Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What will happen if someone lives by 3T values in the 1T?
#21
(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-10-2016, 10:09 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-08-2016, 05:15 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-08-2016, 04:06 PM)taramarie Wrote: If their 3T ideals go against what the majority live by and not seen as rational they will be ignored and viewed as a replica of the destructive tendencies of their parents generation as well as having the 4T fresh in their minds they will not want a return to that. They will crave order for the ideal of peace for at least the majority.

What about someone living by 2T ideals in the 1T, defending those ideals very fiercely, and saying and living what the new prophets would say and questioning the order? Would they have an easier time or a harder time than the 3T person?

Probably so.

The 3T was culture wars. So the conformists were embattled, but powerful. All one has to do is associate with your side. In the 2T, conformists were on the ropes. So living 2T values in the conformist 1T would be a bit harder. But the beatnicks did it, toward the latter part of the 1T, and they got along pretty well and were setting trends that expanded in the 2T. Except Ginsberg, who was arrested for his poetry. The human potential movement, which expanded in the 2T, began in the First.

But those who had been communists in the 4T, they got slammed in the 1T. So it may be a question of some people living 4T values having a hard time in a 1T.

I wonder if there will be the next incarnation of McCarthyism in the next 1T. I think there will be hate towards people who have holdover views from the 4T because they'll see them as disrupting the peaceful society. I think with the internet, it's definitely possible. We have witch hunts now for different people except it's on more people and it spreads faster on an online platform.

Since I wasn't there, what happened to members of the GI generation who thought like the Beats in the 1T but weren't a part of the movement? What happened to them and what did they do to cope with the era?

I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

Like Republicans of Thomas Jefferson's generation who fell of Jacobinism and GIs of John Kennedy's generation who fell for Communism, both the 'wrong' and 'unpatriotic' rivals of the more orthodox and accepted collectivism of the time, there will likely be some temptation for Millennial adults who stay aligned with a Crisis-era ally who turns enemy or who promises a more complete revolution.

So if America becomes part of an 'Islamic civil war' and the side that we end up with starts pressing its advantages to create its own revolution in America... that is one possibility.
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
#22
(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-10-2016, 10:09 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-08-2016, 05:15 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-08-2016, 04:06 PM)taramarie Wrote: If their 3T ideals go against what the majority live by and not seen as rational they will be ignored and viewed as a replica of the destructive tendencies of their parents generation as well as having the 4T fresh in their minds they will not want a return to that. They will crave order for the ideal of peace for at least the majority.

What about someone living by 2T ideals in the 1T, defending those ideals very fiercely, and saying and living what the new prophets would say and questioning the order? Would they have an easier time or a harder time than the 3T person?

Probably so.

The 3T was culture wars. So the conformists were embattled, but powerful. All one has to do is associate with your side. In the 2T, conformists were on the ropes. So living 2T values in the conformist 1T would be a bit harder. But the beatnicks did it, toward the latter part of the 1T, and they got along pretty well and were setting trends that expanded in the 2T. Except Ginsberg, who was arrested for his poetry. The human potential movement, which expanded in the 2T, began in the First.

But those who had been communists in the 4T, they got slammed in the 1T. So it may be a question of some people living 4T values having a hard time in a 1T.

I wonder if there will be the next incarnation of McCarthyism in the next 1T. I think there will be hate towards people who have holdover views from the 4T because they'll see them as disrupting the peaceful society. I think with the internet, it's definitely possible. We have witch hunts now for different people except it's on more people and it spreads faster on an online platform.

Since I wasn't there, what happened to members of the GI generation who thought like the Beats in the 1T but weren't a part of the movement? What happened to them and what did they do to cope with the era?

In my own experience and recollection, most of the GI Generation members did not think like Beats or hippies or other non-conformists until the time of the Beats or later in the 2T. There were pioneers from older generations quietly doing work which would contribute to the Awakening later, such as Hoffman who invented LSD, and psychologists like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow and philosophers like Alan Watts. Many GIs, especially younger ones, experienced the Awakening when it came around 1966, just as younger folks did, and changed their lives because of it. Others hung on to the old ways and defended them against their Boomer children.

