Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What will happen when this turning ends?
#21
(12-27-2019, 04:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I see no reason to think the Left is not genuinely concerned about the environment and climate change.

Obviously you weren't watching when leftist Washington State voted down a carbon tax last year.  Meanwhile, all the "solutions" to which the left gives lip service are counterproductive, like the Paris Accord which caused Germany to junk its nuclear plants for coal plants.
Reply
#22
(12-28-2019, 01:06 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-27-2019, 04:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I see no reason to think the Left is not genuinely concerned about the environment and climate change.

Obviously you weren't watching when leftist Washington State voted down a carbon tax last year.  Meanwhile, all the "solutions" to which the left gives lip service are counterproductive, like the Paris Accord which caused Germany to junk its nuclear plants for coal plants.

Surprise surprise, I don't buy your hasty conclusions, which are natural for a conservative to make. Germany gave up nuclear power because of Fukushima. The Paris Accord had nothing to do with nuclear power, and may even recommend it. 

Washington state voted down a carbon tax, and yes that was not the right vote regarding concern over climate change. But voters in all states of the USA are not always Left, and not always "right" either; they are fickle and easily confused. They are Americans, after all; Americans like Classic Xer claims we are. Meanwhile however, they elected climate change fighter Jay Inslee as governor, and the state is doing many of the right things. It is always among the group of blue states that restrict gas mileage, increase energy efficiency and join together to support the Paris Accords and the changes it mandates. And I don't think it has given up nuclear power. Citing one example of behavior is not to define a trend. 

https://www.governor.wa.gov/issues/issue...nvironment
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#23
(12-27-2019, 01:38 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote:
(12-26-2019, 02:19 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(12-23-2019, 01:51 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-23-2019, 04:03 AM)Bill the Piper Wrote: If the Nationalists win, they won't be able to establish a proper 1T because the elites despise them.

If the Nationalists win, that will mean that most of the elites have been destroyed, and the remaining ones will have been cowed into submission.

That depends on which elites you're addressing.  The wealthy elite are, for all practical purposes, untouchable by the nationalists who rant on about foreigners, not them.  If anything, the wealthy elite are completely happy to  join in the immigrant-bashing, while using their at-risk talents to make millions or Billions for themselves.
Are they really as untouchable as you say? Dude, we are touching them/ financially hurting them/ financially threatening them right now which is why your politicians are going ape shit, supporting stupid stuff and acting more like a bunch foreign/ global politicians than American politicians right now. The proof is in the pudding as we say.

The Reaganomics policies you vote for are the greatest possible boon to the wealthy elite. Lower taxes, less regulation, subsidies, wars for oil; what more could they want?
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#24
Obviously how the Crisis ends will matter greatly. We could see the Crisis ending with any result from extinction of Humanity in a nuclear holocaust to a relatively bloodless end in which political reforms bring sudden, decisive, and largely-benign change. In between are many gradations of disaster and triumph.

Obviously the extinction of humanity puts an end to history as we know it, and a near-extinction could result in a steady transition to a new and perhaps protracted Dark Age as one after another metaphoric light of the old civilization dies out without succession. War? Who will be th winner and who will be the loser -- and even victory could be so tainted with mass destruction of human and physical capital and destruction of institutions that victory could sting as badly as some catastrophic defeats (think of Poland at the end of WWII).

On a national scale...

If this Crisis ends with the establishment of a vile change in the political order (let us say an ideology that transforms most Americans into serfs while suppressing freedom of inquiry and innovation on behalf of elites of ownership and administration (the 3T intensified and solidified), then we could have a nasty order indeed -- one that could implode in a Bolshevik-style revolution that will establish the nature of the Crisis of 2100. Should American political leadership determine that global warming is to be treated as a necessary price of economic growth, then global warming could lead to wars and persecutions that could make those of the Crisis of 1940 look gentle by comparison. But I get ahead of myself by discussing events circa 2100 when I cannot be absolutely certain that Humanity, let alone civilization and high technology (and if technology is rendered unusable we might be turning things other than swords into plowshares -- like slices of motor vehicles) that people if lucky attach to draft animals so that people can keep themselves fed -- barely, if they are lucky.

The generational theory can inform us of some trends. The right-wing political trend that began with the Tea Party (and perhaps before that Newt Gingrich's "Contract for America" will either consolidate itself with the imposition of a dictatorial regime that entrenches power that elevates a plutocratic elite and debases everyone else (which Classic X'er stands for without quite recognizing such)... or will dissipate as the American electorate becomes much less sympathetic to current elites of ownership and management. About 1.5% of the electorate, predominantly over 55, leaves the electorate every year due to death and debility while younger adults join the electorate. Those young adults are now largely of the Millennial Generation. If there is a generation of voters following the Millennial generation, then its definition in birth-year cohorts is not yet set. So far young adults born in 2000, 2001, and 2002 (the 2020 Presidential election will include all but a few of the first adults voting whose birth-years do not begin with a "1") seem to be echoes of the Millennial Generation in their political values.

