying to revert to pre-pandemic conventions even in instances where the new option is easier or higher quality. Remote work also allows less pollution from commuting, which ties into the other big issue we have: climate change.

I agree. The 1T is still arguable on many levels, and your example of remote work is trenchant. The last 1T was unexpected by the very people who created it, and it was the GI Bill and American dominance of the world's economy that made that true. What wil be the equivalent in the next 1T? Any wild guesses out there?

[Tim Randal Walker]

Within a few years the youngest Boomer cohorts-the late '50s cohorts-will reach their 65th birthday. Soon all the Prophets will be in old age, and we will soon see the oldest Boomers start die off.

[David Horn]

(09-30-2021, 10:22 AM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: Within a few years the youngest Boomer cohorts-the late '50s cohorts-will reach their 65th birthday.  Soon all the Prophets will be in old age, and we will soon see the oldest Boomers start die off.

We're already leaving the scene.  I'm surprised by how many of my HS classmates are already gone.  As '47 cohort I'm near the front of the line, but I feel pretty healthy overall.  Many others my age, not so much.

[pbrower2a]

(09-30-2021, 10:38 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(09-30-2021, 10:22 AM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: Within a few years the youngest Boomer cohorts-the late '50s cohorts-will reach their 65th birthday.  Soon all the Prophets will be in old age, and we will soon see the oldest Boomers start die off.

We're already leaving the scene.  I'm surprised by how many of my HS classmates are already gone.  As '47 cohort I'm near the front of the line, but I feel pretty healthy overall.  Many others my age, not so much.

Bad habits (drugs, smoking, alcoholism, fornicating) aren't good for an extended old age. Such risk-taking as bad driving isn't so great. Let's not forget poverty, which usually destroys any joie de vivre necessary for the motivation to stick around despite advanced age. Old age isn't too bad for those who have the means before their bodies give out. For the poor, old age is often a nightmare of fear, loneliness, and a lack of meaning. Then there are things for which nobody is at obvious fault, like diabetes and early-onset cancer, Parkinsonism, and dementia.  

The fastest disappearance of Boomers is most likely in the poorest parts of America: obviously the urban ghettos, but also the economically-ravaged Mountain and Deep South, and that could result in rapid changes in political life. The Millennial Generation is much less likely to believe in Protestant fundamentalism even there, and that could easily result in the demise of the Religious Right/Tea Party/Trump cult (it's hard to distinguish them) as means of achieving and holding power for the Right. (It pretends to be populist with its appeals to visceral concerns of abortion, homosexuality, and racism and is ineffective in stopping abortion, homosexuality, and miscegenation but is highly effective in serving reactionary economics. I'm not saying that I want to see economic leftism tied to reactionary social values and a rejection of reason. I ask white people in the Mountain and Deep South what big tax cuts for corporate interests that don't live in their area and the evisceration of labor rights do for them.

[AspieMillennial]

(09-29-2021, 12:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-29-2021, 12:23 PM)nguyenivy Wrote:

(09-27-2021, 09:43 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-27-2021, 12:08 AM)galaxy Wrote:

(09-25-2021, 01:20 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: (the Millennial Generation is clearly Civic by now)

I'm glad someone else has noticed this. The Millennial Generation has transitioned during the last few years, and is much more obviously Civic now than it was previously. Of course it always was, but in 2014 one had to look much more closely and carefully to see it. Now it's impossible to ignore. I think the peak Civicness is probably those born between 1988 and 1996 or so. Perhaps the seemingly "stepwise" transition into this turning has stratified the generation a bit. Those born before 1988 are noticeably less collectivist and conformist, while those born 1996 and later are activists, with a general "darker" mood (that is, more cynical and less optimistic, but still just as collective), which might be partly responsible for the fact that wider society still perceives the Millennial generation as ending around 1997 or so (with the incorrect designation of memory and understanding of 9/11 as a generational fault line, rather than what it is, an intragenerational* divide).

It's clear that the 1988-1996 group are the ones "enforcing the rules of the new order." Or, at least, they're by far the most enthusiastic about it.

I hate the new order. What do I do about it? Every solution being proposed to this mess are things I hate.

