The New Crisis War Unfolding Now?

[Eric the Green]

(07-20-2018, 12:58 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 11:30 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: I recall that the paleo site had a thread listing 4Ts for various countries.

Not every one had a war.  During the 19th century, Britain had a bloodless Reform Crisis, and Canada had a rather low key Confederation Crisis.

That is interesting when I read the books the authors really never talked about other nations very much. And when they talk about America they really only use examples that involve kind of ideology. 

American Revolution was ideology that America did not want to be subjugated to a crown. Then after that you have the Civil War which was obviously based on an ideology North vs South. After that we have World War II obviously a clash of ideologies on a global scale.  

All three of those resets in American civilization involved violence great amounts of violence.  I'm trying to remember if there was anything in the texts that was an example of a bloodless American fourth turning. Can anyone remember that?

There was no such fourth turning. For a milder war crisis you have to go back to the English cycle from which America was descended, the battle against the Spanish Armada. The authors titled an entire turning based on the rivalry of England and Spain, and the underlying religious and dynastic conflict.

[pbrower2a]

(07-20-2018, 12:58 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 11:30 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: I recall that the paleo site had a thread listing 4Ts for various countries.

Not every one had a war.  During the 19th century, Britain had a bloodless Reform Crisis, and Canada had a rather low key Confederation Crisis.

That is interesting when I read the books the authors really never talked about other nations very much. And when they talk about America they really only use examples that involve kind of ideology. 

American Revolution was ideology that America did not want to be subjugated to a crown. Then after that you have the Civil War which was obviously based on an ideology North vs South. After that we have World War II obviously a clash of ideologies on a global scale.  

All three of those resets in American civilization involved violence great amounts of violence.  I'm trying to remember if there was anything in the texts that was an example of a bloodless American fourth turning. Can anyone remember that?

But I see it possible that one could interpret the Second World War as the civil war of Western civilization itself. This fits Toynbee's explanation that the civilization is the unit of history. It may have been seen as the clash between Good and Evil -- and Nazism was about as pure evil as the world could ever know. But Hitler could see the British as 'Aryans' in good standing except for their tolerance of the supposedly non-Aryan Jews that Hitler saw as debasing all that he cherished. As is difficult to explain any irrational ideology, I will not try.

[TheNomad]

(07-20-2018, 03:17 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(07-20-2018, 12:58 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 11:30 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: I recall that the paleo site had a thread listing 4Ts for various countries.

Not every one had a war.  During the 19th century, Britain had a bloodless Reform Crisis, and Canada had a rather low key Confederation Crisis.

That is interesting when I read the books the authors really never talked about other nations very much. And when they talk about America they really only use examples that involve kind of ideology. 

American Revolution was ideology that America did not want to be subjugated to a crown. Then after that you have the Civil War which was obviously based on an ideology North vs South. After that we have World War II obviously a clash of ideologies on a global scale.  

All three of those resets in American civilization involved violence great amounts of violence.  I'm trying to remember if there was anything in the texts that was an example of a bloodless American fourth turning. Can anyone remember that?

There was no such fourth turning. For a milder war crisis you have to go back to the English cycle from which America was descended, the battle against the Spanish Armada. The authors titled an entire turning based on the rivalry of England and Spain, and the underlying religious and dynastic conflict.

What do you mean there was no such fourth turning?

[TheNomad]

(07-20-2018, 05:11 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(07-20-2018, 12:58 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 11:30 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: I recall that the paleo site had a thread listing 4Ts for various countries.

Not every one had a war.  During the 19th century, Britain had a bloodless Reform Crisis, and Canada had a rather low key Confederation Crisis.

That is interesting when I read the books the authors really never talked about other nations very much. And when they talk about America they really only use examples that involve kind of ideology. 

American Revolution was ideology that America did not want to be subjugated to a crown. Then after that you have the Civil War which was obviously based on an ideology North vs South. After that we have World War II obviously a clash of ideologies on a global scale.  

All three of those resets in American civilization involved violence great amounts of violence.  I'm trying to remember if there was anything in the texts that was an example of a bloodless American fourth turning. Can anyone remember that?

