Thoughts On Where We Are, and Where We're Going

[Eric the Green]

You are on the right track P. Brower as usual. But I do get a bit concerned when you say "the boom awakening" has been dashed. It will not be enough for the blue side to knock Trump and the GOP agenda. The blue side in order to win will need some inspiring ideals for the future, and to elucidate and articulate those in a charismatic way. That way all stems from the Consciousness Revolution and the Blue Awakening portions of it. The 1960s-70s awakening still beckons us, and still provides all of the inspiration for the future. We can advocate for good behavior, and try to practice it. We can knock the excesses of behavior and rhetoric of those days, and we knock the excesses of today. But those were not the essence of the Awakening.

The Awakening brought us the environmental movement, to protect the life of Earth not just in faraway places, but also in our midst; to clean up our air and water, preserve our lands and all their animals and plants, and to remember that we are a part of them and depend on them. And to reverse the fossil fuel pollution that creates climate change and all its dangers. This movement began in the 1960s, was powered by the Boomer Generation, and still is agenda item #1 today.

And this also implies that quality, not mere quantity of life, is uppermost. To be inspired, we must be presented with more than just bread; we want roses too. Beyond economics, there is ecology and our love of Nature and its life-giving properties, and there is spirituality and human potential too, and freedom and abilities of expression, and means to expand and liberate consciousness freely available. Without expanding our human abilities, our awareness of all spiritual dimensions and not just the physical, and our connection to all of life, we are just keeping our heads above water, and not growing into a society that respects that people are human beings, not just numbers; that life is about more than work. And at a time when work itself might be ending, the blueprints for a higher purpose of life, toward spiritual and creative evolution, and beyond physicalist reductionism and the darwinism that empowers racism, all need to be remembered and championed, and also the more-physical blueprints for cities and neighborhoods that are people friendly and which establish social connection and cultural richness, for jobs and work that are fulfilling, and education and health for the whole person. These trends of the Consciousness Revolution 2T are still the most relevant if we are to be inspired toward a future society, and not just bread and the mere endurance of existence.

The Awakening gave us the Great Society, toward greater economic and social equality for all races and peoples. We cannot be satisfied with a society that only benefits a few, justified by free enterprise rhetoric and trickle-down neo-liberal economics that only tinkles on us. The plans of Dr. Martin Luther King, LBJ and George McGovern from the Awakening still wait to be realized. A society geared only to the wealthy is not healthy. A fairer tax system, stronger unions, guaranteed wages and shorter hours for the same pay, social programs, Medicare for all, free or assisted fee college, these ideals from the Awakening are all still on the agenda. Trickle-down economics and hatred of social welfare as mere freeloading dependency for non-whites will not fly, as a few bosses hog all the benefits from a computerized economy that puts people out of work or sends all our jobs overseas. We must respect social protection as good for all of us, not just the poor.

But these plans were also scuttled by the war in Vietnam. The peace movement remains a strong legacy of the mis-named Boom Awakening, which the authors called the Consciousness Revolution. In spite of the Bush betrayals, the ideal of the Consciousness Revolution and its protests against the crime of the US Invasion of Vietnam is that war is unhealthy for living things, and is a horrible means to achieve anything. The ideal of the end of war is a great legacy of the Awakening, and together with the environmental movement, entitles the 2T of the 1960s and 70s to be called the Greenpeace Awakening. And we need peace at home as well as ending imperialism abroad, and that means that the gun control movement that began after the assassinations of RFK and MLK must finally succeed.

Democratic reforms are a crying need now too. We can't have a country of, by and for the people, if peoples' votes are suppressed, made irrelevant by gerrymandering, and scuttled by out-moded, slave-protecting features of our constitution; nor dominated and distorted by a political system built on and based on the money of rich special interests. Public-financed campaigns and the reform of lobbies dominating our congress need to be established. The voting rights act of 1965 must be restored. This too is an ideal from the Awakening (particularly after the Watergate Scandal) that needs to be pressed forward again now. As Matt Post said, "our country is sick with soullnessness, but make no mistake, we are the cure." We must restore morality to our country's politics. Just as in Lincoln's times, government of, by and for the people needs to be restored and built upon.

And sometimes social justice warriors may be irritating. But social justice is something to uphold. The great legacy of rights, and personal dignity, for all races and peoples, all sexes and sexual orientations, must continue to be expanded, and it is part and parcel of economic fairness, and democratic reforms. Economic and social justice cannot be separated, either way. The feeling of liberation which these people felt in the Awakening was truly inspiring, and must not be forgotten, and must not in any way be reversed. Our police must be respected, but our police must exercize respect, and be held accountable when they don't. And nowadays when immigrants are falsely blamed for our economic problems, and one race led by its new demagogue wishes to make its country "great" again, fairness toward these people too is essential if we are to restore morality as well as economic fairness to our country, whose immigration policies in the 1960s started us on the road to a truly-great multi-racial society.

