Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Hypothetical coronavirus in the 2T
#1
What if COVID-19 had happened 40 years ago, in 1980? It was the tail end of the 2T/Awakening. What would have been different?

I'm guessing there would not have been as much of a government response in the United States. None of this proactive shutting down of schools and businesses. If would have felt less fearful and more zany.
Steve Barrera

[A]lthough one would like to change today's world back to the spirit of one hundred years or more ago, it cannot be done. Thus it is important to make the best out of every generation. - Hagakure

Saecular Pages
Reply
#2
I'm not sure.  The dominant time of the last Awakening was during the progressive era, the tax and spend period.  I would have the heart of it run from the Beatles arrival in America to Nixon's election.  At a guess they would have thrown a bunch of money at it and tried to solve the problem.  There might have been more confidence.  America was believed widely to be able to do anything.  The 'ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" mentality was in place.  People were more ready to sacrifice.

Maybe less fearful and zany, more rational and optimistic.  I don't know though.  The next so called awakening could be very different.  I am not sure the Industrial Age pattern is holding well.
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Reply
#3
(03-15-2020, 10:57 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I'm not sure.  The dominant time of the last Awakening was during the progressive era, the tax and spend period.  I would have the heart of it run from the Beatles arrival in America to Nixon's election.  At a guess they would have thrown a bunch of money at it and tried to solve the problem.  There might have been more confidence.  America was believed widely to be able to do anything.  The 'ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" mentality was in place.  People were more ready to sacrifice.

Maybe less fearful and zany, more rational and optimistic.  I don't know though.  The next so called awakening could be very different.  I am not sure the Industrial Age pattern is holding well.

That's a great response. There actually would have been proactive shutdowns since institutions were still strong (ish). I think, then, that there would have been protests against them. Claims of government conspiracy.
Steve Barrera

[A]lthough one would like to change today's world back to the spirit of one hundred years or more ago, it cannot be done. Thus it is important to make the best out of every generation. - Hagakure

Saecular Pages
Reply
#4
(03-15-2020, 11:31 AM)sbarrera Wrote: That's a great response. There actually would have been proactive shutdowns since institutions were still strong (ish). I think, then, that there would have been protests against them. Claims of government conspiracy.

Further thought…. The boomers were busy protesting the flaws of 1950s America. I carried a live draft card. My female friends may have had to deal with coat hanger abortions. Blacks could not eat in many restaurants or stay in most hotels. The streams stank. The glass ceiling was mighty low. Communism was expanding, and those in charge were caught up in the Domino Theory and fighting hot wars.

In short, the America of the post war years was not perfect. Many who had fought and died for that imperfection were not thrilled by boomer protests. Many thought the imperfections should be fixed, and protested. Many of the GIs tried to fix things, did fix things. Many complain that the boomers shat on America, but maybe America deserved to be shat upon? The culture needed changing?

I have no doubt the administrations of that time would have thrown money at the problem, but I doubt the young would have trusted them. The administration was over 30, after all. I could see huge protests for and against the administration, and the administration forbidding the protests as gatherings of a bunch of people who would spread the virus, which would have angered the protesters who would…

Better perhaps to have the virus in the middle of this nice non eventful crisis. Wink
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Reply
#5
(03-15-2020, 12:34 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(03-15-2020, 11:31 AM)sbarrera Wrote: That's a great response. There actually would have been proactive shutdowns since institutions were still strong (ish). I think, then, that there would have been protests against them. Claims of government conspiracy.

Further thought…. The boomers were busy protesting the flaws of 1950s America.  I carried a live draft card.  My female friends may have had to deal with coat hanger abortions.  Blacks could not eat in many restaurants or stay in most hotels.  The streams stank.  The glass ceiling was mighty low.  Communism was expanding, and those in charge were caught up in the Domino Theory and fighting hot wars.

In short, the America of the post war years was not perfect.  Many who had fought and died for that imperfection were not thrilled by boomer protests.  Many thought the imperfections should be fixed, and protested.  Many of the GIs tried to fix things, did fix things.  Many complain that the boomers shat on America, but maybe America deserved to be shat upon?  The culture needed changing?