But I see it possible that one could interpret the Second World War as the civil war of Western civilization itself. This fits Toynbee's explanation that the civilization is the unit of history. It may have been seen as the clash between Good and Evil -- and Nazism was about as pure evil as the world could ever know. But Hitler could see the British as 'Aryans' in good standing except for their tolerance of the supposedly non-Aryan Jews that Hitler saw as debasing all that he cherished. As is difficult to explain any irrational ideology, I will not try.

I like the first sentence, pungent.

Were there examples in the text(s) about a non-violent fourth turning?  And btw now that we have progressed from a self-contained internal crisis of internal ideologies and then a GLOBAL clash as you say, what is next?  As in, you fight with your brother... then the chieftan, then the tribe down the river, then the nation-state near you, to the continent over there, then the whole world lines up to battle .... where can it go from there?  It seems like there is nowhere to go with that. 

Or does it just reoccur in some other global location with different alliances than previous.  As in, last time it was britain/france and ultimately US and Russia versus nazi aliiance (and toss Japan and Italy in there?) ............. but then this time it will be US/Russia/Israel v China/Iran/Pakistan or some concoction. Just endless versions of war with different participants each time? That sucks. I hope we find out the cause of all this and change our minds collectively,,,, isn't that the only way

[Eric the Green]

(07-20-2018, 05:40 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-20-2018, 03:17 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(07-20-2018, 12:58 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 11:30 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: I recall that the paleo site had a thread listing 4Ts for various countries.

Not every one had a war.  During the 19th century, Britain had a bloodless Reform Crisis, and Canada had a rather low key Confederation Crisis.

That is interesting when I read the books the authors really never talked about other nations very much. And when they talk about America they really only use examples that involve kind of ideology. 

American Revolution was ideology that America did not want to be subjugated to a crown. Then after that you have the Civil War which was obviously based on an ideology North vs South. After that we have World War II obviously a clash of ideologies on a global scale.  

All three of those resets in American civilization involved violence great amounts of violence.  I'm trying to remember if there was anything in the texts that was an example of a bloodless American fourth turning. Can anyone remember that?

There was no such fourth turning. For a milder war crisis you have to go back to the English cycle from which America was descended, the battle against the Spanish Armada. The authors titled an entire turning based on the rivalry of England and Spain, and the underlying religious and dynastic conflict.

What do you mean there was no such fourth turning?

Come on, Nomad. I was just answering your question. There was no American 4T without bloodletting and war, which includes all the 4Ts that Strauss and Howe mentioned.

[TheNomad]

(07-20-2018, 11:37 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(07-20-2018, 05:40 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-20-2018, 03:17 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(07-20-2018, 12:58 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 11:30 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: I recall that the paleo site had a thread listing 4Ts for various countries.

Not every one had a war.  During the 19th century, Britain had a bloodless Reform Crisis, and Canada had a rather low key Confederation Crisis.

That is interesting when I read the books the authors really never talked about other nations very much. And when they talk about America they really only use examples that involve kind of ideology. 

American Revolution was ideology that America did not want to be subjugated to a crown. Then after that you have the Civil War which was obviously based on an ideology North vs South. After that we have World War II obviously a clash of ideologies on a global scale.  

All three of those resets in American civilization involved violence great amounts of violence.  I'm trying to remember if there was anything in the texts that was an example of a bloodless American fourth turning. Can anyone remember that?

There was no such fourth turning. For a milder war crisis you have to go back to the English cycle from which America was descended, the battle against the Spanish Armada. The authors titled an entire turning based on the rivalry of England and Spain, and the underlying religious and dynastic conflict.

What do you mean there was no such fourth turning?

Come on, Nomad. I was just answering your question. There was no American 4T without bloodletting and war, which includes all the 4Ts that Strauss and Howe mentioned.

ok maybe i was braindead sorry

[Marypoza]

(07-20-2018, 03:11 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 01:25 PM)Marypoza Wrote: Me -- if you look at the 1st 2 Crises Wars, they were both civil wars (yes the Revolution was a civil war. We think of it as a war with England bcuz we have been these 2 separate countries for so long  but at the time it was a civil war, with Americans wanting to bcome a separate nation vs Tories who wanted to remain with England ) lt was only the last Crisis War where we fought an external threat (Hitler) which makes me wonder if that was an anomaly, & the next Crisis will be another civil war. I see alot of pisspot dictators around the globe, but nothing really comparable to Hitler as far as being a global threat goes. Evil maybe, but a global threat? Not so much. OTOH, wtr to the Mideast, esp considering some of these Congresscritters consider themselves entitled to the keys to the 1000 Yr Kingdom, & considering we already got troops in lraq & Afghanistan, l can see us getting involved in an expanded all out hot war over oil  or some other flimsy pretext. I can also see us being  the aggressor in such a war.