The Counter-awakening, i.e. the red and white awakenings, the Reaganomics and the Trumpisms, meanwhile deserve to be abandoned, just like the views of tories, confederates and the FDR haters were abandoned once the struggles of the 4T were over. The new true-blue greenpeace ideals from the Awakening need to be established as the new consensus.

The Fourth Turning is all about making the ideals of the previous awakening into institutional realities. This must be done, and to do that, the Consciousness Revolution in all its facets must be upheld and respected.

[Eric the Green]

Respect the Consciousness Revolution Awakening. Respect environmentalism. Respect the Peace Movement. Restore Democracy. Respect human potential and consciousness expansion. Respect community economics, and social connection and cultural revival in our cities. Respect social and economic equity.

[Teejay]

During the last Fourth Turning the new order did not begin to take shape until the Second World War, more accurately the Battle of Stalingrad in 1942-43. That was like thirteen years into the Fourth Turning (if you accept the Wall Street Crash as the catalyst, which I do).

For example; In Australia I have not noticed any new order starting to emerge yet, rather the old order has been continuing to decay for some time. Therefore; I don’t expect to see a new order start emerging at least in my region of the world until around maybe 2020-2022. Concerning the presidency of Donald Trump, I don’t believe much of what he has achieved will last beyond his presidency. Especially if he is successfully impeached from office.

Because the whole Trump “Make America Great Again” agenda is an appeal to go back to the past, this is same I observe from all these Nationalist Conservative and Populist movements which have come to political prominence in recent years. These people I predict will be the losing not winning side of this Fourth Turning like the Tories were in the Revolutionary War, Confederates in the Civil War and the Fascist Axis powers in the Second World War. This Fourth Turning reminds me a little of the Revolutionary War one at least in the Thirteen Colonies, which was a civil war with neither side being what could be considered wholly "good" or "bad".

Perhaps the blueprint for this new order is coming from people such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who recently won a Democratic Primary to a Congressional District and the Democratic Socialists of America she represents. Also the British Labour Party under the leader of Jeremy Corbyn as well and particularly the Momentum group in the Labour Party which were instrumental to getting elected as leader.

I am constantly reminded lately that history, rather it rhymes.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-04-2018, 03:26 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: The Counter-awakening, i.e. the red and white awakenings, the Reaganomics and the Trumpisms, meanwhile deserve to be abandoned, just like the views of tories, confederates and the FDR haters were abandoned once the struggles of the 4T were over. The new true-blue greenpeace ideals from the Awakening need to be established as the new consensus.

The Fourth Turning is all about making the ideals of the previous awakening into institutional realities. This must be done, and to do that, the Consciousness Revolution in all its facets must be upheld and respected.

This is precisely why I suggest we are not in a core 4T. There has been no regeneracy. We are not doing these things to any degree. The whole country has not accepted these values. The four turning cycle has not worked well outside Western Civilization in the Industrial Age. There are attempts here to force fit a theory by ignoring the evidence that its patten is not holding.

Mind you, much of the above happened, much changed, back in the Consciousness Revolution proper. The new values were acted on immediately, with the abandonment of the Vietnam war, with a rejection of active hot wars under the domino theory, with the signing of the Civil Rights act, with the woman's movement at the time and a wave of environmental action. That and the lack of a surge in the spiral of violence leads me to believe change is taking place in the Second Turning during the new age (Computerized information, nuclear weapons, renewable energy), not the Fourth.

There was what I call a false regeneracy with Bush 43's wars of aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq. He tried to alter US values towards making perpetual war, but failed to make the change because other nations resisted and made perpetual guerrilla war not a pleasant prospect at all. US values have since remained resistant to committing US ground troops abroad. In short, Bush 43's values were not accepted by the US after they briefly saw action.

Mind you, this might only effect the timing a little. When it becomes clear that we are killing the Earth, that we have to act in the active generations lifetime, there will be an awakening strong enough to make the Consciousness Revolution look small. Then we will see if change can be made in the Second Turning in the new age.

[Teejay]

(09-05-2018, 07:10 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: This is precisely why I suggest we are not in a core 4T.  There has been no regeneracy.  We are not doing these things to any degree.  The whole country has not accepted these values.  The four turning cycle has not worked well outside Western Civilization in the Industrial Age.  There are attempts here to force fit a theory by ignoring the evidence that its patten is not holding.

Mind you, much of the above happened, much changed, back in the Consciousness Revolution proper.  The new values were acted on immediately, with the abandonment of the Vietnam war, with a rejection of active hot wars under the domino theory, with the signing of the Civil Rights act, with the woman's movement at the time and a wave of environmental action.  That and the lack of a surge in the spiral of violence leads me to believe change is taking place in the Second Turning during the new age (Computerized information, nuclear weapons, renewable energy), not the Fourth.