Isn't the 'new order' not established until the 1T? We may not yet even know what the new order is yet. If we still have the rest of this decade (2020s) in a 4T, then there is still plenty of time for new norms to be established. I think given we are still in the pandemic, it is too early for a new order to be in place that will stick. We'll see once the pandemic is over how much of a new order in society we really have. I thought for instance that remote work was going to stick around as a permanent thing only to see many offices requiring people back on-site now (just with a vaccine in them + maybe masks for now). Society still seems to be trying to revert to pre-pandemic conventions even in instances where the new option is easier or higher quality. Remote work also allows less pollution from commuting, which ties into the other big issue we have: climate change.

George Monbiot has been describing a search for a new "narrative" that would provide guidance and motivation for a new order or new direction of society. Whether this comes in a 4T or a 1T he doesn't say, but it's clear we haven't quite found it yet. We are using old policies to meet our needs, and they are stale and unworkable now. He contrasts this with the Keynesian narrative from the 1930s and neoliberalism from the 1980s that provided the older narratives. He says that these stories or directions for society is based on the timeless narrative of the hero's journey, similar to what Joseph Campbell described. He calls it the restoration story. It is a universal story, with a common structure, but the contents change in order to meet the times. He describes this process in this TED talk.





Another explanation here: https://youtu.be/ARiaiyHrijw

Another version: https://youtu.be/jjiRUP6TWhk

This is my attempt: https://philosopherswheel.com/politics-a...0narrative The ecological principle seems to me a basis for the new order and new story developing.

Aspie's restoration story is mentioned too, and that goes back 2000 years: the Bible story or the Jesus story. For many of us though, that story also is too old and doesn't meet the needs of the time. The religious right that Aspie upholds is what many in Dixie and from older generations uphold as the needed restoration, and this story has already been told in the 1980s as part of the neoliberal story from Reagan's time, but it is largely not being accepted by his millennial generation. But something similar, a restoration of belonging, is part of what Monbiot describes.

The restoration of spirituality is part of what I think a new order needs, and many Boomers sought to provide this. But further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But meanwhile the restoration of the value of life and our interdependence on Nature and each other, as a model for organizing society, is what today's generations might agree upon as climate change and pandemics continue to spread disorder across the land.

I don't think it has to wait for the new prophets to arrive. People in my generation who agree with me can get our spiritual needs met by living separately from the majority and cutting ourselves off from them. I don't see the point of waiting because by the time change happens I will be old or dead. Being around too many atheists or agnostics is bad for your relationship with God so anyone who insults my religion isn't worth being around IMO.

[pbrower2a]

I see no reason to believe that the Millennial Generation will be prophetic. They are not profoundly religious. The biggest religious innovators among American GI's were L. Ron Hubbard (yuck!) and Billy Graham (who was more an innovator in techniques of reaching people than in establishing any new or improved theology). Billy Graham seems to have been much less objectionable than other televangelists who followed him. (Billy Graham established some practices to keep himself from scandal: never promise medical miracles or personal wealth to an audience, separate himself from the money and let others do the financial choices -- he got a salary that did not depend upon the take, and never be alone with any female other than his wife. Also -- rely upon crowds to make participation less obviously personal, encourage people to rely upon their own local churches, and ensure that there are no obvious distractions. Were I a preacher who got to do religion on a large scale I would do much as Graham did.

If there should be any Millennial innovation in Christianity, then it will most be in fine-tuning the Christian message to fit people who have lived in a highly-secular world and find something missing. Any country in which Donald Trump can captivate 45% of the electorate has huge gaps in any collective soul.

[AspieMillennial]

(09-30-2021, 01:00 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: I see no reason to believe that the Millennial Generation will be prophetic. They are not profoundly religious. The biggest religious innovators among American GI's were L. Ron Hubbard (yuck!) and Billy Graham (who was more an innovator in techniques of reaching people than in establishing any new or improved theology). Billy Graham seems to have been much less objectionable than other televangelists who followed him. (Billy Graham established some practices to keep himself from scandal: never promise medical miracles or personal wealth to an audience, separate himself from the money and let others do the financial choices -- he got a salary that did not depend upon the take, and never be alone with any female other than his wife. Also -- rely upon crowds to make participation less obviously personal, encourage people to rely upon their own local churches, and ensure that there are no obvious distractions. Were I a preacher who got to do religion on a large scale I would do much as Graham did.

If there should be any Millennial innovation in Christianity, then it will most be in fine-tuning the Christian message to fit people who have lived in a highly-secular world and find something missing. Any country in which Donald Trump can captivate 45% of the electorate has huge gaps in any collective soul.