Full disclosure: l am a pacifist & l really don't care to see us get involved in any wars.

Do you think it's possible to get thru a Crisis without a war?


Eric--I would call the Revolution an external threat war. The military forces against the rebels were almost entirely gathered by the British, who had to invade. The Tories may have left the new country or kept silent; they weren't fighting as far as I know.

The previous war was a mixture, but it was originally the great rebellion civil war during the 2T. The Glorious Revolution gave one side the victory. But then it was William of Orange vs. Louis XIV. There were people on both sides in the colonies, I think.

The previous crisis war was short and comparatively easy and mild: the defeat of the external threat from the Spanish Armada. The previous one to that was a prolonged dynastic civil war of the roses.


-- Eric you are a trip. You call the Revolution an external threat war bcuz the Brits had to invade. Then you refer to the previous Crises- The War of the Roses,  Spanish Armada, Wm of Orange.. that's all English shit. What does any of it have to do with the United States?  The reason l call the Revolution our 1st  Crisis War is bcuz it was the 1st one where the United States is a separate entity, or @ least attempting to bcome one severing political ties with England. The Brits did not have to invade btw. Not only did they had troops over here, they were forcing ppl here to house them. That's what the 3rd Amendment ( no quartering of soldiers) is all about. Mass was under martial law since the early 1770s, ie  before 1776. Also Tories did fight for England in the Revolution. The battle of the Cowpers, for instance, in which Dan Morgan was able to turn the tide of the war in the South towards the US, was fought against Tory troops. There were a few Brit officers running the (shit)show, but the bulk of the troops there were Tories

Eric--the crisis war in this 4T might be smaller, because war is getting obsolete, and our place in the larger 500-year cycle is basically positive. The external threats are smaller now than in the past 4T, as you say. But Russia is likely to start a war around the 2020/2021 boundary, in which the USA is not involved directly. But Russia is an evil and large threat now to our allies, so there could be an external war with Russia by 2025. Or it could be a response to the continuing mid-east terrorist threats. 

We could also have a small civil war, if the Left is in charge of America by 2025 and institutes reforms such as gun control, court packing and higher taxes. The Right-wing in this country feels entitled to rule, so I consider a right-wing rebellion like that of the civil war to be a likely event long about 2025, with smaller outbursts possible before then if the Left gains enough power to put in these reforms. If the right-wing stays in charge, I expect secession movements in blue states and/or portions of blue states. I don't know if they could succeed, but I would expect a leftist violent revolution in the USA to be crushed unless it is accompanied by a virtual coup against Trump or a Trumpist tyrant within the government itself.

The most likely scenario I see, therefore, is small wars both domestic and foreign in the middle to late 2020s.

A lot more of us are pacifists since the sixties, but that did not stop the Bush presidents from destroying the Vietnam Syndrome and sending thousands of troops abroad to die in oil wars. If the Left is in charge in the mid-2020s though, I would expect the threat to come from abroad and from domestic rebels rather than the war to be of the USA's own making. The peace movement may also rev up too if there's another war or two in the 2020s.

-- do you have charts on all this or are you just speculating?

This is mostly from my new book, which is my interpretation of the various configurations in the sky coming up. It's based of course also on what I know about the USA as well as my knowledge of generation cycles and other cycles.

The English saecula are mentioned because the T4T authors covered those cycles. The basic fourthturning site explains all that. 
http://www.lifecourse.com/about/method/t...nings.html
[/quote]