Quote:I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

They were silenced and blacklisted.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#23
(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote: I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.
Reply
#24
(10-14-2016, 08:34 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote: I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.

Indeed, the 4T typically ends because further humiliation and subjection of the defeated becomes unwise. Although the Allies saw fit to execute Holocaust perpetrators, Axis war criminals, and wartime traitors to Allied countries, they did not see fit to punish the low-ranking soldier who did not choose what army or navy he was to join. If one is a victor, someone like this has no role in the post-war world except as an example of what is to be rejected:


Quote:Kenji Doihara (土肥原 賢二 Doihara Kenji?, 8 August 1883 – 23 December 1948) was a general in the Imperial Japanese Army in World War II. He was instrumental in the Japanese invasion of Manchuria for which he earned fame taking the nickname 'Lawrence of Manchuria', a reference to the Lawrence of Arabia, although according to Jamie Bisher this flattering sobriquet was rather misapplied given that Colonel T.E. Lawrence fought to liberate, not to oppress a people.[1] Furthermore, according to the opinion of his military chief in Manchuria, Lieutenant-General Ishiwara Kanji, his heavy addiction to opium contributed to his unreliability as an army officer.[2]

As a leading intelligence officer he played a key role to the Japanese machinations leading to the occupation of large parts of China, the destabilization of the country and the disintegration of the traditional structure of the Chinese society in order to diminish reaction to the Japanese plans using highly unconventional methods. He became the mastermind of the Manchurian drug trade, and the real boss and sponsor behind every kind of gang and underworld activity in China (see Controversy section). After the end of World War II, he was prosecuted for war crimes in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. He was found guilty, sentenced to death and was hanged in December 1948.

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

The Allied tribunals for the prosecution of major war criminals made sure that this sort of person got culpability for the crimes of a thug regime and its military failure, and that his type would never become a role model for Japanese leadership again. So send the soldiers back to the countryside for the rice harvest to prevent a famine...

The best way to win a war is to take away the will to fight of the enemy. Such is better done with humaneness (a difficult commodity to furnish during an apocalyptic war) than with genocidal brutality. In 1945 the Americans and British left the defeated peoples of the Axis who came under their dominion, however temporary, nothing to fight against. In 1939 the Nazis left the Poles every reason to maintain the war even as their soldiers were defeated. Poland was a dangerous place for a German soldier even where Germany fully annexed the territory. Germany after World War II gave the British or American soldier little cause to watch his back.

So let the defeated people keep their farms, businesses, and merchandise, and let the small businesses (if not plutocrats themselves war criminals) do what they do best. The soldiers are the foreigners, and the recently-defeated people do the work that they did before the war, and the people recently defeated can pay attention again to planting and reaping grain, tending and butchering livestock, doing industrial work to make the decencies of life, and doing construction work to repair and replace the old infrastructure damaged or destroyed in warfare.  Oh, yes -- remove the fearsome Kempeitai, Gestapo, or Mukhabarat from public life, if necessary with "extreme prejudice".
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
#25
(10-14-2016, 08:34 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote: I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.


An example is someone upset that their solution to the 4T wasn't taken because things went a totally different way than what they think should have happened. It could be someone who was the loser in a war in some cases and now on the demonized side, other cases it could be someone who wanted a solution that the people rejected, even if they weren't at war with the other ideology at the time. Like a person who wanted the South to succeed from the union and was still angry at Abraham Lincoln. Or maybe even someone who was angry that communism wasn't used as the solution to the great depression and wished they had that type of a revolution in the US.
Reply
#26
Quote:In my own experience and recollection, most of the GI Generation members did not think like Beats or hippies or other non-conformists until the time of the Beats or later in the 2T. There were pioneers from older generations quietly doing work which would contribute to the Awakening later, such as Hoffman who invented LSD, and psychologists like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow and philosophers like Alan Watts. Many GIs, especially younger ones, experienced the Awakening when it came around 1966, just as younger folks did, and changed their lives because of it. Others hung on to the old ways and defended them against their Boomer children.