I have no doubt the administrations of that time would have thrown money at the problem, but I doubt the young would have trusted them.  The administration was over 30, after all.  I could see huge protests for and against the administration, and the administration forbidding the protests as gatherings of a bunch of people who would spread the virus, which would have angered the protesters who would…

Better perhaps to have the virus in the middle of this nice non eventful crisis.  Wink

Yeah, a toilet paper shortage is a pretty small price to pay.
Steve Barrera

[A]lthough one would like to change today's world back to the spirit of one hundred years or more ago, it cannot be done. Thus it is important to make the best out of every generation. - Hagakure

Saecular Pages
Reply
#6
(03-15-2020, 09:12 AM)sbarrera Wrote: What if COVID-19 had happened 40 years ago, in 1980? It was the tail end of the 2T/Awakening. What would have been different?

I'm guessing there would not have been as much of a government response in the United States. None of this proactive shutting down of schools and businesses. If would have felt less fearful and more zany.

I think essentially nothing would have happened.  We would have taken no steps in response, and any additional deaths would have been attributed to the flu.

In fact, I'm certain that would have happened, because at the time we didn't have the genetic testing technology to identify specific strains of the flu and coronavirus.  But even with the technology, there would not have been the panic and economy crippling overreaction of today.

Today, the arguments on how to respond are largely red versus blue political arguments.  In the second turning, they would have been generational political arguments.  Boomers would have refused to participate in any measures that wouldn't help them, and would only save a few elderly Lost.
Reply
#7
They would have tried. At the time there was a confidence that America could do anything if big government threw enough money at the problem. They might have well failed due to lack of technology. In which case it would have been one of the failures which opened the Conservative Era, such as the fall of Saigon, Watergate, the Oil and Hostage crises, and the national malaise.

I think you are projecting the conservative instinct to ignore problems a little early, and the same bias leaves you are unable to see the magnitude of the virus problem clearly. It would have certainly taken more time to identify the problem, if only because the doors to China were still closed as well as technology. It would have been a commie problem a bit longer, but in time it would spread.
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Reply
#8
(03-15-2020, 10:57 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I'm not sure.  The dominant time of the last Awakening was during the progressive era, the tax and spend period.  I would have the heart of it run from the Beatles arrival in America to Nixon's election.  At a guess they would have thrown a bunch of money at it and tried to solve the problem.  There might have been more confidence.  America was believed widely to be able to do anything.  The 'ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" mentality was in place.  People were more ready to sacrifice.

Maybe less fearful and zany, more rational and optimistic.  I don't know though.  The next so called awakening could be very different.  I am not sure the Industrial Age pattern is holding well.

But they refused to go to war for their country. The “ask not—-“ mentality unraveled big time at this point.
Reply
#9
(03-15-2020, 10:57 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I'm not sure.  The dominant time of the last Awakening was during the progressive era, the tax and spend period.  I would have the heart of it run from the Beatles arrival in America to Nixon's election.  At a guess they would have thrown a bunch of money at it and tried to solve the problem.  There might have been more confidence.  America was believed widely to be able to do anything.  The 'ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" mentality was in place.  People were more ready to sacrifice.

Maybe less fearful and zany, more rational and optimistic.  I don't know though.  The next so called awakening could be very different.  I am not sure the Industrial Age pattern is holding well.

Good analysis. No, the can-do '60s weren't anything like today, so the approach would have been more focused on problem solving than blame shifting.  The tools were less capable then, but better utilized.  I suspect that the pandemic would have been addressed pretty quickly, though the number of sick and dead may have been more … or not.  The examples of St. Louis and Philadelphia were well known then, and would have certainly been used as guidance.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#10
(03-15-2020, 07:21 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(03-15-2020, 09:12 AM)sbarrera Wrote: What if COVID-19 had happened 40 years ago, in 1980? It was the tail end of the 2T/Awakening. What would have been different?

I'm guessing there would not have been as much of a government response in the United States. None of this proactive shutting down of schools and businesses. If would have felt less fearful and more zany.

I think essentially nothing would have happened.  We would have taken no steps in response, and any additional deaths would have been attributed to the flu.

In fact, I'm certain that would have happened, because at the time we didn't have the genetic testing technology to identify specific strains of the flu and coronavirus.  But even with the technology, there would not have been the panic and economy crippling overreaction of today.

Today, the arguments on how to respond are largely red versus blue political arguments.  In the second turning, they would have been generational political arguments.  Boomers would have refused to participate in any measures that wouldn't help them, and would only save a few elderly Lost.

I disagree.  The health professionals of the time would know the difference between a flu virus and a corona virus by inspection.  They may have thought it was a super version of the common cold (at least initially), but they would have attacked the problem head-on.  They may have failed to find a cure, but public health responses were well known.  Think about the response to polio before Jonas Salk.
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Reply
#11
(03-15-2020, 08:15 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: They would have tried.  At the time there was a confidence that America could do anything if big government threw enough money at the problem.  They might have well failed due to lack of technology.  In which case it would have been one of the failures which opened the Conservative Era, such as the fall of Saigon, Watergate, the Oil and Hostage crises, and the national malaise.