-- ok gotcha. Actually after reading your post again the English saecula answered 1 of my questions. The War of Roses was a civil war, while the Spanish Armada & Wm of Orange & Louis XlV were external threats. So we have an internal conflict followed by 2 external threats. Next up is the Revolution, which started out as an internal conflict (rebels breaking away from the Mother Country) but morphed into an external threat (4 the Brits, not us) once France got involved. Infact it can be argued that the reason a motley crew of militiamen (which is what the Continentals basically were) defeated the baddest military in the (18th century ) world is bcuz the French were keeping them busy elsewhere around the globe.  Conversely our Crises were 2 internal (Revolution, Civil War) followed by an external threat (WW2) So it would appear that there isn't a pattern to these Crises Wars. Or maybe a reverse pattern-  this Crisis could start out as some kind of Mideast war (external) but then morph into an internal conflict as current civil unrest ramps up into a civil war. Somebody mentioned  a bloodless Reform Crisis in England during the 19th century. Well, except the Brits were fighting all kinds of wars during the 19th century from Napoleon to the Crimea to India to Afghanistan, to the Boer War in South Africa. I don't know how many of these wars were fought during a 4T, but l do see a clear paralell today wrt this country: fighting some stupid hot Mideast war while there's civil unrest @ home. I like David's idea about cyberwars (well not really, but y'all know what l mean) hey, use every tool @ your disposal & this being the 21st century & all.. throw in some nutjob with a vial of anthrax & this Crises should get interesting, esp if Yellowstone blows

[Marypoza]

(07-19-2018, 09:59 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 02:44 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 02:07 PM)Marypoza Wrote:

(07-09-2018, 12:40 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(07-05-2018, 04:30 AM)Marypoza Wrote: Full disclosure: l am a pacifist & l really don't care to see us get involved in any wars. Do you think it's possible to get thru a Crisis without a war?

Can we have a 4T without a hot shooting war?  Yes, I think so.  The only restriction I would impose, as if I have any authority to impose anything, is the need for a clash of ideas that invalidates one set of arguments while validating the other.  Using war as a tool is intellectually easy, but getting there without war isn't impossible, just unlikely.  A more likely outcome, sans war, would be a truce or some sort that tilted more one way than another … think the armistice on the Korean peninsula as an example, albeit one that required war to achieve.  Typically, we would consider that a failed 4T.

-- of course a civil war doesn't necessarily have to be a war with traditional armies or militias. Just look @ the cops, the police brutality. It could devolve into a situation where groups of ppl fight back guerilla style. Or maybe the mob gets involved like in the 1920s. Of course that was over Prohibition. I can't think of anything these daze that would cause the mob to ramp it up like they did in the 1920s. But l see situations where groups of ppl band together against police brutality, destabilizing cities, the Govt steps in, & then they are fighting the Govt, & at that point maybe the mob would get involved. I dunno

The one viable option I simply forgot is cyber war.  It's the exact opposite of the neutron bomb, that would have been designed to kill everyone but do no harm to the infrastructure.  Cyber destroys the infrastructure, and leaves all the people alive and wondering what to do next.

BUT is that akin to an invasion or a hostile takeover?  If a "cyber war" type of thing is what we are looking for as a signal, is that not the same as the 2008 financial graft that still lingers in America even now a decade later?  I think of it as "was there a winner and a loser"?  I'm not sure like even if there was some natural disaster like an earthquake that decimated Japan and the civilization was brought low, is that really a 4T event?  There was no real "winner" in that and things were not "reset" so much as just left destroyed. 

But I think possibly based on the s/h text, civilizations CAN in a 4T simply collapse and never return?  Maybe there doesn't have to be a winner.  What does anyone think?

-- l think it depends upon the natural disaster. If Yellowstone blows big time, which it does every 600,000 yrs or so give or take a few- & it is supposedly some 40,000 yrs overdue- then the United States & Canada would both be toast. So yeah our civilization would collapse. But never return? I'm thinking something will rise up from the volcanic ashes

[Marypoza]

(07-20-2018, 05:46 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-20-2018, 05:11 AM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(07-20-2018, 12:58 AM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 11:30 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: I recall that the paleo site had a thread listing 4Ts for various countries.

Not every one had a war.  During the 19th century, Britain had a bloodless Reform Crisis, and Canada had a rather low key Confederation Crisis.

That is interesting when I read the books the authors really never talked about other nations very much. And when they talk about America they really only use examples that involve kind of ideology. 

American Revolution was ideology that America did not want to be subjugated to a crown. Then after that you have the Civil War which was obviously based on an ideology North vs South. After that we have World War II obviously a clash of ideologies on a global scale.  

All three of those resets in American civilization involved violence great amounts of violence.  I'm trying to remember if there was anything in the texts that was an example of a bloodless American fourth turning. Can anyone remember that?