There was what I call a false regeneracy with Bush 43's wars of aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq.  He tried to alter US values towards making perpetual war, but failed to make the change because other nations resisted and made perpetual guerrilla war not a pleasant prospect at all.  US values have since remained resistant to committing US ground troops abroad.  In short, Bush 43's values were not accepted by the US after they briefly saw action.

Mind you, this might only effect the timing a little.  When it becomes clear that we are killing the Earth, that we have to act in the active generations lifetime, there will be an awakening strong enough to make the Consciousness Revolution look small.  Then we will see if change can be made in the Second Turning in the new age.

For myself there is nothing that tells me that the Saeculum is not currently in operation. Strauss and Howe predicted what has happened in the last ten years much more accurately than anybody else, even if the predictions were particularly specific.

I am personally need to wait another couple of decades to get a fuller picture of things like when did the regeneracy occurred in this Fourth Turning. Mind you the regeneracy might have not been that dramatic, Rise of the Tea Party movement, Sarah Palin's popularity and the election of a large number of extreme conservatives in state and federal legislatures could been the regeneracy.

In Australia it could have been the election of the most conservative government (The Liberals under Tony Abbott) we have had for a very long time, on the back of populist anger in 2013 over the implementation of the carbon tax (which the incoming government abolished). Despite being deposed as Liberal Party leader in 2015, Tony Abbott still maintains a fanatical following among our version of the Tea Party crowd.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-05-2018, 07:25 AM)Teejay Wrote: For myself there is nothing that tells me that the Saeculum is not currently in operation. Strauss and Howe predicted what has happened in the last ten years much more accurately than anybody else, even if the predictions were particularly specific.

I am personally need to wait another couple of decades to get a fuller picture of things like when did the regeneracy occurred in this Fourth Turning. Mind you the regeneracy might have not been that dramatic, Rise of the Tea Party movement, Sarah Palin's popularity and the election of a large number of extreme conservatives in state and federal legislatures could been the regeneracy.

Hmm. You seem to be highlighting conservative peaks in the see saw as possible regeneracy, where someone like Eric or Pbower would nominate progressive highlights. That one new set of values is not riding high, running roughshod, is indication to me that no regeneracy has taken place, that the out of power party remains in a position to flip the see saw.

Me, I could daydream about the anti establishment wings of both parties getting behind a compromising Grey Champion who takes both sets of concerns seriously and takes over one party or the other. I recognize, however, that this has not happened yet. Not close.

[pbrower2a]

(09-05-2018, 07:25 AM)Teejay Wrote: For myself there is nothing that tells me that the Saeculum is not currently in operation. Strauss and Howe predicted what has happened in the last ten years much more accurately than anybody else, even if the predictions were particularly specific.

When they wrote Generations, Howe and Strauss suggested Al Gore as a possible Grey Champion. That looks highly unlikely now.

Quote:I am personally need to wait another couple of decades to get a fuller picture of things like when did the regeneracy occurred in this Fourth Turning. Mind you the regeneracy might have not been that dramatic, Rise of the Tea Party movement, Sarah Palin's popularity and the election of a large number of extreme conservatives in state and federal legislatures could been the regeneracy.

Sarah Palin has faded into irrelevancy, hardly suggesting that she has remade America. She seems to have done more to hurt the McCain candidacy for President in 2008 than to have helped. The Tea Party Movement and the right-wing pols that it helped get elected especially in 2010 and 2014 are becoming vulnerable. A successful movement gets entrenched in the most decisive part of the Crisis; it is never in danger of being cast off. The Left-leaning parts of the political spectrum are much more active in 2018 than the Tea Party was in 2010.

The success of Donald Trump in getting elected is superficial, transitory, and reversible. His approval polls have sunk to the vicinity of 40%, which is abysmal for any sitting President. He and his associates are under scrutiny for legal misconduct including corruption and abuse of power. This is not what one expects of Lincoln or FDR. America can still have the equivalent of a Lincoln or FDR (OK -- Disraeli, Garibaldi, Juarez, Gandhi, Churchill, Mannerheim, or Adenauer would be good equivalents, too) who solves lots of problems fast, decisively, and permanently -- this bringing the Crisis to a satisfying ending for most Americans.

The only function that I see in Donald Trump is how not to lead America in dangerous times.  It is ironic that he chose to repudiate everything about Obama -- and unfortunately, among Obama attributes that he rejected were integrity, decency, caution, and kindness. Those might not be enough (Carter had those), but they would seem necessary for effectiveness as a leader.