I think you are projecting the conservative instinct to ignore problems a little early, and the same bias leaves you are unable to see the magnitude of the virus problem clearly.  It would have certainly taken more time to identify the problem, if only because the doors to China were still closed as well as technology.  It would have been a commie problem a bit longer, but in time it would spread.

I think you're confusing 1980 with 1960.  The original question asked about 1980, not 1960.

(03-16-2020, 12:56 PM)beechnut79 Wrote: But they refused to go to war for their country. The “ask not—-“ mentality unraveled big time at this point.

Exactly.
Reply
#12
(03-16-2020, 01:13 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: I think you're confusing 1980 with 1960.  The original question asked about 1980, not 1960.

Yah.  I have a different idea of the core of the Awakening, having it end when Nixon hit office.  Thus, I answered for the core of the Awakening as I stated, the arrival in the US of the Beatles through the election of Nixon.  By 1980 the fall of Saigon, the hostage and oil crises, Watergate, and the national malaise had already left America feeling a lot less sure of itself, a lot less omnipotent.  

I know The Theory states the pessimistic selfish period should have begun later, but I sort of go with reality.  The failures of the 1970s contributed to the end of boundless optimism and the idea that America could succeed by throwing a lot of money at any problem.  Reagan just formalized it, putting the red unravelling theory into place.  America would no longer even try to be great.  Carter thought this idea was a malaise.  Reagan turned the malaise into the new normal.

1980 would have put Carter in his last year.  I would anticipate an attempt at a scientific response that would fail due to lack of technology.  The bug would have gone as one more failure capping off what was typical of the 1970s.
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Reply
#13
(03-15-2020, 07:21 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(03-15-2020, 09:12 AM)sbarrera Wrote: What if COVID-19 had happened 40 years ago, in 1980? It was the tail end of the 2T/Awakening. What would have been different?

I'm guessing there would not have been as much of a government response in the United States. None of this proactive shutting down of schools and businesses. If would have felt less fearful and more zany.

I think essentially nothing would have happened.  We would have taken no steps in response, and any additional deaths would have been attributed to the flu.

In fact, I'm certain that would have happened, because at the time we didn't have the genetic testing technology to identify specific strains of the flu and coronavirus.  But even with the technology, there would not have been the panic and economy crippling overreaction of today.

Today, the arguments on how to respond are largely red versus blue political arguments.  In the second turning, they would have been generational political arguments.  Boomers would have refused to participate in any measures that wouldn't help them, and would only save a few elderly Lost.

It seems like destiny that this new virus for which no-one has immunity until they recover from it has happened in a 4T and not a 2T. It's true we didn't have the specific testing for it in 1980. I think society could have mobilized almost as fully as it has today though, for quarantines and social distancing and some national-sponsored research, because the Reagan counter-revolution hadn't happened yet, and the idea that government is the problem was not yet instituted. We did have malaise, and did not have much of the can-do 1T collective spirit of JFK anymore, regardless of generation; but today we have still not recovered this yet either. So, the level of collective commitment in 1980 was about the same as today, or even less because we are divided between red and blue now, as we were not quite so much then, and the red side under McConnell does not want to do what is necessary because it would require accepting blue ideology.

The boomers in 1980 were the most idealistic generation, and they would have been the most willing to speak out in favor of protective measures for all. The GI gen might have also. The boomers' selfishness largely began under Reagan, and intensified under Trump, as many of (us) now consider the Reagan koolaid or the Biden bland normality what is needed to protect boomers' comfort and to secure such wealth as they have, or think they are entitled to.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#14
(03-16-2020, 12:56 PM)beechnut79 Wrote:
(03-15-2020, 10:57 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I'm not sure.  The dominant time of the last Awakening was during the progressive era, the tax and spend period.  I would have the heart of it run from the Beatles arrival in America to Nixon's election.  At a guess they would have thrown a bunch of money at it and tried to solve the problem.  There might have been more confidence.  America was believed widely to be able to do anything.  The 'ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" mentality was in place.  People were more ready to sacrifice.

Maybe less fearful and zany, more rational and optimistic.  I don't know though.  The next so called awakening could be very different.  I am not sure the Industrial Age pattern is holding well.