But I see it possible that one could interpret the Second World War as the civil war of Western civilization itself. This fits Toynbee's explanation that the civilization is the unit of history. It may have been seen as the clash between Good and Evil -- and Nazism was about as pure evil as the world could ever know. But Hitler could see the British as 'Aryans' in good standing except for their tolerance of the supposedly non-Aryan Jews that Hitler saw as debasing all that he cherished. As is difficult to explain any irrational ideology, I will not try.

I like the first sentence, pungent.

Were there examples in the text(s) about a non-violent fourth turning?  And btw now that we have progressed from a self-contained internal crisis of internal ideologies and then a GLOBAL clash as you say, what is next?  As in, you fight with your brother... then the chieftan, then the tribe down the river, then the nation-state near you, to the continent over there, then the whole world lines up to battle .... where can it go from there?  It seems like there is nowhere to go with that. 

Or does it just reoccur in some other global location with different alliances than previous.  As in, last time it was britain/france and ultimately US and Russia versus nazi aliiance (and toss Japan and Italy in there?) ............. but then this time it will be US/Russia/Israel v China/Iran/Pakistan or some concoction.  Just endless versions of war with different participants each time?  That sucks.  I hope we find out the cause of all this and change our minds collectively,,,, isn't that the only way

-- yes it does suck. Big time. Which is why l asked, is it possible to get thru a 4 T without a war

[pbrower2a]

(07-21-2018, 02:17 PM)Marypoza Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 09:59 PM)TheNomad Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 02:44 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(07-19-2018, 02:07 PM)Marypoza Wrote:

(07-09-2018, 12:40 PM)David Horn Wrote: Can we have a 4T without a hot shooting war?  Yes, I think so.  The only restriction I would impose, as if I have any authority to impose anything, is the need for a clash of ideas that invalidates one set of arguments while validating the other.  Using war as a tool is intellectually easy, but getting there without war isn't impossible, just unlikely.  A more likely outcome, sans war, would be a truce or some sort that tilted more one way than another … think the armistice on the Korean peninsula as an example, albeit one that required war to achieve.  Typically, we would consider that a failed 4T.

-- of course a civil war doesn't necessarily have to be a war with traditional armies or militias. Just look @ the cops, the police brutality. It could devolve into a situation where groups of ppl fight back guerilla style. Or maybe the mob gets involved like in the 1920s. Of course that was over Prohibition. I can't think of anything these daze that would cause the mob to ramp it up like they did in the 1920s. But l see situations where groups of ppl band together against police brutality, destabilizing cities, the Govt steps in, & then they are fighting the Govt, & at that point maybe the mob would get involved. I dunno

The one viable option I simply forgot is cyber war.  It's the exact opposite of the neutron bomb, that would have been designed to kill everyone but do no harm to the infrastructure.  Cyber destroys the infrastructure, and leaves all the people alive and wondering what to do next.

BUT is that akin to an invasion or a hostile takeover?  If a "cyber war" type of thing is what we are looking for as a signal, is that not the same as the 2008 financial graft that still lingers in America even now a decade later?  I think of it as "was there a winner and a loser"?  I'm not sure like even if there was some natural disaster like an earthquake that decimated Japan and the civilization was brought low, is that really a 4T event?  There was no real "winner" in that and things were not "reset" so much as just left destroyed. 

But I think possibly based on the s/h text, civilizations CAN in a 4T simply collapse and never return?  Maybe there doesn't have to be a winner.  What does anyone think?

-- l think it depends upon the natural disaster. If Yellowstone blows big time, which it does every 600,000 yrs or so give or take a few- & it is supposedly some 40,000 yrs overdue- then the United States & Canada would both be toast. So yeah our civilization would collapse. But never return? I'm thinking something will rise up from the volcanic ashes

The weak Carolingian Renaissance and the stronger Italian Renaissance (basically the beginning of our modern world) both resulted from people rediscovering some (the weak Carolingian Renaissance) or much (the Italian Renaissance) of the great intellectual treasure of the Classical world. Of course, people like Michelangelo, Petrarch, and Leonardo were far closer to us than they were to being Romans; indeed, the more that they started to innovate and of course recognized that modern vernaculars were more satisfying vehicles for expression than were classical Latin and Greek for their feelings, they knew that they were no longer Romans. This is especially true for such people as the English, Dutch, Flemings, Germans, Scandinavians, Irish, Czechs, and Poles who knew that they had practically no Roman heritage.