I agree that the Christian message should be fine tuned to fit people who lived in a highly secular world and find something missing. I'm not speaking of the majority and the collective though. I am speaking of the minority of Millennials who are religious. I don't know why we as the minority need to appeal to the majority. They are spiritually void people and don't even realize it but I don't think they ever will realize it. They are all about worshipping science as a religion and if they are depressed or anxious or falling apart, they reap what they sow. They decide to spread the emptiness of a world without God so any misery they come across is their own fault. I don't feel sympathy for them or their plight as it is self induced.

As long as the majority is hostile to my values, I see no sense in appealing to larger structures at all or even compromising. If changing the church doesn't get them to convert, the change is worthless IMO. The church should be changed and catered to the religious minority who don't leave their beliefs behind. Why bother catering to a mainstream that hates you? Even if they like you in the end, if they don't convert, the goal has not been reached. What people don't realize about religious Millennials, especially first wave ones, is that we exist. The only difference is our response to mainstream culture is to tune it out or criticize it whereas the Boomer response was to engage with it. We don't seek to be one with the secular majority and see ourselves like the early Christians being persecuted in the Roman Empire. Do you see them as ever realizing they have spiritual needs? I see the majority as hopeless don't know why I was sent into a world against my values.

[Eric the Green]

(09-30-2021, 12:08 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-29-2021, 12:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-29-2021, 12:23 PM)nguyenivy Wrote:

(09-27-2021, 09:43 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-27-2021, 12:08 AM)galaxy Wrote: I'm glad someone else has noticed this. The Millennial Generation has transitioned during the last few years, and is much more obviously Civic now than it was previously. Of course it always was, but in 2014 one had to look much more closely and carefully to see it. Now it's impossible to ignore. I think the peak Civicness is probably those born between 1988 and 1996 or so. Perhaps the seemingly "stepwise" transition into this turning has stratified the generation a bit. Those born before 1988 are noticeably less collectivist and conformist, while those born 1996 and later are activists, with a general "darker" mood (that is, more cynical and less optimistic, but still just as collective), which might be partly responsible for the fact that wider society still perceives the Millennial generation as ending around 1997 or so (with the incorrect designation of memory and understanding of 9/11 as a generational fault line, rather than what it is, an intragenerational* divide).

It's clear that the 1988-1996 group are the ones "enforcing the rules of the new order." Or, at least, they're by far the most enthusiastic about it.

I hate the new order. What do I do about it? Every solution being proposed to this mess are things I hate.

Isn't the 'new order' not established until the 1T? We may not yet even know what the new order is yet. If we still have the rest of this decade (2020s) in a 4T, then there is still plenty of time for new norms to be established. I think given we are still in the pandemic, it is too early for a new order to be in place that will stick. We'll see once the pandemic is over how much of a new order in society we really have. I thought for instance that remote work was going to stick around as a permanent thing only to see many offices requiring people back on-site now (just with a vaccine in them + maybe masks for now). Society still seems to be trying to revert to pre-pandemic conventions even in instances where the new option is easier or higher quality. Remote work also allows less pollution from commuting, which ties into the other big issue we have: climate change.

George Monbiot has been describing a search for a new "narrative" that would provide guidance and motivation for a new order or new direction of society. Whether this comes in a 4T or a 1T he doesn't say, but it's clear we haven't quite found it yet. We are using old policies to meet our needs, and they are stale and unworkable now. He contrasts this with the Keynesian narrative from the 1930s and neoliberalism from the 1980s that provided the older narratives. He says that these stories or directions for society is based on the timeless narrative of the hero's journey, similar to what Joseph Campbell described. He calls it the restoration story. It is a universal story, with a common structure, but the contents change in order to meet the times. He describes this process in this TED talk.





Another explanation here: https://youtu.be/ARiaiyHrijw

Another version: https://youtu.be/jjiRUP6TWhk

This is my attempt: https://philosopherswheel.com/politics-a...0narrative  The ecological principle seems to me a basis for the new order and new story developing.

Aspie's restoration story is mentioned too, and that goes back 2000 years: the Bible story or the Jesus story. For many of us though, that story also is too old and doesn't meet the needs of the time. The religious right that Aspie upholds is what many in Dixie and from older generations uphold as the needed restoration, and this story has already been told in the 1980s as part of the neoliberal story from Reagan's time, but it is largely not being accepted by his millennial generation. But something similar, a restoration of belonging, is part of what Monbiot describes.