I know most didn't, but how did the ones who did cope during the era? As in people severely marginalized and on the sidelines because they didn't think like the majority or people who thought the society oppressed them. Did they drink a lot to cope or take lots of prescription drugs? I heard a lot of people like that had to constantly numb themselves during the era.
Reply
#27
(10-14-2016, 03:33 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
Quote:In my own experience and recollection, most of the GI Generation members did not think like Beats or hippies or other non-conformists until the time of the Beats or later in the 2T. There were pioneers from older generations quietly doing work which would contribute to the Awakening later, such as Hoffman who invented LSD, and psychologists like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow and philosophers like Alan Watts. Many GIs, especially younger ones, experienced the Awakening when it came around 1966, just as younger folks did, and changed their lives because of it. Others hung on to the old ways and defended them against their Boomer children.

I know most didn't, but how did the ones who did cope during the era? As in people severely marginalized and on the sidelines because they didn't think like the majority or people who thought the society oppressed them. Did they drink a lot to cope or take lots of prescription drugs? I heard a lot of people like that had to constantly numb themselves during the era.

I would expect those who were ahead of the curve in the 1T were exceptional folks, who thought outside the box and were ready to question convention. I think they were usually healthy people who didn't have to depend on addictions at all. The era itself was numbing, but most people did not even know they were being numbed down, as it were. They just conformed.

But some of these folks, who were conforming, and not questioning or pioneering, were the ones who had problems. Death of a Salesman types, men in the gray flannel suits keeping up with the Joneses. Most of them repressed their anxieties and feelings of emptiness, as many of them still do. I don't know if alcoholism rates were higher than in other turnings; maybe not. The guys often killed themselves with smoking though. There were certainly repressed abuses within families. People who were different were repressed too. Most people didn't even have a concept of these differences, that are so openly discussed today in a "politically correct" way. The victims suffered, usually silently; sometimes just bullied and teased. They mostly stayed quiet and just repressed their feelings, and went along as best they could. To compensate for all this superficiality and repression, there was also more of a sense of belonging then; not in any intimate or fulfilling way, but joining a club or a church or being taken care of at work kept people from feeling too isolated or left out. Advancing materially substituted for deeper fulfillment, at least for those who were white guys. "Guys like us we had it made; those were the days!" Some good movies to go to as well, and some TV shows worth watching. And at the end of the 1T, an increasing sense of futurism and humanitarian concern was felt that people could identify with and even participate in. Those who had been bullied began to come out.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#28
(10-14-2016, 03:30 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 08:34 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote: I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.

An example is someone upset that their solution to the 4T wasn't taken because things went a totally different way than what they think should have happened. It could be someone who was the loser in a war in some cases and now on the demonized side, other cases it could be someone who wanted a solution that the people rejected, even if they weren't at war with the other ideology at the time. Like a person who wanted the South to succeed from the union and was still angry at Abraham Lincoln. Or maybe even someone who was angry that communism wasn't used as the solution to the great depression and wished they had that type of a revolution in the US.

They end up on McCarthy's list or the equivalent.
Reply
#29
(10-14-2016, 04:47 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 03:33 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
Quote:In my own experience and recollection, most of the GI Generation members did not think like Beats or hippies or other non-conformists until the time of the Beats or later in the 2T. There were pioneers from older generations quietly doing work which would contribute to the Awakening later, such as Hoffman who invented LSD, and psychologists like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow and philosophers like Alan Watts. Many GIs, especially younger ones, experienced the Awakening when it came around 1966, just as younger folks did, and changed their lives because of it. Others hung on to the old ways and defended them against their Boomer children.

I know most didn't, but how did the ones who did cope during the era? As in people severely marginalized and on the sidelines because they didn't think like the majority or people who thought the society oppressed them. Did they drink a lot to cope or take lots of prescription drugs? I heard a lot of people like that had to constantly numb themselves during the era.