Let us remember that the great bulk of Western civilization is now in Latin America, and no longer in Europe and the US. As it is, Latin  America has a vibrant literary scene and it is rich in good translations of literature and technological material from English.

Another eruption of the Supervolcano in Yellowstone? That could bring back an ice age, and there would not be enough food for the world's population of dogs or cats, let alone us. But even if the world population were to go to a million or so (it would be that bad), there would be huge repositories of adequate material for a restart of technological civilization. A high-school library would be enough. Human nature is what it is, always seeking an easy way out from boredom of all kinds, including numbing toil.

[TheNomad]

Yellowstone.... here's a question, if a natural disaster happens, is that part of a saeculum? Can some natural disaster be considered the cause of a Crisis?

I would personally say no because it involves no trend or "reaction" to any previous cultural impact. I think strauss and howe mention that America has been a good model for the saeculum "science" because it has not been affected generally by things like annexation by larger power or on-soil wars or natural disasters. Although I do not think they actually used the words natural disaster. Can a force of nature be considered a valid component of saeculum movements?

Seriously what does anyone think??

[pbrower2a]

Near-extinction events such as supervolcano eruptions, a gamma-ray burst, a new Ice Age, or the strike of a body comparable to the one that exterminated the non-avian dinosaurs would be beyond the scope of this study. The comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 that struck Jupiter demonstrates what is possible. To be sure, Jupiter may largely clear the Earth's orbit of such dangerous objects with its gravity, pulling them in before they can get in range of the Earth. but not all such objects have missed.

[Tim Randal Walker]

I have been reviewing some archived threads.  The MegaSaeculum thread, the Alternating Paradign thread, the Two Lifetime thread.

In the MegaSaeculum thread, it is predicted that this 4T will be a "Mild Crisis". I mention this because, so far, the USA seems to be experiencing a relatively mild 4T.

In the Two Lifetime thread, it was suggested that there are two alternating kinds of questions: 1. Stick with the status quo, or return to a past status? 2. Stick with the status quo, or transform the outer world? Number one would correspond to to a Dionysus cycle, and number two would correspond to an Apollo cycle. If choosing the status quo, the 4T of a Dionysus cycle may offer, in addition, some comparatively minor reforms.

With our present cycle we have been seeing an attempt to revert to the Gilded Age. Preserving the status quo means preserving the New Deal paradigm. Such worldly reforms growing out of the Boom Awakening are basically about patching up the old status quo. We may get health care reform, for example, but nothing as drastic as revamping the economy (The Great Power cycle) or founding a new country (the Revolutionary cycle).

[Tim Randal Walker]

It has been suggested that this 4T may resemble the Glorious Revolution.

The Glorious Revolution as it played out in Europe:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_Revolution

[Marypoza]

(07-22-2018, 09:43 PM)TheNomad Wrote: Yellowstone.... here's a question, if a natural disaster happens, is that part of a saeculum?  Can some natural disaster be considered the cause of a Crisis?

I would personally say no because it involves no trend or "reaction" to any previous cultural impact.  I think strauss and howe mention that America has been a good model for the saeculum "science" because it has not been affected generally by things like annexation by larger power or on-soil wars or natural disasters.  Although I do not think they actually used the words natural disaster.  Can a force of nature be considered a valid component of saeculum movements?  

Seriously what does anyone think??

-- maybe.. wrt Yellowstone, l remember reading somewhere that if somebody drops a bomb on Cheyenne Mountain this could aggrevate Yellowstone, making it blow, which would put an end to any war (nuclear or otherwise) & in the case of a nuclear war, prevent the planet from becoming totally radioactive, allowing civilization to rebuild. So if Yellowstone blew as a result of a Crises War, l would say that could be considered a valid component of that saeculum movement

[Marypoza]

(07-24-2018, 07:47 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: I have been reviewing some archived threads.  The MegaSaeculum thread, the Alternating Paradign thread, the Two Lifetime thread.

In the MegaSaeculum thread, it is predicted that this 4T will be a "Mild Crisis".    I mention this because, so far, the USA seems to be experiencing a relatively mild 4T.