Quote:In Australia it could have been the election of the most conservative government (The Liberals under Tony Abbott) we have had for a very long time, on the back of populist anger in 2013 over the implementation of the carbon tax (which the incoming government abolished). Despite being deposed as Liberal Party leader in 2015, Tony Abbott still maintains a fanatical following among our version of the Tea Party crowd.

Right-wing populism can degenerate into free-flowing anger against people who have done nothing wrong. Such intensifies the nastiness of a Crisis. I can't say that left-wing populism is any better, as is shown in Venezuela.

[Teejay]

Bob Butler 54 wrote:

Quote:Hmm. You seem to be highlighting conservative peaks in the see saw as possible regeneracy, where someone like Eric or Pbower would nominate progressive highlights. That one new set of values is not riding high, running roughshod, is indication to me that no regeneracy has taken place, that the out of power party remains in a position to flip the see saw.

Me, I could daydream about the anti establishment wings of both parties getting behind a compromising Grey Champion who takes both sets of concerns seriously and takes over one party or the other. I recognize, however, that this has not happened yet. Not close.

I would not say I am highlighting only conservative peaks in the see saw, I just argue they just came first in this case. With these things you need a something to trigger it and Barack Obama becoming President in 2008 was going to affect the Conservatives more than the Progressives. With the election of Donald Trump now we are seeing the Progressive part of the see saw more prominently before, some examples would be the Black Lives Matter and #metoo movements.

[pbrower2a]

(09-05-2018, 05:51 PM)Teejay Wrote: Bob Butler 54 wrote:

Quote:Hmm. You seem to be highlighting conservative peaks in the see saw as possible regeneracy, where someone like Eric or Pbower would nominate progressive highlights. That one new set of values is not riding high, running roughshod, is indication to me that no regeneracy has taken place, that the out of power party remains in a position to flip the see saw.

Me, I could daydream about the anti establishment wings of both parties getting behind a compromising Grey Champion who takes both sets of concerns seriously and takes over one party or the other. I recognize, however, that this has not happened yet. Not close.

I would not say I am highlighting only conservative peaks in the see saw, I just argue they just came first in this case. With these things you need a something to trigger it and Barack Obama becoming President in 2008 was going to affect the Conservatives more than the Progressives. With the election of Donald Trump now we are seeing the Progressive part of the see saw more prominently before, some examples would be the Black Lives Matter and #metoo movements.

In a Crisis, it is the last act that mattes most. Hitler completely dominated the German Crisis of 1940 from early 1933 until early 1945.  After that, American, British, French, and Soviet generals  decided what was possible and what was impossible in Germany. Events can discredit a secular leader, and somehow I cannot see Donald Trump as the sort who establishes what is possible and what is not beyond his Presidency.

[Teejay]

(09-05-2018, 07:04 PM)pbrower2a Wrote:

(09-05-2018, 05:51 PM)Teejay Wrote: Bob Butler 54 wrote:

Quote:Hmm. You seem to be highlighting conservative peaks in the see saw as possible regeneracy, where someone like Eric or Pbower would nominate progressive highlights. That one new set of values is not riding high, running roughshod, is indication to me that no regeneracy has taken place, that the out of power party remains in a position to flip the see saw.

Me, I could daydream about the anti establishment wings of both parties getting behind a compromising Grey Champion who takes both sets of concerns seriously and takes over one party or the other. I recognize, however, that this has not happened yet. Not close.

I would not say I am highlighting only conservative peaks in the see saw, I just argue they just came first in this case. With these things you need a something to trigger it and Barack Obama becoming President in 2008 was going to affect the Conservatives more than the Progressives. With the election of Donald Trump now we are seeing the Progressive part of the see saw more prominently before, some examples would be the Black Lives Matter and #metoo movements.

In a Crisis, it is the last act that mattes most. Hitler completely dominated the German Crisis of 1940 from early 1933 until early 1945.  After that, American, British, French, and Soviet generals  decided what was possible and what was impossible in Germany. Events can discredit a secular leader, and somehow I cannot see Donald Trump as the sort who establishes what is possible and what is not beyond his Presidency.

I totally agree with you with that assessment, hence why I argued that the new order did not begin to take shape until quite late in the last Fourth Turning, about when the Battle of Stalingrad occurred in 1942-1943.