I would expect those who were ahead of the curve in the 1T were exceptional folks, who thought outside the box and were ready to question convention. I think they were usually healthy people who didn't have to depend on addictions at all. The era itself was numbing, but most people did not even know they were being numbed down, as it were. They just conformed.

But some of these folks, who were conforming, and not questioning or pioneering, were the ones who had problems. Death of a Salesman types, men in the gray flannel suits keeping up with the Joneses. Most of them repressed their anxieties and feelings of emptiness, as many of them still do. I don't know if alcoholism rates were higher than in other turnings; maybe not. The guys often killed themselves with smoking though. There were certainly repressed abuses within families. People who were different were repressed too. Most people didn't even have a concept of these differences, that are so openly discussed today in a "politically correct" way. The victims suffered, usually silently; sometimes just bullied and teased. They mostly stayed quiet and just repressed their feelings, and went along as best they could. To compensate for all this superficiality and repression, there was also more of a sense of belonging then; not in any intimate or fulfilling way, but joining a club or a church or being taken care of at work kept people from feeling too isolated or left out. Advancing materially substituted for deeper fulfillment, at least for those who were white guys. "Guys like us we had it made; those were the days!" Some good movies to go to as well, and some TV shows worth watching. And at the end of the 1T, an increasing sense of futurism and humanitarian concern was felt that people could identify with and even participate in. Those who had been bullied began to come out.

What would happen to the different people who fought back very harshly and ruthlessly in response to the alienation and bullying they felt?
Who decided they weren't going to be accepted no matter what so they may as well fight back. If someone did that during the 1T instead of suffering in silence?
Reply
#30
(10-14-2016, 10:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 03:30 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 08:34 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote: I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.

An example is someone upset that their solution to the 4T wasn't taken because things went a totally different way than what they think should have happened. It could be someone who was the loser in a war in some cases and now on the demonized side, other cases it could be someone who wanted a solution that the people rejected, even if they weren't at war with the other ideology at the time. Like a person who wanted the South to succeed from the union and was still angry at Abraham Lincoln. Or maybe even someone who was angry that communism wasn't used as the solution to the great depression and wished they had that type of a revolution in the US.

They end up on McCarthy's list or the equivalent.

What happens if the wrong side wins? Like the Nazis win instead of America or if the South wins instead of the North?
What happens in the 1T?
Reply
#31
(10-15-2016, 03:05 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 10:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 03:30 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 08:34 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote: I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.

An example is someone upset that their solution to the 4T wasn't taken because things went a totally different way than what they think should have happened. It could be someone who was the loser in a war in some cases and now on the demonized side, other cases it could be someone who wanted a solution that the people rejected, even if they weren't at war with the other ideology at the time. Like a person who wanted the South to succeed from the union and was still angry at Abraham Lincoln. Or maybe even someone who was angry that communism wasn't used as the solution to the great depression and wished they had that type of a revolution in the US.

They end up on McCarthy's list or the equivalent.

What happens if the wrong side wins? Like the Nazis win instead of America or if the South wins instead of the North?
What happens in the 1T?

That is a horrifying thought. Ugh. Nope not going there. Horrific image.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#32
(10-15-2016, 03:05 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 10:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 03:30 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 08:34 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-12-2016, 08:12 PM)disasterzone Wrote: I also wonder what would happen to a 4T type person who's angry that the revolution they wanted never happened and thinking everything's too wishy washy and mild. Someone who wants to push their 4T ideology on the max and believes that should have been the solution.

Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.

An example is someone upset that their solution to the 4T wasn't taken because things went a totally different way than what they think should have happened. It could be someone who was the loser in a war in some cases and now on the demonized side, other cases it could be someone who wanted a solution that the people rejected, even if they weren't at war with the other ideology at the time. Like a person who wanted the South to succeed from the union and was still angry at Abraham Lincoln. Or maybe even someone who was angry that communism wasn't used as the solution to the great depression and wished they had that type of a revolution in the US.

They end up on McCarthy's list or the equivalent.

What happens if the wrong side wins? Like the Nazis win instead of America or if the South wins instead of the North?
What happens in the 1T?
By definition, the side that wins is the right side.