In the Two Lifetime thread, it was suggested that there are two alternating kinds of questions:  1.  Stick with the status quo, or return to a past status?  2.  Stick with the status quo, or transform the outer world?  Number one would correspond to to a Dionysus cycle, and number two would correspond to an Apollo cycle.  If choosing the status quo, the 4T of a Dionysus cycle may offer, in addition, some comparatively minor reforms.

With our present cycle we have been seeing an attempt to revert to the Gilded Age.  Preserving the status quo means preserving the New Deal paradigm.  Such worldly reforms growing out of the Boom Awakening are basically about patching up the old status quo.  We may get health care reform, for example, but nothing as drastic as revamping the economy (The Great Power cycle) or founding a new country (the Revolutionary cycle).

-- a Mild Crises could explain why we can't figure out if we're in a 4T or still in an extremely long 3T.  Maybe we're supposed to be fighting the Culture Wars this time around.  I honestly can't see a civil war involving 2 opposing armies. I can & do see guerilla style civil unrest, & on the non-violent side, mass protests as we move forward into this 4 T

[pbrower2a]

(07-25-2018, 07:30 AM)Marypoza Wrote:

(07-24-2018, 07:47 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: I have been reviewing some archived threads.  The MegaSaeculum thread, the Alternating Paradign thread, the Two Lifetime thread.

In the MegaSaeculum thread, it is predicted that this 4T will be a "Mild Crisis".    I mention this because, so far, the USA seems to be experiencing a relatively mild 4T.

In the Two Lifetime thread, it was suggested that there are two alternating kinds of questions:  1.  Stick with the status quo, or return to a past status?  2.  Stick with the status quo, or transform the outer world?  Number one would correspond to to a Dionysus cycle, and number two would correspond to an Apollo cycle.  If choosing the status quo, the 4T of a Dionysus cycle may offer, in addition, some comparatively minor reforms.

With our present cycle we have been seeing an attempt to revert to the Gilded Age.  Preserving the status quo means preserving the New Deal paradigm.  Such worldly reforms growing out of the Boom Awakening are basically about patching up the old status quo.  We may get health care reform, for example, but nothing as drastic as revamping the economy (The Great Power cycle) or founding a new country (the Revolutionary cycle).

-- a Mild Crises could explain why we can't figure out if we're in a 4T or still in an extremely long 3T.  Maybe we're supposed to be fighting the Culture Wars this time around.  I honestly can't see a civil war involving 2 opposing armies. I can & do see guerilla style civil unrest, & on the non-violent side, mass protests as we move forward into this 4 T

Had things gone right, then we might have had a cultural crisis in which Americans simply wipe away the bad practices of a 3T -- the mindless mass culture, the crooked business practices, and the anti-scientific superstition and bigotry.  By now we have a President and leadership within his Party who want what looks like a New Feudalism, an order in which 95% or so of the people suffer for 2% as the Will of God. But this is incompatible with our democratic heritage which implies the responsibility of government to the People instead of the people toward some entrenched elite that has every tool of repression at its disposal.

If one assumes that the intensity of a Crisis is its destructiveness (World War II was the most destructive Crisis Era ever), then the intensity arises from the dreadfulness of one of the possibilities. When one considers what the Great Powers were going into the Crisis of 1940 -- the British and French Empires, the Soviet Union, the United States, the severely-flawed Republic of China, and the monstrous Evil Empires of Nazi Germany and Thug Japan, it is easy to see why that Crisis could be so horrific. The United States of America might have been less willing to build an atom bomb had it not been for the atrocities of Nazi Germany -- and had it not been for such horrors as the Bataan Death March, maybe Japan might have been spared what destruction it received.

We still do not know how this Crisis will go. Crises Eras are typically the shortest phases of the cycle as they usually force decisive resolutions. Those who want wars for profit or national glory find that the war isn't so profitable and glorious as it might seem -- and that it requires ever-increasing exactions of life, capital, and toil. Those who might not have wanted war and got it want to get the war over with. FDR may have made a convincing speech that expressed his contempt for war -- but once he got it, he would stop at nothing to prevent  a fascist victory.