But they refused to go to war for their country. The “ask not—-“ mentality unraveled big time at this point.

That's a different debate, but collective consciousness among the new generation was still inspired by JFK, but it was inspired to realize that this deadly war of the mid 60s' early 2T was not "for their country" and had nothing to do with the security of "their country." The realized in fact that most USA wars have had little to do with "their country." So they acted together to stop the war for the real sake "of their country" and to create an alternative culture of peace and love, at least for a while.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#15
(03-17-2020, 01:17 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: The boomers in 1980 were the most idealistic generation, and they would have been the most willing to speak out in favor of protective measures for all.

Kind of like they were the generation that still thought the Vietnam War was the right thing to do, eh?

Frankly, this is a ridiculous view.  Boomers had learned by then not just to trust the solutions of the then elder GIs - like for example the JFK initiated Vietnam War.  I think it's questionable whether the threat would have been seen as significant in 1980, but even if some Boomers accepted that, they would have taken the "think globally, act locally" approach of personal social distancing and quarantine, and been very resistant to GI imposed lockdowns and such.
Reply
#16
(03-16-2020, 02:03 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(03-16-2020, 01:13 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: I think you're confusing 1980 with 1960.  The original question asked about 1980, not 1960.

Yah.  I have a different idea of the core of the Awakening, having it end when Nixon hit office.  Thus, I answered for the core of the Awakening as I stated, the arrival in the US of the Beatles through the election of Nixon.  By 1980 the fall of Saigon, the hostage and oil crises, Watergate, and the national malaise had already left America feeling a lot less sure of itself, a lot less omnipotent.  

I know The Theory states the pessimistic selfish period should have begun later, but I sort of go with reality.  The failures of the 1970s contributed to the end of boundless optimism and the idea that America could succeed by throwing a lot of money at any problem.  Reagan just formalized it, putting the red unravelling theory into place.  America would no longer even try to be great.  Carter thought this idea was a malaise.  Reagan turned the malaise into the new normal.

1980 would have put Carter in his last year.  I would anticipate an attempt at a scientific response that would fail due to lack of technology.  The bug would have gone as one more failure capping off what was typical of the 1970s.
I have often thought of that national malaise as just the tip of the iceberg. Many developments over the four decades since seem to have added fuel to the fire.  One of the biggies is that so many workers complain that their hard work even though it could be noticed by higher-ups who they feel seldom if ever give them the recognition and rewards they feel they deserve. A syndrome and seemingly endless cycle of feeling under appreciated.  This occurred in one of my workplaces although I wasn’t one of the crybabies.  Might all the restrictions now put in place only make the current malaise even worse?  For those with romance on their mind, they most likely will have the inability to plan a romantic night out. Today is St. Patrick’s Day, normally a great time to hang out with friends and having fun, even though in recent years we have been advised to just be careful of over-indulging. No such luck this year.
Reply
#17
(03-17-2020, 01:17 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(03-15-2020, 07:21 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(03-15-2020, 09:12 AM)sbarrera Wrote: What if COVID-19 had happened 40 years ago, in 1980? It was the tail end of the 2T/Awakening. What would have been different?

I'm guessing there would not have been as much of a government response in the United States. None of this proactive shutting down of schools and businesses. If would have felt less fearful and more zany.

I think essentially nothing would have happened.  We would have taken no steps in response, and any additional deaths would have been attributed to the flu.

In fact, I'm certain that would have happened, because at the time we didn't have the genetic testing technology to identify specific strains of the flu and coronavirus.  But even with the technology, there would not have been the panic and economy crippling overreaction of today.

Today, the arguments on how to respond are largely red versus blue political arguments.  In the second turning, they would have been generational political arguments.  Boomers would have refused to participate in any measures that wouldn't help them, and would only save a few elderly Lost.

It seems like destiny that this new virus for which no-one has immunity until they recover from it has happened in a 4T and not a 2T. It's true we didn't have the specific testing for it in 1980. I think society could have mobilized almost as fully as it has today though, for quarantines and social distancing and some national-sponsored research, because the Reagan counter-revolution hadn't happened yet, and the idea that government is the problem was not yet instituted. We did have malaise, and did not have much of the can-do 1T collective spirit of JFK anymore, regardless of generation; but today we have still not recovered this yet either. So, the level of collective commitment in 1980 was about the same as today, or even less because we are divided between red and blue now, as we were not quite so much then, and the red side under McConnell does not want to do what is necessary because it would require accepting blue ideology.