The restoration of spirituality is part of what I think a new order needs, and many Boomers sought to provide this. But further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But meanwhile the restoration of the value of life and our interdependence on Nature and each other, as a model for organizing society, is what today's generations might agree upon as climate change and pandemics continue to spread disorder across the land.

I don't think it has to wait for the new prophets to arrive. People in my generation who agree with me can get our spiritual needs met by living separately from the majority and cutting ourselves off from them. I don't see the point of waiting because by the time change happens I will be old or dead. Being around too many atheists or agnostics is bad for your relationship with God so anyone who insults my religion isn't worth being around IMO.

Further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But "new order" here refers to a majority consensus and shapes the predominant movements in society, especially political, economic and cultural/social ones. You can continue to pursue and develop your religion and relationship to God among your minority of believers, but you can't hope for it to become part of a restoration narrative during this 4T.

Your more restrictive, doctrinaire, dogmatic approach to religion, especially one able to be imposed upon others, at the expense of democracy, may never be the majority consensus narrative or worldview again in The West or most of the Orient. But that does not mean at all that spirituality won't assume a greater role and position in culture and society than it has now within today's predominantly secular, pro-scientific society of millennials and the fourth turning. Spirituality and even relationship with God is not limited to the sort of religion that you believe in.

[AspieMillennial]

(09-30-2021, 06:58 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-30-2021, 12:08 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-29-2021, 12:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-29-2021, 12:23 PM)nguyenivy Wrote:

(09-27-2021, 09:43 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote: I hate the new order. What do I do about it? Every solution being proposed to this mess are things I hate.

Isn't the 'new order' not established until the 1T? We may not yet even know what the new order is yet. If we still have the rest of this decade (2020s) in a 4T, then there is still plenty of time for new norms to be established. I think given we are still in the pandemic, it is too early for a new order to be in place that will stick. We'll see once the pandemic is over how much of a new order in society we really have. I thought for instance that remote work was going to stick around as a permanent thing only to see many offices requiring people back on-site now (just with a vaccine in them + maybe masks for now). Society still seems to be trying to revert to pre-pandemic conventions even in instances where the new option is easier or higher quality. Remote work also allows less pollution from commuting, which ties into the other big issue we have: climate change.

George Monbiot has been describing a search for a new "narrative" that would provide guidance and motivation for a new order or new direction of society. Whether this comes in a 4T or a 1T he doesn't say, but it's clear we haven't quite found it yet. We are using old policies to meet our needs, and they are stale and unworkable now. He contrasts this with the Keynesian narrative from the 1930s and neoliberalism from the 1980s that provided the older narratives. He says that these stories or directions for society is based on the timeless narrative of the hero's journey, similar to what Joseph Campbell described. He calls it the restoration story. It is a universal story, with a common structure, but the contents change in order to meet the times. He describes this process in this TED talk.





Another explanation here: https://youtu.be/ARiaiyHrijw

Another version: https://youtu.be/jjiRUP6TWhk

This is my attempt: https://philosopherswheel.com/politics-a...0narrative  The ecological principle seems to me a basis for the new order and new story developing.

Aspie's restoration story is mentioned too, and that goes back 2000 years: the Bible story or the Jesus story. For many of us though, that story also is too old and doesn't meet the needs of the time. The religious right that Aspie upholds is what many in Dixie and from older generations uphold as the needed restoration, and this story has already been told in the 1980s as part of the neoliberal story from Reagan's time, but it is largely not being accepted by his millennial generation. But something similar, a restoration of belonging, is part of what Monbiot describes.

The restoration of spirituality is part of what I think a new order needs, and many Boomers sought to provide this. But further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But meanwhile the restoration of the value of life and our interdependence on Nature and each other, as a model for organizing society, is what today's generations might agree upon as climate change and pandemics continue to spread disorder across the land.

I don't think it has to wait for the new prophets to arrive. People in my generation who agree with me can get our spiritual needs met by living separately from the majority and cutting ourselves off from them. I don't see the point of waiting because by the time change happens I will be old or dead. Being around too many atheists or agnostics is bad for your relationship with God so anyone who insults my religion isn't worth being around IMO.