[Cynic Hero '86]

Trump seems to be bogging down in partisan politics, his actions so far have energized hardcore supporters (and opponents) but not much else, the improving economy might be in his favor. As for the progressive side, at best they could get temporary gains in the house and senate that would probably be reversed in the next election or two; The progressives would be incapable of acquiring any gains that are bigger than that even in the best case scenario for them unless they abandon SJWism. Neither the Liberals or the Conservatives are trusted by the citizenry at the moment. At this point the only pillar of governance and the only political force in the Country that has not been discredited by the last 20 years of US politics, the only remaining fully credible force in America is the Military.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-05-2018, 09:48 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: Trump seems to be bogging down in partisan politics, his actions so far have energized hardcore supporters (and opponents) but not much else, the improving economy might be in his favor. As for the progressive side, at best they could get temporary gains in the house and senate that would probably be reversed in the next election or two; The progressives would be incapable of acquiring any gains that are bigger than that even in the best case scenario for them unless they abandon SJWism. Neither the Liberals or the Conservatives are trusted by the citizenry at the moment. At this point the only pillar of governance and the only political force in the Country that has not been discredited by the last 20 years of US politics, the only remaining fully credible force in America is the Military.

Trump is embracing the swamp and using the Tea Party.  Of course he is bogging down in partisan politics.  He will be the incumbent as well as a probably healthy economy on his side, but he won a minority victory and proceeded to make a bunch of people on the fence mad at him.  I suspect the see saw is tipped.

But he might not last four years the way he is going.  But if he last just a little over two years, Pence could be the incumbent in 2020 and again in 2024.  

Or maybe not.  The Republicans are rejecting their Establishment.  They could well nominate someone in the Palin / Trump scheme, but more sane and competent, rejecting their incumbent.

As a progressive, I am apt to see the SJW opponents as the racists and sexists, as the leftovers of Nixon's Southern Strategy.  There were large steps forward on social issues during the Obama years, encouraging the racists and sexists to step out in the open again.  The SJWs are generally fighting for equality, one of the classic Enlightenment and American values in the past.  The Democrats have taken up the banner, are unlikely to let it down.  Me, I have my arrow of progress, and suspect strongly that the equality side will come out eventually on top.  This does not mean that the next few years will be quiet ones.  The bad guys will have their innings.

This is one place where the red complaint that the blue never listen can be reversed.  Many blue sincerely and with emphasis believe in equality.  They have seen a history of equality overcoming past prejudice.  I do not see the blues backing down to the racists and sexists, though they might not see it as the dominant issue in the upcoming elections.

But ignoring racism and sexism will not be easy.  I believe that in part racism and sexism are behind much of the red economic approach.  Independence over a strong community?  A small government with low taxes?  Favoring a strong division of wealth over attempts to spread money more evenly?  All can make a wonderful surface sense and attract legitimate voters.  They also get in the way of taking away red money and spending it on disadvantaged people with skin pigmentation.  LBJ redistributed wealth too much in his Great Society.  Conservatives killed American greatness, the notion that America could do anything it put is mind to, created the National Malaise, in part to fight that trend, a trend based in part on racist and sexist motivation.

I would like to see a non establishment candidate, or more than one, take over one or both parties.  That trend is real.  One element of the upcoming conflict is the division of wealth, and both rural and urban populations could benefit by non traditional anti establishment candidates.  This wave is growing, but so far the establishment is hanging on to power.

But the wave against the establishment is growing.  I am not seeing it breaking yet.  I am not seeing new values triumphing soon.  I could be wrong.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-05-2018, 07:53 PM)Teejay Wrote: I totally agree with you with that assessment, hence why I argued that the new order did not begin to take shape until quite late in the last Fourth Turning, about when the Battle of Stalingrad occurred in 1942-1943.

The Atlantic Charter was released in August of 1941, and defined the basics. Churchill's Iron Curtain speech was 1946. But, yes, we are in agreement as much as a Turning boundary issue ever is.

The New Age is based on computer information, nukes, and renewable energy. The first two were born in WW II, the former in code breaking efforts. The last came a little later. I would put the resolution of the Civic rights movement, the women's movement, the rebuking of the domino policy and the environmental movement as evidence that major issues could be resolved in the 2T, that the awakening values, being resolved, do not any longer come to fruition in the non regenerated pseudo 4T.

[pbrower2a]

(09-06-2018, 11:57 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-05-2018, 09:48 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: Trump seems to be bogging down in partisan politics, his actions so far have energized hardcore supporters (and opponents) but not much else, the improving economy might be in his favor. As for the progressive side, at best they could get temporary gains in the house and senate that would probably be reversed in the next election or two; The progressives would be incapable of acquiring any gains that are bigger than that even in the best case scenario for them unless they abandon SJWism. Neither the Liberals or the Conservatives are trusted by the citizenry at the moment. At this point the only pillar of governance and the only political force in the Country that has not been discredited by the last 20 years of US politics, the only remaining fully credible force in America is the Military.

Trump is embracing the swamp and using the Tea Party.  Of course he is bogging down in partisan politics.  He will be the incumbent as well as a probably healthy economy on his side, but he won a minority victory and proceeded to make a bunch of people on the fence mad at him.  I suspect the see saw is tipped.

But he might not last four years the way he is going.  But if he last just a little over two years, Pence could be the incumbent in 2020 and again in 2024.