If it happens to be more authoritarian than the U.S. ended up being, well, the Soviet Union in the 1950s is probably a good model. The "wrong side" ended up in gulags or purged.
Reply
#33
(10-15-2016, 05:30 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 03:05 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 10:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 03:30 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 08:34 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Can you give some examples of what you might be talking about?  Fourth turnings are basically pushed to the max already.  Pushing things further would involve stuff like executing all southern whites after the Civil War, or nuking Japanese and German cities after they had surrendered unconditionally; I'd think advocates of such things would just be ignored.

An example is someone upset that their solution to the 4T wasn't taken because things went a totally different way than what they think should have happened. It could be someone who was the loser in a war in some cases and now on the demonized side, other cases it could be someone who wanted a solution that the people rejected, even if they weren't at war with the other ideology at the time. Like a person who wanted the South to succeed from the union and was still angry at Abraham Lincoln. Or maybe even someone who was angry that communism wasn't used as the solution to the great depression and wished they had that type of a revolution in the US.

They end up on McCarthy's list or the equivalent.

What happens if the wrong side wins? Like the Nazis win instead of America or if the South wins instead of the North?
What happens in the 1T?
By definition, the side that wins is the right side.

If it happens to be more authoritarian than the U.S. ended up being, well, the Soviet Union in the 1950s is probably a good model. The "wrong side" ended up in gulags or purged.

Dixie, the Nazis, the British, etc.; they were the wrong side. And everyone knew it; and increasingly so as we get closer to today. At least in The West. The Soviets could be seen at least as idealistic, compared to the Nazi invaders, although both were horrific. Now, the red states are the wrong side, and Islamic jihadists are the wrong side. They will be defeated too. 4Ts always take us forward; not backward as today's Republicans whether Trumpsters or Ryanists still want to do.

In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us. At least until later in the 1T, when they start to peek through the cracks, and then the new non-conformists with some new and different ideals come out big-time in the 2T.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#34
(10-15-2016, 06:02 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 05:30 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 03:05 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 10:35 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(10-14-2016, 03:30 PM)disasterzone Wrote: <post was here> Big Grin
Eric Wrote:Dixie, the Nazis, the British, etc.; they were the wrong side. And everyone knew it; and increasingly so as we get closer to today. At least in The West. The Soviets could be seen at least as idealistic, compared to the Nazi invaders, although both were horrific. Now, the red states are the wrong side, and Islamic jihadists are the wrong side. They will be defeated too. 4Ts always take us forward; not backward as today's Republicans whether Trumpsters or Ryanists still want to do.
Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?


In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.

Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up. Cool



At least until later in the 1T, when they start to peek through the cracks, and then the new non-conformists with some new and different ideals come out big-time in the 2T.
---Value Added Cool
Reply
#35
(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?


It's obvious red states are wrong. They are the reactionaries, clinging to the past of trickle-down, dog-whistle economics, racism, militarism, climate science denial, traditional cultures and prejudice. Not everyone in red states (of course) but the predominant political trends there.

Quote:
Quote:In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.
Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up. Cool

No, in the 1T, the millies may tell their new prophet children to shut up. But the 1T trend is for relaxing parentage by the civics.

The Boom may be too old; most of them will voluntarily shut up. Maybe some won't. But X may tell Millies and new artists to shut up.

It's mostly not generational (or I should say, not a generation gap between Boom and X, but more complicated than that), except that Xers are the dominant elders in a 1T and tell everyone else to shut up and get off my lawn. Mostly though, everyone is telling the non-conformists and radicals to shut up. I don't see too much basis for saying which generation is telling which to shut up, except maybe that predominantly the Nomads are telling that to everyone else because as elders they want relief, peace and quiet, and those who speak up the loudest (prophets) are mostly in the cribs or the old folks homes and are thus "absent." So goes the theory. If you're right, Rags, it's because the Boom will have stayed as young as they wished to.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#36
(10-15-2016, 08:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?