I look at the political leadership of America in the last three Crisis Eras -- and I see great moral and intellectual leaders. There may have been no such leader as the center of the American Revolution, but there were enough excellent ones who could eventually work out a response to the danger of the time that we got through well. Abraham Lincoln is the epitome of wartime leadership throughout his Presidency. FDR was basically the attempt to stop the hemorrhaging of the economy in an economic meltdown (something like Obama, who may have been more effective with the economy but less able to change the political culture) in his first two terms -- probably because Obama rescued the people who wanted a New Feudalism . Trump is the intended vehicle of that New Feudalism -- and he fails at that because of Americans resisting him and his policies, or America becomes the Evil Empire that the rest of the world must resist -- and will resist!

Think carefully of the enemies that America had in the Second World War. Japan has far greater economic prowess now than it had in the 1940s. Its scientific community is excellent. It could hardly be more up-to-date in technology. Germany is similar in many respects, and it does not have France and Britain as enemies -- and indeed, in a war with America those are likely allies. Against a fascist America it would have the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force on its side. Whoops -- I just spoke of two of America's friends in the last Crisis War not being reliable allies -- excuse me, partners in crime. 

If you thought the destructive power of World War II could not be exceeded, think again. America was out of the range of propeller aircraft such as the Stukas and Zeros that rained apocalypse upon Warsaw, Amsterdam, Coventry, and Manila. Even if the munitions are no more powerful, the jet aircraft can put such places as Denver and Dallas within range of carrier-based jet fighter off the coast of California -- or off the American East Coast. Chicago at the end of a Crisis War could look like Warsaw after the end of a short Crisis war even without the use of nuclear weapons.

Crises work out contradictions between power and reality. If we do not live in a time of unsettling contradictions, then what is an unsettling condition? Political and economic power in America (for now) is clearly on the right, with persons close to fascist ideology as their principles. Objective reality is probably center-left by American standards, which reflects where ABC, CBS, and NBC news are, where NPR and PBS are, and where the vast majority of big-city daily newspapers are. The only semblance of feudalism in the American heritage is the legacy of the slave-owning planters, and technology and learning have made that heritage unsupportable. We have the most despotic or dictatorial President ever, yet we have decades of democratic heritage. We have competent news media that have not changed their journalistic standards and were largely reliable for telling the truth -- yet the President lambasts any story that he dislikes as 'fake news'. Americans mostly believe in Christian moral principles, and in general if they are not Christians they have the moral principles if not the theology. Nothing about Christian morality fits Donald Trump, whose Christianity is identity and sentimentality. 

History, to paraphrase Hegel, is the resolution of contradictions. Crisis eras are the times in which the contradictions become most severe -- and pressing.

[Tim Randal Walker]

I was reviewing an archived civil war thread. In it gianthogweed commented that there are two types of Civic generations: 1. Builders of public empires. 2. Builders of private empires. These correspond to Apollo and Dionysus cycles respectively.

This time around, without a blue print for a grand new public order, we can expect the Millenials to not be builders of great public institutions.. They may uphold a patched up system, but their focus will be on building private institutions.

[David Horn]

(07-25-2018, 07:30 AM)Marypoza Wrote: -- a Mild Crises could explain why we can't figure out if we're in a 4T or still in an extremely long 3T.  Maybe we're supposed to be fighting the Culture Wars this time around.  I honestly can't see a civil war involving 2 opposing armies. I can & do see guerilla style civil unrest, & on the non-violent side, mass protests as we move forward into this 4 T

Unrest can devolve into chaos, and that's at least as bad as a true war.  We have all the elements that can make that possible, including a irrational belief by many Americans in our Huckster in Chief.  Irrational ideas, when put to the test, typically disappoint.  In a 4T, disappointment can lead random violence on a broad scale.

[David Horn]

(08-03-2018, 11:28 AM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: I was reviewing an archived civil war thread.  In it gianthogweed commented that there are two types of Civic generations:  1.  Builders of public empires.  2.  Builders of private empires.  These correspond to Apollo and Dionysus cycles respectively.

This time around, without a blue print for a grand new public order, we can expect the Millenials to not be builders of great public institutions..  They may uphold a patched up system, but their focus will be on building private institutions.

Boomers and Xers have already overbuilt private institutions, and some are trying to displace public institutions of long standing with for-profit private alternatives already.  If Millies continue on that path, we're seriously screwed.  The good news: they seem ill disposed to more privatization … or even continuing what currently exists.