Add a self-righteous theocracy to the plutocratic agenda Donald Trump kept hidden from the masses in 2016, and you have Mike Pence. Pence can offend even more people by pushing his fundamentalist Christianity as public policy.

Quote:Or maybe not.  The Republicans are rejecting their Establishment.  They could well nominate someone in the Palin / Trump scheme, but more sane and competent, rejecting their incumbent.

They are creating a new potential Establishment, one even more rapacious, intolerant, and ruthless. Will that go well? It will be more effective if it can intensify punishments for dissent or faltering, but it won't make people happier. To twist FDR's "We have nothing to fear but Fear itself" into a totalitarian mode, harsh rulers make sure that people know that they have nothing but fear to motivate them. Never mind that fear eventually breaks people down and strips them of any initiative.

Quote:As a progressive, I am apt to see the SJW opponents as the racists and sexists, as the leftovers of Nixon's Southern Strategy.  There were large steps forward on social issues during the Obama years, encouraging the racists and sexists to step out in the open again.  The SJWs are generally fighting for equality, one of the classic Enlightenment and American values in the past.  The Democrats have taken up the banner, are unlikely to let it down.  Me, I have my arrow of progress, and suspect strongly that the equality side will come out eventually on top.  This does not mean that the next few years will be quiet ones.  The bad guys will have their innings.

...Nixon's Southern Strategy exploited what was already there -- racists and people with sentimental attachments to a sick social order. That's nostalgia for the pig wallow. Some people have it. Nixon thought that he was creating a new alliance for himself and successors like him, He started forming such an alliance that would serve a reactionary demagogue such as Donald Trump and whoever might follow in our current President's footsteps. Ironically, Trump shows much the same anger at what he considers America's intellectual elites as did the leftist Sixties radicals at what they saw as the rapacious warmongers. Trump is no more civil than those who chanted "Hey, hey LBJ! How many boys did you kill today!" or who as the Vietcong took over Saigon shouted "Bring the victory home!" Mocking a reporter with visible autism is similarly crude and offensive.

This said, social equity has its attractions. It smooths the nastiness out of life. Equality also means that more people get viable chances to participate in creating prosperity and happiness for themselves. We are not rich because our elites can build palaces with opulent furnishings and have veritable armies of domestic staff to indulge their whims. We are rich to the extent that those who do the work to create prosperity themselves prosper.

We are in a Crisis, and good and evil will contest practically everything. We will see much destruction and tragedy. We will see good people giving up on life itself as they find futility in its struggle as bad people get into temporary ascendancy. I can tell you that in my bleakest moments that I considered Death welcome as an end to a life that I came to hate. One such time was when Donald Trump, a man who stands for nothing that I believe in and with whom all I have in common is that I am white, male, American, and about half-German in ancestry, a vulgar barbarian (or is it 'barbarous vulgarian'?) devoid of any evident virtues, was elected.

But I live in relative pampering in contrast to someone like the late Elie Wiesel, who saw a Crisis Era at its worst and came out of it competent to challenge anything promising to be in the same direction, if not as monstrous in scale and intensity, as the Holocaust that he knew. Am I an ingrate or did I simply have things too good in the past to face what I now know -- simply being poor in a culture and political system that values only wealth and institutional power. Suffering for plutocrats who know no constraints on their indulgence yet want most people to survive in misery is not the same as trying to buy a little time by doing back-breaking tol on starvation rations. With a bad back all my life, I would have never have lasted long in a Nazi labor camp at any age -- not even as a teenager or young adult. With a bad back and Aspergers I would have been seen as crazy, lazy, and useless, someone to be given a lethal injection of carbolic acid in the "euthanasia" program.

Quote:This is one place where the red complaint that the blue never listen can be reversed.  Many blue sincerely and with emphasis believe in equality.  They have seen a history of equality overcoming past prejudice.  I do not see the blues backing down to the racists and sexists, though they might not see it as the dominant issue in the upcoming elections.

I have my prediction: Trump policies will hurt many who fell for the idea that he could "make America great again". As one very good at analyzing language for fraudulence (read Nineteen Eighty-Four a few times, a decade or so apart, over fifty years, and you will know enough), I could look at such a bumper sticker or yard sign that reads "Make America Great Again" and think of snide rejoinders.

Better? For whom? How was America better at some time? Maybe easier (as with real estate costs) or having opportunities (cheap farmland on the western frontier) that have all been snapped up. But 'easier' isn't better. 'Easy' crossword puzzles bore me. I prefer our crowded expressways to the blood-alley blacktop roads of the 1920s and 1930s. Even if I would be privileged just for being white, I cannot imagine anyone in good conscience resurrecting Jim Crow practice. I don't have to understand homosexuality (there but for the grace of God go I) to believe that we are all better off that it is in the mainstream. I have no desire for a return of deadly 'childhood diseases'. I would rather have to live with the technologies of the 1920s than give up the social progress since then.