Note well the pattern: voters over 55 are (whether Silent, Boom, or very early-wave X) about 5% more Republican than Democratic -- and the voters under 40 are about 20% more Democratic than Republican. 1.5% of the electorate going more D by about 25% each year means that even with ordinary successes in partisan results based on the composition of the electorate -- Democrats get a big enough edge to win back Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin even without the perception that Donald Trump is a complete disaster. OK, Florida keeps getting an influx of R-leaning voters from other states as they retire there -- sure. That means that Trump loses Arizona, Georgia, or North Carolina instead.

I expect Millennial participation in the election to get more marked for another reason: that Millennial adults who will be approaching 40 are at the age when a generation takes increasing numbers of high elected positions in public office. Many will better fit patterns of thought of Millennial voters who are much more secular and egalitarian than their seniors. These types will get the Millennial vote out as it has never been before, and almost entirely to the detriment of the Hard Right.

I have a sincere hope that we solve our political debates with ballots -- and not with bullets, let alone bombs. Don't you?
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
(12-28-2019, 01:06 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-27-2019, 04:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I see no reason to think the Left is not genuinely concerned about the environment and climate change.

Obviously you weren't watching when leftist Washington State voted down a carbon tax last year.  Meanwhile, all the "solutions" to which the left gives lip service are counterproductive, like the Paris Accord which caused Germany to junk its nuclear plants for coal plants.

I can't speak to the Washington State issue, but Germany is a case of split personality.  They hate nuclear power out of radiation fear and AGW for the same reasons everyone else does.  For some reason, they don't put the two together.  I agree, it's stupid.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#26
(12-28-2019, 12:59 AM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-27-2019, 08:58 AM)David Horn Wrote:
(12-26-2019, 07:12 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(12-26-2019, 02:19 PM)David Horn Wrote:
(12-23-2019, 01:51 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: If the Nationalists win, that will mean that most of the elites have been destroyed, and the remaining ones will have been cowed into submission.

That depends on which elites you're addressing.  The wealthy elite are, for all practical purposes, untouchable by the nationalists who rant on about foreigners, not them.  If anything, the wealthy elite are completely happy to  join in the immigrant-bashing, while using their at-risk talents to make millions or Billions for themselves.

The Nationalists would love to take out the Globalist elites.  Soros, Gates and Microsoft's campuses in India, Google and Facebook and their immigrant engineers and managers, I could easily see Nationalists take a wrecking ball to them as the crisis gets more intense.

Thank you for making my point.  Note the entire lack of anyone from the much more typical rightwing wealthy elite.  Where ae the Mercers and Kochs?  Yes, the Nationalists are happy to bash internationalists for being, well, internationalists.  But none of the Nationalists want to tax the extremely wealthy the way they need to be taxed to reduce their stranglehold on the economy … none!

So now you're claiming that Soros and Gates aren't wealthy?  That's some serious self delusion there.

Yes, both are wealthy, as are several others like Warren Buffet and Mike Bloomberg -- all are more liberal than the average Billionaire. The Nationalists are all-in on them, but ignore the hundreds (yes, that's an accurate category) of Billionaires who are far right of center. You never hear about them from the Nationalist crowd, and why? East answer: the Nationalists are funded by them. Trump is part of that club too -- the egocentric and greedy.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  I'm a sceptic that the 4th Turning started in 2008 Isoko 293 12,481 09-15-2020, 10:24 PM
Last Post: Bob Butler 54
  First Turning "purge" Teejay 66 8,510 08-18-2020, 07:22 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  The Civil War 4th turning Eric the Green 2 483 05-13-2020, 04:42 PM
Last Post: Bob Butler 54
  In What Turning do Neighborhood Communities come back? AspieMillennial 7 636 05-05-2020, 10:15 PM
Last Post: beechnut79
  War & Military Turning & Generational Issues JDG 66 4 2,425 03-03-2020, 03:30 PM
Last Post: Warren Dew
  Why does the Fourth Turning seem to take Forever? AspieMillennial 22 1,906 01-19-2020, 03:30 PM
Last Post: Anthony '58
  Does the UK disprove the Fourth Turning? AspieMillennial 14 1,328 01-02-2020, 12:14 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Turning-dependent jokes Hintergrund 15 2,339 11-08-2019, 07:52 AM
Last Post: Hintergrund
  First Turning "purge" Teejay 49 12,028 11-14-2018, 09:51 PM
Last Post: Marypoza
  The Fourth Turning Halftime Update sbarrera 54 14,589 11-06-2018, 10:39 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)