Further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But "new order" here refers to a majority consensus and shapes the predominant movements in society, especially political, economic and cultural/social ones. You can continue to pursue and develop your religion and relationship to God among your minority of believers, but you can't hope for it to become part of a restoration narrative during this 4T.

Your more restrictive, doctrinaire, dogmatic approach to religion, especially one able to be imposed upon others, at the expense of democracy, may never be the majority consensus narrative or worldview again in The West or most of the Orient. But that does not mean at all that spirituality won't assume a greater role and position in culture and society than it has now within today's predominantly secular, pro-scientific society of millennials and the fourth turning. Spirituality and even relationship with God is not limited to the sort of religion that you believe in.

Why wouldn't it though? The traditional Catholics among my generation can convert the children of the secularists who see their parents as having empty values. The empty void their kids feel is something we can use to mass convert. This conversion can happen in the 2T. Then we can use that as a springboard to make the secular Millennials live by these rules and even convert because they want to conform. It will be justice after seeing Christians mocked and shunned by the normal culture. The secular Millennials that abused religious Millennials will suffer the consequences when the backlash happens.

[pbrower2a]

(09-30-2021, 07:23 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-30-2021, 06:58 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-30-2021, 12:08 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-29-2021, 12:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-29-2021, 12:23 PM)nguyenivy Wrote: Isn't the 'new order' not established until the 1T? We may not yet even know what the new order is yet. If we still have the rest of this decade (2020s) in a 4T, then there is still plenty of time for new norms to be established. I think given we are still in the pandemic, it is too early for a new order to be in place that will stick. We'll see once the pandemic is over how much of a new order in society we really have. I thought for instance that remote work was going to stick around as a permanent thing only to see many offices requiring people back on-site now (just with a vaccine in them + maybe masks for now). Society still seems to be trying to revert to pre-pandemic conventions even in instances where the new option is easier or higher quality. Remote work also allows less pollution from commuting, which ties into the other big issue we have: climate change.

George Monbiot has been describing a search for a new "narrative" that would provide guidance and motivation for a new order or new direction of society. Whether this comes in a 4T or a 1T he doesn't say, but it's clear we haven't quite found it yet. We are using old policies to meet our needs, and they are stale and unworkable now. He contrasts this with the Keynesian narrative from the 1930s and neoliberalism from the 1980s that provided the older narratives. He says that these stories or directions for society is based on the timeless narrative of the hero's journey, similar to what Joseph Campbell described. He calls it the restoration story. It is a universal story, with a common structure, but the contents change in order to meet the times. He describes this process in this TED talk.





Another explanation here: https://youtu.be/ARiaiyHrijw

Another version: https://youtu.be/jjiRUP6TWhk

This is my attempt: https://philosopherswheel.com/politics-a...0narrative  The ecological principle seems to me a basis for the new order and new story developing.

Aspie's restoration story is mentioned too, and that goes back 2000 years: the Bible story or the Jesus story. For many of us though, that story also is too old and doesn't meet the needs of the time. The religious right that Aspie upholds is what many in Dixie and from older generations uphold as the needed restoration, and this story has already been told in the 1980s as part of the neoliberal story from Reagan's time, but it is largely not being accepted by his millennial generation. But something similar, a restoration of belonging, is part of what Monbiot describes.

The restoration of spirituality is part of what I think a new order needs, and many Boomers sought to provide this. But further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But meanwhile the restoration of the value of life and our interdependence on Nature and each other, as a model for organizing society, is what today's generations might agree upon as climate change and pandemics continue to spread disorder across the land.

I don't think it has to wait for the new prophets to arrive. People in my generation who agree with me can get our spiritual needs met by living separately from the majority and cutting ourselves off from them. I don't see the point of waiting because by the time change happens I will be old or dead. Being around too many atheists or agnostics is bad for your relationship with God so anyone who insults my religion isn't worth being around IMO.

Further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But "new order" here refers to a majority consensus and shapes the predominant movements in society, especially political, economic and cultural/social ones. You can continue to pursue and develop your religion and relationship to God among your minority of believers, but you can't hope for it to become part of a restoration narrative during this 4T.

Your more restrictive, doctrinaire, dogmatic approach to religion, especially one able to be imposed upon others, at the expense of democracy, may never be the majority consensus narrative or worldview again in The West or most of the Orient. But that does not mean at all that spirituality won't assume a greater role and position in culture and society than it has now within today's predominantly secular, pro-scientific society of millennials and the fourth turning. Spirituality and even relationship with God is not limited to the sort of religion that you believe in.