I pity people who fell for Trump and got burned. At least I knew what was coming to an extent. If something went well, I would be delightfully surprised, which is the one good thing about being a pessimist on anything. People who voted for him and get burned get my pity. Sure, I didn't expect Trump to get cozy with dictators, promote environmental degradation for quick bucks, or impose tariffs that would put seven years of economic recovery at risk. I can ask some 'Red's what they would like to do about such. Sometimes what they say disgusts me while giving me some political hope. The tariffs and the resulting trade war will hurt people who never saw it coming, including people who will lose more than I ever can through reduced income (lower commodity prices), endure higher costs of doing business (even casualty insurance will become more costly), and a higher cost of the consumer society. Remember: tariffs are basically sales taxes on imports. Many who voted for Donald Trump out of habit or hope have been burned as I have not been.

For them I can tell them that they don't have to vote for the same Mistake again or for that Mistake's enablers in Congress.

Quote:But ignoring racism and sexism will not be easy.  I believe that in part racism and sexism are behind much of the red economic approach.  Independence over a strong community?  A small government with low taxes?  Favoring a strong division of wealth over attempts to spread money more evenly?  All can make a wonderful surface sense and attract legitimate voters.  They also get in the way of taking away red money and spending it on disadvantaged people with skin pigmentation.  LBJ redistributed wealth too much in his Great Society.  Conservatives killed American greatness, the notion that America could do anything it put is mind to, created the National Malaise, in part to fight that trend, a trend based in part on racist and sexist motivation.

Racism and sexism at most offer the perverse attraction of Schadenfreude. Someone else for which one cares little gets hurt. Poverty is not freedom, inequality is not community, and regression is not ease. We can no more get small government with low taxes than we can recover the low real estate costs of San Francisco in the 1920s. Heck, I am priced into the dreary hick town in which I was born, a place that I did not want to return to in which to live. It is not living. But such is how things happen when a few things go wrong and do not get undone. It is far easier to achieve one's nightmares than to achieve one's dreams.

Quote: I would like to see a non establishment candidate, or more than one, take over one or both parties.  That trend is real.  One element of the upcoming conflict is the division of wealth, and both rural and urban populations could benefit by non traditional anti establishment candidates.  This wave is growing, but so far the establishment is hanging on to power.

I would be satisfied with the Establishment of both side of the political spectrum starting to show compassion for the common man at the least out of concern that the common man can strike back in a revolution that destroys the Establishment. In return for the survival of a little class privilege the economic elites start making the world better for people not themselves.

Quote:But the wave against the establishment is growing.  I am not seeing it breaking yet.  I am not seeing new values triumphing soon.  I could be wrong.

I don't want to see anything like Russia in 1917, China in 1949, or Cuba in 1959. Just because the Establishment  gets exiled, decimated, or ruined does not mean that things get better. I'll take incremental reform over blood-sodden revolution any day.

[Teejay]

(09-06-2018, 12:44 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-05-2018, 07:53 PM)Teejay Wrote: I totally agree with you with that assessment, hence why I argued that the new order did not begin to take shape until quite late in the last Fourth Turning, about when the Battle of Stalingrad occurred in 1942-1943.

The Atlantic Charter was released in August of 1941, and defined the basics.  Churchill's Iron Curtain speech was 1946.  But, yes, we are in agreement as much as a Turning boundary issue ever is.

I was arguing that Battle of Stalingrad was it was definite that the allies would win the War rather than the Axis powers in the European theater. In Europe the Soviet Union did the greater part in defeating the Axis powers.

[Eric the Green]

Where are we and where are we going? I posted this song in the long thread about the best songs ever. I am now convinced this was a very vivid prophecy of our current fourth turning, probably the best ever. Certainly it's THE song of this 4T, even though created in the 2T. But that seems fitting too. And in a way, it tells us where we need to be going too. I always thought it was one of the greatest songs ever. iirc one of our posters had this in a signature line.

Climate change has literally brought more and more storms and floods threatening our lives today. If you live in Redding or Santa Rosa CA you saw fires sweepin' your street like a red coat carpet. And we've got a "mad bull" in a China cabinet occupying the White House, losing our way. Wars are just a shot way, as droughts spark revolutions in the Arab world, and our leaders are still talking bombs away. Murder is just a shot away with all the massacres in our schools and concert halls and everywhere, anywhere, at any time; people have come to expect it. And rape is on everyone's mind with the me too movement and the pedophile priests. Gimme Shelter! But love is in the air too, as the people rise up to meet the challenge. We can change this.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-06-2018, 09:47 PM)Teejay Wrote:

(09-06-2018, 12:44 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-05-2018, 07:53 PM)Teejay Wrote: I totally agree with you with that assessment, hence why I argued that the new order did not begin to take shape until quite late in the last Fourth Turning, about when the Battle of Stalingrad occurred in 1942-1943.

