Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why is the 2T -> 3T transition dated around 1984?
#1
I wasn't around for this transition so bear with me.

The theoretical framing is that the 2nd turning is when supply of societal order is high and demand is low...when the supply flips to being low also, then we are in a 3rd turning also.

The thing is, wasn't order already low starting around the MLK assassination 1968? There were riots all over the country. If anything, the 1984-2008 stretch seems to be remembered as more orderly than "the seventies", with the lines for gas, stuck hostages, political resignations, hard-to-manage inflation etc. 

Wouldn't the awakening be more the time before that, when there was actually the societal breathing room to focus on matters of the soul and spirit? 

I may be missing something of the proper feel of 2Ts and 3Ts, though.
Reply
#2
The fundamentalist-evangelical phase of the Boom Awakening starts to lose its luster, and nothing is there to replace it as Awakening behavior. America goes full-bore consumerism (even if millions are damned to supply the consumerist binges without getting a chance to partake in them. The MBA school takes off in importance for intellectual and moral mediocrities looking for an edge in life. The middle-to-late 1980's are the peak of the shopping-mall culture, and this is about the time in which "shopping channels" appear on broadcast TV.

Popular culture may have gone 3T earlier for becoming mindless hedonism and sexuality (disco was a portent in the late 1970's. Economic inequality intensified, as the factory jobs started to get exported and such jobs available for most young adults were minimum-wage work in which one was expected to show the "Happy to Serve You" smile even if you were contemplating suicide because the American Dream was your nightmare.

America became stupider because one almost had to be stupid to be happy if one didn't already have everything made and hierarchical in command-and-control business models taught in the MBA schools, and represive of any attitude inconsistent with the idea that those who own the gold have the right to duty to crack the whip. For many it was a time to count their blessings -- always thinking of how worse things could get and that they had not experienced that yet. Hedonism was available, but it was an expensive escape that brought death instead of a drug downer.

Yuck! I hated the 3T and wouldn't impose it on anyone.
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.


Reply
#3
That makes sense...though wasn't 3T supposed to be "personally enjoyable" on a smaller scale, the issues being more with institutions and social-fabric?
Reply
#4
(12-18-2022, 03:19 PM)erdna3 Wrote: That makes sense...though wasn't 3T supposed to be "personally enjoyable" on a smaller scale, the issues being more with institutions and social-fabric?

If one was well off, then one could enjoy a hedonistic era that depended upon cheap services in restaurants, lodging, amusement parks, and shopping. Gasoline may have been expensive, but restaurant meals were cheap. There were recent college grads doing such work as waiters, salesclerks, bartenders, cooks, cleaners, and greeters for lack of better alternatives.  Smart kids were told in the 1960's and 1970's, "Whatever you do do not go to work in a factory". Yes, the factories started laying off in large numbers -- but the factory was always the most reliable route out of poverty, and the sorts of jobs that flourished in the last 3T offered the deadest of dead ends. There was nothing to learn, and no wealth to create aside from real estate. Interest rates were brutal, so housing costs soared because there was no building except of 'luxury' real estate or that connected to the service economy.    

As with any 3T (see also the 1920's) it was a great time for hedonism -- if one could afford it. Entertainment was as good as ever -- if mostly mindless.  This was a time of severe alienation if one had a low-paying service job that underpinned the hedonism. Yes, there was religion that offered exactly what every economic exploiter has always offered -- pie in the sky if you comply as proof of faith in the System. 

One aspect of a 4T is a demise of the hedonism and superstition (fundamentalist "Christianity" is more typically a wealth cult than it is a religion of service and morality, as shown in Fundamentalist support for Donald Trump). This downfall of mindless faith and hedonism itself creates a malaise because people come to the recognition that the fake prophets are preaching only for their gain and that hedonism is empty and that "luxurious" means "overpriced". Financial scams in the latter years of a 3T, especially the speculative boom that devours wealth more than it creates it and has the backing of right-wing politicians, bring mass ruin. Think of the shopping malls and amusement parks that have closed down. Think of the golf courses that went bankrupt because people could no longer afford to play golf.

Unlike the last 3T which began with a more protracted economic meltdown that forced major political reforms because the economic elites could no longer buy the political process, this time the economic meltdown was less severe. The dark side of the lesser severity was that those already rich could buy the political process and restore crony capitalism on an even bigger scale. Competition fades, so plutocrats can gouge by restraining supply. The plutocrats buy politicians who make clear that they believe that no human suffering can ever be in excess on behalf of the power, indulgence, and gain of those elites. The billionaires get richer, and the rest of us are ensured that even if e vote for an opposition to this, that such will be ineffective.

When the rich decide that the non-rich need a stake in the system so that they will not goldbrick or (worse) rebel, then things will get better.It may be up to the rich-and-powerful.
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.


Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)