Why wouldn't it though? The traditional Catholics among my generation can convert the children of the secularists who see their parents as having empty values. The empty void their kids feel is something we can use to mass convert. This conversion can happen in the 2T. Then we can use that as a springboard to make the secular Millennials live by these rules and even convert because they want to conform. It will be justice after seeing Christians mocked and shunned by the normal culture. The secular Millennials that abused religious Millennials will suffer the consequences when the backlash happens.

I have my prediction on who would most be amenable to Traditional Catholicism: the children of the converts from Presbyterianism in the Mountain and Deep South to the 'independent' Southern Baptist churches that promote superstition such as young-earth creationism (the Catholic Church wants nothing to do with that hindrance to faith) and with the reactionary economics that hurt poor people of any kind. Their parents took the heartlessness of Calvinism and melded it with a philosophy that considered science evil.

[AspieMillennial]

(09-30-2021, 08:17 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(09-30-2021, 07:23 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-30-2021, 06:58 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-30-2021, 12:08 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-29-2021, 12:41 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: George Monbiot has been describing a search for a new "narrative" that would provide guidance and motivation for a new order or new direction of society. Whether this comes in a 4T or a 1T he doesn't say, but it's clear we haven't quite found it yet. We are using old policies to meet our needs, and they are stale and unworkable now. He contrasts this with the Keynesian narrative from the 1930s and neoliberalism from the 1980s that provided the older narratives. He says that these stories or directions for society is based on the timeless narrative of the hero's journey, similar to what Joseph Campbell described. He calls it the restoration story. It is a universal story, with a common structure, but the contents change in order to meet the times. He describes this process in this TED talk.





Another explanation here: https://youtu.be/ARiaiyHrijw

Another version: https://youtu.be/jjiRUP6TWhk

This is my attempt: https://philosopherswheel.com/politics-a...0narrative  The ecological principle seems to me a basis for the new order and new story developing.

Aspie's restoration story is mentioned too, and that goes back 2000 years: the Bible story or the Jesus story. For many of us though, that story also is too old and doesn't meet the needs of the time. The religious right that Aspie upholds is what many in Dixie and from older generations uphold as the needed restoration, and this story has already been told in the 1980s as part of the neoliberal story from Reagan's time, but it is largely not being accepted by his millennial generation. But something similar, a restoration of belonging, is part of what Monbiot describes.

The restoration of spirituality is part of what I think a new order needs, and many Boomers sought to provide this. But further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But meanwhile the restoration of the value of life and our interdependence on Nature and each other, as a model for organizing society, is what today's generations might agree upon as climate change and pandemics continue to spread disorder across the land.

I don't think it has to wait for the new prophets to arrive. People in my generation who agree with me can get our spiritual needs met by living separately from the majority and cutting ourselves off from them. I don't see the point of waiting because by the time change happens I will be old or dead. Being around too many atheists or agnostics is bad for your relationship with God so anyone who insults my religion isn't worth being around IMO.

Further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But "new order" here refers to a majority consensus and shapes the predominant movements in society, especially political, economic and cultural/social ones. You can continue to pursue and develop your religion and relationship to God among your minority of believers, but you can't hope for it to become part of a restoration narrative during this 4T.

Your more restrictive, doctrinaire, dogmatic approach to religion, especially one able to be imposed upon others, at the expense of democracy, may never be the majority consensus narrative or worldview again in The West or most of the Orient. But that does not mean at all that spirituality won't assume a greater role and position in culture and society than it has now within today's predominantly secular, pro-scientific society of millennials and the fourth turning. Spirituality and even relationship with God is not limited to the sort of religion that you believe in.

Why wouldn't it though? The traditional Catholics among my generation can convert the children of the secularists who see their parents as having empty values. The empty void their kids feel is something we can use to mass convert. This conversion can happen in the 2T. Then we can use that as a springboard to make the secular Millennials live by these rules and even convert because they want to conform. It will be justice after seeing Christians mocked and shunned by the normal culture. The secular Millennials that abused religious Millennials will suffer the consequences when the backlash happens.