It's obvious red states are wrong. They are the reactionaries, clinging to the past of trickle-down, dog-whistle economics, racism, militarism, climate science denial, traditional cultures and prejudice. Not everyone in red states (of course) but the predominant political trends there.


Yeah pretty much.  But whadda bout blue states which are running fiscally in the deep red?

Who's gonna pony up for this pension plan?

Quote:
Quote:In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.
Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up. Cool

No, in the 1T, the millies may tell their new prophet children to shut up. But the 1T trend is for relaxing parentage by the civics.

Lot's of ppl will be telling old Boomers to shut up. Cool

The Boom may be too old; most of them will voluntarily shut up. Maybe some won't.

Y'all haven't closed the pieholes yet.


But X may tell Millies and new artists to shut up.

Only special snowflake Milles have to shut up.

Quote:It's mostly not generational, except that Xers are the dominant elders in a 1T and tell everyone else to shut up and get off my lawn. Mostly though, everyone is telling the non-conformists and radicals to shut up. I don't see too much basis for saying which generation is telling which to shut up, except maybe that predominantly the Nomads are telling that to everyone else because as elders they want relief, peace and quiet, and those who speak up the loudest (prophets) are mostly in the cribs or the old folks homes and are thus "absent." So goes the theory. If you're right, Rags, it's because the Boom will have stayed as young as they wished to.

The path has been lit.   Big Grin
---Value Added Cool
Reply
#37
(10-15-2016, 08:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?


It's obvious red states are wrong. They are the reactionaries, clinging to the past of trickle-down, dog-whistle economics, racism, militarism, climate science denial, traditional cultures and prejudice. Not everyone in red states (of course) but the predominant political trends there.

Quote:
Quote:In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.
Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up. Cool

No, in the 1T, the millies may tell their new prophet children to shut up. But the 1T trend is for relaxing parentage by the civics.

The Boom may be too old; most of them will voluntarily shut up. Maybe some won't. But X may tell Millies and new artists to shut up.

It's mostly not generational, except that Xers are the dominant elders in a 1T and tell everyone else to shut up and get off my lawn. Mostly though, everyone is telling the non-conformists and radicals to shut up. I don't see too much basis for saying which generation is telling which to shut up, except maybe that predominantly the Nomads are telling that to everyone else because as elders they want relief, peace and quiet, and those who speak up the loudest (prophets) are mostly in the cribs or the old folks homes and are thus "absent." So goes the theory. If you're right, Rags, it's because the Boom will have stayed as young as they wished to.

What would happen to a Civic who felt the times bullied them so they fought back even harder? As in reacted like their children's generation to their generation, reacted to things as they happened instead of afterwards?
Reply
#38
(10-15-2016, 10:41 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 08:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?


It's obvious red states are wrong. They are the reactionaries, clinging to the past of trickle-down, dog-whistle economics, racism, militarism, climate science denial, traditional cultures and prejudice. Not everyone in red states (of course) but the predominant political trends there.

Quote:
Quote:In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.
Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up. Cool

No, in the 1T, the millies may tell their new prophet children to shut up. But the 1T trend is for relaxing parentage by the civics.

The Boom may be too old; most of them will voluntarily shut up. Maybe some won't. But X may tell Millies and new artists to shut up.

It's mostly not generational, except that Xers are the dominant elders in a 1T and tell everyone else to shut up and get off my lawn. Mostly though, everyone is telling the non-conformists and radicals to shut up. I don't see too much basis for saying which generation is telling which to shut up, except maybe that predominantly the Nomads are telling that to everyone else because as elders they want relief, peace and quiet, and those who speak up the loudest (prophets) are mostly in the cribs or the old folks homes and are thus "absent." So goes the theory. If you're right, Rags, it's because the Boom will have stayed as young as they wished to.

What would happen to a Civic who felt the times bullied them so they fought back even harder? As in reacted like their children's generation to their generation, reacted to things as they happened instead of afterwards?

Millies will get their way as the 4T proceeds. Then they will be middle aged and will be the builders, mostly content to ride the new consensus. There's always individual exceptions to the trends. Civic non-conformists will have the same fate as new artist or older Xer non-conformists in the 1T.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#39
(10-15-2016, 11:11 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 10:41 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 08:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?