The boomers in 1980 were the most idealistic generation, and they would have been the most willing to speak out in favor of protective measures for all. The GI gen might have also. The boomers' selfishness largely began under Reagan, and intensified under Trump, as many of (us) now consider the Reagan koolaid or the Biden bland normality what is needed to protect boomers' comfort and to secure such wealth as they have, or think they are entitled to.
Regarding your final paragraph, Boomer selfishness had to have begun during the 1970s, as it was then that they were branded as the “Me Generation “. What did begin under Reagan was the trend toward cutbacks in social programs and workplace benefits which now seem very well entrenched, having led toward increases in outsourcing and contingent or gig work, which now has become the new normal. Yet acceptance of these policies was quite universal and so many considered Reagan to be the best thing to come along since sliced bread.
Reply
#18
(03-17-2020, 01:26 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(03-16-2020, 12:56 PM)beechnut79 Wrote:
(03-15-2020, 10:57 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I'm not sure.  The dominant time of the last Awakening was during the progressive era, the tax and spend period.  I would have the heart of it run from the Beatles arrival in America to Nixon's election.  At a guess they would have thrown a bunch of money at it and tried to solve the problem.  There might have been more confidence.  America was believed widely to be able to do anything.  The 'ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" mentality was in place.  People were more ready to sacrifice.

Maybe less fearful and zany, more rational and optimistic.  I don't know though.  The next so called awakening could be very different.  I am not sure the Industrial Age pattern is holding well.

But they refused to go to war for their country. The “ask not—-“ mentality unraveled big time at this point.

That's a different debate, but collective consciousness among the new generation was still inspired by JFK, but it was inspired to realize that this deadly war of the mid 60s' early 2T was not "for their country" and had nothing to do with the security of "their country." The realized in fact that most USA wars have had little to do with "their country." So they acted together to stop the war for the real sake "of their country" and to create an alternative culture of peace and love, at least for a while.
But that peace and love mantra turned out to be so much malarkey, didn’t it? By the turn of this century we had drifted about as far away from it as possible; the society becoming increasingly uptight and mean-spirited. Boomers by and large became just about everything that they had once ridiculed.
Reply
#19
(03-15-2020, 07:21 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:
(03-15-2020, 09:12 AM)sbarrera Wrote: What if COVID-19 had happened 40 years ago, in 1980? It was the tail end of the 2T/Awakening. What would have been different?

I'm guessing there would not have been as much of a government response in the United States. None of this proactive shutting down of schools and businesses. If would have felt less fearful and more zany.

I think essentially nothing would have happened.  We would have taken no steps in response, and any additional deaths would have been attributed to the flu.

In fact, I'm certain that would have happened, because at the time we didn't have the genetic testing technology to identify specific strains of the flu and coronavirus.  But even with the technology, there would not have been the panic and economy crippling overreaction of today.

Today, the arguments on how to respond are largely red versus blue political arguments.  In the second turning, they would have been generational political arguments.  Boomers would have refused to participate in any measures that wouldn't help them, and would only save a few elderly Lost.

But, assuming that it is correct that COVID-19 is actually much more severe than the recent flus, there would have been the same issue with case overload that was experienced in 1918 with the Spanish flu and in Italy today. So there would have been no denying a problem. I would guess, based on the 2T v. 4T difference, that GI-led government would just get blamed no matter what they did - they would get accused of either overreacting or underreacting as fit the circumstances.

Today with this pandemic, there is much more of a sense of public cooperation. People are onboard for the most part with complying with the request to self-quarantine. It's even become a meme that we need to #flattenthecurve as a civic duty.
Steve Barrera

[A]lthough one would like to change today's world back to the spirit of one hundred years or more ago, it cannot be done. Thus it is important to make the best out of every generation. - Hagakure

Saecular Pages
Reply
#20
(03-17-2020, 11:49 AM)sbarrera Wrote: But, assuming that it is correct that COVID-19 is actually much more severe than the recent flus, there would have been the same issue with case overload that was experienced in 1918 with the Spanish flu and in Italy today. So there would have been no denying a problem.

Don't underestimate the ability of a conservative to deny a problem.
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Coronavirus Bob Butler 54 1,262 88,366 6 hours ago
Last Post: Eric the Green
  Nevada governor limits malaria drugs for coronavirus patients girlmonday 0 52 03-06-2021, 04:00 AM
Last Post: girlmonday
  Coronavirus shows government is a problem, not the solution pmc 7 198 03-01-2021, 02:34 AM
Last Post: newvoter

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)