I have my prediction on who would most be amenable to Traditional Catholicism: the children of the converts from Presbyterianism in the Mountain and Deep South to the 'independent' Southern Baptist churches that promote superstition such as young-earth creationism (the Catholic Church wants nothing to do with that hindrance to faith) and with the reactionary economics that hurt poor people of any kind. Their parents took the heartlessness of Calvinism and melded it with a philosophy that considered science evil.

I think so too. It offers an alternative to people who want faith but don't want to turn off their brains. Catholics are also better at debating with atheists. Now that secularism is the norm, the typical atheist or agnostic arguments are far easier to topple. Their arguments mostly boil down to "It's the 2020s", "sky daddy" insults, or mentioning science without even telling what the science is. I like telling them their ideology is a trend they do just to look smart and fit in.

[Eric the Green]

(09-30-2021, 07:23 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-30-2021, 06:58 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But "new order" here refers to a majority consensus and shapes the predominant movements in society, especially political, economic and cultural/social ones. You can continue to pursue and develop your religion and relationship to God among your minority of believers, but you can't hope for it to become part of a restoration narrative during this 4T.

Your more restrictive, doctrinaire, dogmatic approach to religion, especially one able to be imposed upon others, at the expense of democracy, may never be the majority consensus narrative or worldview again in The West or most of the Orient. But that does not mean at all that spirituality won't assume a greater role and position in culture and society than it has now within today's predominantly secular, pro-scientific society of millennials and the fourth turning. Spirituality and even relationship with God is not limited to the sort of religion that you believe in.

Why wouldn't it though? The traditional Catholics among my generation can convert the children of the secularists who see their parents as having empty values. The empty void their kids feel is something we can use to mass convert. This conversion can happen in the 2T. Then we can use that as a springboard to make the secular Millennials live by these rules and even convert because they want to conform. It will be justice after seeing Christians mocked and shunned by the normal culture. The secular Millennials that abused religious Millennials will suffer the consequences when the backlash happens.

"Traditional" Catholics as you describe them are not really the only Catholics, either. A wide range of people are Catholics, including many who support democratic socialism and social change. People who support Catholic charities are not political conservatives either. Catholics don't all have your conservative views, nor are they against democracy as you say you are, and they don't have to think their role is to convert others or to have the state impose Catholicism on others. The Pope himself today is a liberal on many matters.

Catholics are supposed to be followers of Jesus, who does not teach revenge and backlash like what you hope for, but forgiveness. I have attended benefit services to celebrate Albert Schweitzer, and sang in a choir there organized by my organist friend at our local bishopric and main Catholic Church in my city of San Jose CA, originally founded as a Catholic city, which religion is still (or still was recently) the dominant one here even though now it's the capitol of Silicon Valley. The priest's homily there that day did not talk about coverting atheists, but about Jesus who made himself poor. My organist friend took communion that day and became a member. Later he played a concert there which included one of my favorite pieces which its composer, a French Catholic named Louis Vierne, called "his Marseillaise"-- hardly a conservative reference.

There will indeed be an empty spiritual void by the time the next 2T comes around. But it will be the fulfillment of the previous 2T, and the spiritual void then was filled for a while by the new age and human potential movements, as well as by a fundamentalist revival. As human evolution continues, repressive and restrictive religions will disappear, even as genuine moral and spiritual teachings and practices develop further.

[galaxy]

(09-28-2021, 05:59 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-27-2021, 12:08 AM)galaxy Wrote:

(09-25-2021, 01:20 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: (the Millennial Generation is clearly Civic by now)

I'm glad someone else has noticed this. The Millennial Generation has transitioned during the last few years, and is much more obviously Civic now than it was previously. Of course it always was, but in 2014 one had to look much more closely and carefully to see it. Now it's impossible to ignore. I think the peak Civicness is probably those born between 1988 and 1996 or so. Perhaps the seemingly "stepwise" transition into this turning has stratified the generation a bit. Those born before 1988 are noticeably less collectivist and conformist, while those born 1996 and later are activists, with a general "darker" mood (that is, more cynical and less optimistic, but still just as collective), which might be partly responsible for the fact that wider society still perceives the Millennial generation as ending around 1997 or so (with the incorrect designation of memory and understanding of 9/11 as a generational fault line, rather than what it is, an intragenerational* divide).

It's clear that the 1988-1996 group are the ones "enforcing the rules of the new order." Or, at least, they're by far the most enthusiastic about it.