It's obvious red states are wrong. They are the reactionaries, clinging to the past of trickle-down, dog-whistle economics, racism, militarism, climate science denial, traditional cultures and prejudice. Not everyone in red states (of course) but the predominant political trends there.

Quote:
Quote:In the 1T, the wrong side has been repressed, but the right side is repressed too. The consensus is, yes, we have turned back the reactionary enemy, but we don't want any more change now, so--- radicals and non-conformists: just shut up and stay in the closet and don't disturb us.
Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up. Cool

No, in the 1T, the millies may tell their new prophet children to shut up. But the 1T trend is for relaxing parentage by the civics.

The Boom may be too old; most of them will voluntarily shut up. Maybe some won't. But X may tell Millies and new artists to shut up.

It's mostly not generational, except that Xers are the dominant elders in a 1T and tell everyone else to shut up and get off my lawn. Mostly though, everyone is telling the non-conformists and radicals to shut up. I don't see too much basis for saying which generation is telling which to shut up, except maybe that predominantly the Nomads are telling that to everyone else because as elders they want relief, peace and quiet, and those who speak up the loudest (prophets) are mostly in the cribs or the old folks homes and are thus "absent." So goes the theory. If you're right, Rags, it's because the Boom will have stayed as young as they wished to.

What would happen to a Civic who felt the times bullied them so they fought back even harder? As in reacted like their children's generation to their generation, reacted to things as they happened instead of afterwards?

Millies will get their way as the 4T proceeds. Then they will be middle aged and will be the builders, mostly content to ride the new consensus. There's always individual exceptions to the trends. Civic non-conformists will have the same fate as new artist or older Xer non-conformists in the 1T.

What is the fate of the new artist and the nomad non-conformists in the 1T?

Also, isn't it also possible that there isn't any one new consensus but maybe two of them? It could be if the US keeps polarizing like this. The consensus might be way different in one state than another.
Reply
#40
(10-15-2016, 11:50 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 11:11 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 10:41 PM)disasterzone Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 08:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(10-15-2016, 08:26 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Whadda bout blue states   being wrong?


It's obvious red states are wrong. They are the reactionaries, clinging to the past of trickle-down, dog-whistle economics, racism, militarism, climate science denial, traditional cultures and prejudice. Not everyone in red states (of course) but the predominant political trends there.

Quote:Oh,  just another generation gap.  
3T  -  Boom to X shape up
1T  -  X to Boom Shut up. Cool

No, in the 1T, the millies may tell their new prophet children to shut up. But the 1T trend is for relaxing parentage by the civics.

The Boom may be too old; most of them will voluntarily shut up. Maybe some won't. But X may tell Millies and new artists to shut up.

It's mostly not generational, except that Xers are the dominant elders in a 1T and tell everyone else to shut up and get off my lawn. Mostly though, everyone is telling the non-conformists and radicals to shut up. I don't see too much basis for saying which generation is telling which to shut up, except maybe that predominantly the Nomads are telling that to everyone else because as elders they want relief, peace and quiet, and those who speak up the loudest (prophets) are mostly in the cribs or the old folks homes and are thus "absent." So goes the theory. If you're right, Rags, it's because the Boom will have stayed as young as they wished to.

What would happen to a Civic who felt the times bullied them so they fought back even harder? As in reacted like their children's generation to their generation, reacted to things as they happened instead of afterwards?

Millies will get their way as the 4T proceeds. Then they will be middle aged and will be the builders, mostly content to ride the new consensus. There's always individual exceptions to the trends. Civic non-conformists will have the same fate as new artist or older Xer non-conformists in the 1T.

What is the fate of the new artist and the nomad non-conformists in the 1T?

Also, isn't it also possible that there isn't any one new consensus but maybe two of them? It could be if the US keeps polarizing like this. The consensus might be way different in one state than another.
People have already answered this. They will be dismissed or blacklisted. Only late in the 1T they will start to be heard by more people looking for something new.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)