The Atlantic Charter was released in August of 1941, and defined the basics.  Churchill's Iron Curtain speech was 1946.  But, yes, we are in agreement as much as a Turning boundary issue ever is.

I was arguing that Battle of Stalingrad was it was definite that the allies would win the War rather than the Axis powers in the European theater. In Europe the Soviet Union did the greater part in defeating the Axis powers.

Yep. El Alamain and Midway happened about the same time. By that time, the US economy was pretty committed to the war effort, and it began to show. (As one Commie put it, "American uniforms. Soviet men.")

But turnings seem to have more than one dimension, so it is quite possible to put the emphasis on different things. I am into how values change, so I put my emphasis on values rather than the progress of the war. Thus, you get variations in the dates which is best answered by different markers thus fuzzy dates.

[David Horn]

(09-06-2018, 11:57 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I would like to see a non establishment candidate, or more than one, take over one or both parties.  That trend is real.  One element of the upcoming conflict is the division of wealth, and both rural and urban populations could benefit by non traditional anti establishment candidates.  This wave is growing, but so far the establishment is hanging on to power.

But the wave against the establishment is growing.  I am not seeing it breaking yet.  I am not seeing new values
triumphing soon.  I could be wrong.

Any non-establishment candidate who runs has to offer something real or (s)he's just another Trump. Bring me ideas first, then pick a champion to bring them about. I only have four critical issues: addressing climate immediately, establishing international relations on a win-win basis (definitely avoid war), move quickly to reduce inequality, and show basic competence. A lot of other issues make achieving those hard to impossible, but they are symptoms rather than core issues -- race and gender being the two most potent. Unless a candidate with FDR-like charisma, guts, energy and savvy emerges out of the political soup, we're still a few election cycles away from getting there.

[Bob Butler 54]

(09-08-2018, 08:29 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(09-06-2018, 11:57 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I would like to see a non establishment candidate, or more than one, take over one or both parties.  That trend is real.  One element of the upcoming conflict is the division of wealth, and both rural and urban populations could benefit by non traditional anti establishment candidates.  This wave is growing, but so far the establishment is hanging on to power.

But the wave against the establishment is growing.  I am not seeing it breaking yet.  I am not seeing new values
triumphing soon.  I could be wrong.

Any non-establishment candidate who runs has to offer something real or (s)he's just another Trump.  Bring me ideas first, then pick a champion to bring them about.  I only have four critical issues: addressing climate immediately, establishing international relations on a win-win basis (definitely avoid war), move quickly to reduce inequality, and show basic competence.  A lot of other issues make achieving those hard to impossible, but they are symptoms rather than core issues -- race and gender being the two most potent.  Unless a candidate with FDR-like charisma, guts, energy and savvy emerges out of the political soup, we're still a few election cycles away from getting there.

We are going to have to address waste and population eventually, but your four critical issues are a good start.  I would say several election cycles away, rather than a few.  Cultures are incredibly stubborn.

[David Horn]

(09-08-2018, 09:06 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(09-08-2018, 08:29 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(09-06-2018, 11:57 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I would like to see a non establishment candidate, or more than one, take over one or both parties.  That trend is real.  One element of the upcoming conflict is the division of wealth, and both rural and urban populations could benefit by non traditional anti establishment candidates.  This wave is growing, but so far the establishment is hanging on to power.

But the wave against the establishment is growing.  I am not seeing it breaking yet.  I am not seeing new values
triumphing soon.  I could be wrong.

Any non-establishment candidate who runs has to offer something real or (s)he's just another Trump.  Bring me ideas first, then pick a champion to bring them about.  I only have four critical issues: addressing climate immediately, establishing international relations on a win-win basis (definitely avoid war), move quickly to reduce inequality, and show basic competence.  A lot of other issues make achieving those hard to impossible, but they are symptoms rather than core issues -- race and gender being the two most potent.  Unless a candidate with FDR-like charisma, guts, energy and savvy emerges out of the political soup, we're still a few election cycles away from getting there.

We are going to have to address waste and population eventually, but your four critical issues are a good start.  I would say several election cycles away, rather than a few.  Cultures are incredibly stubborn.

All of which leads to the question: are we experiencing a failed 4T?  If battlelines are drawn, but no one takes the battle forward, can we ever resolve anything?  After 45 years of Tweedledee Tweedledum polices, with the very few winning all the battles that count, it seems a long stretch to reversing the trend.  Do we have to experience another major incident, or can we get there by political means alone?