I notice that the earlier millennials are more politically liberal and Democratic-voting.

2020 exit polls say otherwise. There is always a leftness of the youngest voters, so since 2020 was the first election with the entire Millennial Generation (1982-2002) voting, we won't truly know the political patterns within the generation for several more years.

[Eric the Green]

I wonder how Aspie would deal with this. There's no doubt that Nature and pharmacology has helped us to awaken to mystical spirituality through the millennia, which is the true basis of his church and of all religion. As we return in the late 2040s to our periodic Awakening 2T, which is the same and which continues and jumps from saeculum to saeculum and through the cosmic planetary cycles, we will continue the 1966 Awakening powered by psychedelics, which also was coincident and simultaneous with many natural awakenings and contact-highs like mine too, and among people of all ages at that time, even though boomers as the generation of prophets like Mr. Brown here were the most empowered by this spiritual awakening called the "consciousness revolution" of the sixties and seventies.

There are no moral rules, guides and strictures that Mr. Aspie clings to and advocates without their source in the mystical experiences of the original prophets (including Jesus) and their followers who are elevated into higher consciousness and into "speaking in tongues" and spiritual healings and into creating all the artistic and musical expression that mystical experience generates. Like what happened in the great psychedelic year of 1966 and the few years following this fabulous moment. And which has been forgotten and repressed by most of the millennial generation and many Xers and many Boomers themselves too after the Awakening.

And psychedelics have always been a major catalyst. Repression of these fundamental facets of our lives has kept us down and put our noses to the grindstone of keeping people into subjection of the greedy powers. Real freedom from these powers partly comes about from our spiritual awakenings and everything that stimulates and generates them and takes our minds to a place beyond the grindstone.





https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2868...ic-gospels

Very significant and important work by the Browns. The Awakening of the psychedelic sixties is fundamental and basic to our ability to experience higher consciousness and spirituality today, and today a psychedelic revival is beginning. We must be careful of which psychedelics are appropriate to each one of us, and use with care and guidance, and in the best set and setting, to avoid their dangers.

[pbrower2a]

(09-30-2021, 08:55 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-30-2021, 08:17 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(09-30-2021, 07:23 PM)AspieMillennial Wrote:

(09-30-2021, 06:58 PM) pid=\79051' Wrote:Further development of that aspect of a new order will have to wait until the next prophets arrive. But "new order" here refers to a majority consensus and shapes the predominant movements in society, especially political, economic and cultural/social ones. You can continue to pursue and develop your religion and relationship to God among your minority of believers, but you can't hope for it to become part of a restoration narrative during this 4T.

Your more restrictive, doctrinaire, dogmatic approach to religion, especially one able to be imposed upon others, at the expense of democracy, may never be the majority consensus narrative or worldview again in The West or most of the Orient. But that does not mean at all that spirituality won't assume a greater role and position in culture and society than it has now within today's predominantly secular, pro-scientific society of millennials and the fourth turning. Spirituality and even relationship with God is not limited to the sort of religion that you believe in.

Why wouldn't it though? The traditional Catholics among my generation can convert the children of the secularists who see their parents as having empty values. The empty void their kids feel is something we can use to mass convert. This conversion can happen in the 2T. Then we can use that as a springboard to make the secular Millennials live by these rules and even convert because they want to conform. It will be justice after seeing Christians mocked and shunned by the normal culture. The secular Millennials that abused religious Millennials will suffer the consequences when the backlash happens.

I have my prediction on who would most be amenable to Traditional Catholicism: the children of the converts from Presbyterianism in the Mountain and Deep South to the 'independent' Southern Baptist churches that promote superstition such as young-earth creationism (the Catholic Church wants nothing to do with that hindrance to faith) and with the reactionary economics that hurt poor people of any kind. Their parents took the heartlessness of Calvinism and melded it with a philosophy that considered science evil.

I think so too. It offers an alternative to people who want faith but don't want to turn off their brains. Catholics are also better at debating with atheists. Now that secularism is the norm, the typical atheist or agnostic arguments are far easier to topple. Their arguments mostly boil down to "It's the 2020s", "sky daddy" insults, or mentioning science without even telling what the science is. I like telling them their ideology is a trend they do just to look smart and fit in.

...and with people whose religiosity is superstition devoid of intellectual content or moral appeal. I think of the Prosperity Gospel.