"Climax" year of each turning

[Tim Randal Walker]

For the last 2T I would add Woodstock.

[Blazkovitz]

(04-05-2020, 09:09 AM)David Horn Wrote: The last 1T was particularly bad, not because it was stifling (it was), but due to oppressive hangover of the hyper-individualists from the prior 3T.  The Red Scare (Nomad) was vastly worse than the Hayes Code (Civic).  And I lived through it, so I have more than book knowledge here.

It's true many Lost became extremely authoritarian later in life. Hitler and many leading Nazis were Lost. HP Lovecraft went from "cosmic nihilism" and anarchism of his 1920s horror stories to idolizing the Nazis. He changed his views a lot, but hatred of Jews was a constant. Even the names of his demons sound Hebrew.

Many of my Xer friends use quite authoritarian parenting styles. And AFAIK the alt-right is mostly an Xer thing.

I would go with: right-wing authoritarianism is Nomadic, left-wing authoritarianism is Civic.

Quote:The last 1T was as great on the up side as it was due almost entirely to communal effort.  Two obvious examples: the Internet and the Space program.  There are many others, but top those!

The Internet started during the 3T, but yeah computers were invented by GI scientists during the 1T.

[naf140230]

If 2020 is a climax year, then I doubt Trump will be president for much longer.

[Isoko]

To be honest, I really am a sceptic if 9/11 and 2008 were catalyst events. From what I am seeing, it really does like the 2020 Corona virus could very well be a catalyst event if the world economy goes into a great depression.

The reason I am coming to this conclusion is that with catalyst events, average every day life radically changes. Look at the actual great depression. Life radically changed that there was no going back to the way life was before. This is not so the case with 9/11 and 2008. They were more like slow decline events but life still went on as normal. 

If and I mean if 2020 turns out to be the total game changer, that means life as we know it is going to radically change. There won't be no going back to the old ways. Globalisation itself is going to heavily be affected with countries going back to a more nationalistic and protectionist stance. Which itself was not a huge factor with the last two events.

Also if 2020 is the catalyst, then I would expect a revival to be around 2040 or the late 2030s. 

However, if 2020 is a climax and nothing majorly changes, then this was one hell of a weird 4T. That itself means globalisation and life as we know it continues on as before with Brexit and Trump being mere blips in the radar. If that is the case, I honestly cannot see what a revival would even look like. People will just adopt the get on with your life syndrome and nothing will actually change, meaning that overall, this 4T was a damn pretty pointless and meaningless one in the grand scheme of things.

Honestly, I still think we have just entered it.

[Bob Butler 54]

(05-16-2020, 02:42 PM)Isoko Wrote: To be honest, I really am a sceptic if 9/11 and 2008 were catalyst events. From what I am seeing, it really does like the 2020 Corona virus could very well be a catalyst event if the world economy goes into a great depression...

Honestly, I still think we have just entered it.

I could quibble that you used ‘catalyst’ rather than ’trigger’.  You can have lots of catalysts, but generally have only one trigger per major issue of the crisis.  (The mid 20th century crisis seemed to be a double, where the economic and military crises could have each had a distinct trigger for the U.S.

I have called September 11 and Bush 43’s subsequent Middle East wars a false regeneracy.  September 11 was real enough, but a conservative was in charge and proposed a no-change set of values which both failed and did not lead to the proposed progressive transformation which usually comes.  As a result, the proposed values change never happened.  Definitely not a trigger.  Possibly a catalyst.

Similarly, Obama did not punish the elites for the 2008 financial collapse, and did not recover the people after forcing Obamacare through.  Most things he achieved were overthrown by his successor.  That would be no transformation too.  Again, possibly a catalyst, definitely not a trigger.

Both illustrated there was something very wrong.  They both set up Trump as the Buchanan or Hoover bad president who illustrated that the old values did not work any more.  This set the stage for the next president to change radically.

The bug could trigger such a values change if the country requires an executive that will follow the science, which is part of the blue agenda debated through the unraveling.  The rest of the blue agenda could follows with a blue government that takes hold.

So I’m sort of with you.

[Isoko]

Bob,

Thanks for your information on the matter at hand.
To be honest though, I don't understand why people on the forum seem to think a progressive agenda is always the way to go and that America in particular could afford to go down this route right now.

I was chatting to a guy in South Africa once and he told me that the left and progressives are essentially bankrupt on ideas. They have nothing new to add. All the new ideas are coming predominately from the right. You can see this trend amongst key thinkers these days. Most are likely to be on the right, not the left.

However, I think that this is predominantly a European phenomenon. The critical thinkers in Europe tend to hold a more alt right inspired point of view and it is these people who will eventually start to influence politics in Europe in the coming decades...

America though does need reforms so I can concur you guys need to be more progressive. I can see it now. Europe did all this stuff decades ago and now is shifting to the right where as America still needs to catch up. 

However, you need to have a huge radical transformation for this to occur. Basically you need a Thatcher or a Putin to heavily stabilise the ever declining fortunes of your country which in turn will eventually lead to more reforms.

[Bob Butler 54]

I’ll shoot from the hip some.  I haven’t made a comparison of the US and elsewhere a big thing.  Others can feel free to suggest other factors.

But the US Constitution features the slave compromises.  The rural and conservative faction has an artificial advantage in our democracy.  The Senate, the Electoral College, the difficulty of passing an amendment, add up.  As a result, for three plus turnings, the rural and conservative position imposes a big no change policy on our politics.

Thus, by the time the crisis configuration of prophet-nomad-civic comes around and a grey champion gets thrust forward, there is a big backlog of change that the country is ready for.  Slavery had to be abolished.  The government had to regulate the economy.  We could not remain isolationist in a world featuring fascist expansionism.  The government has to be science based, not driven by political fantasies.

S&H looked closest at the American crises which included this pro conservative bias in our Constitution.  Elsewhere the bias does not exist.  For example many European countries flirted with socialism, with a government working for the people.  The tendency towards building up three plus turnings of change that had to be released now may well not be present.  The crisis time could well feature the need to move in a different direction.

Opinions?

[Kinser79]

(05-16-2020, 02:31 PM)naf140230 Wrote: If 2020 is a climax year, then I doubt Trump will be president for much longer.

And he would be replaced by whom?  Biden?  The man doesn't even know where he is half the time.  If the Dimocrats plan on defeating Trump then they are going to have to find a decent candidate.  Unfortunately the only decent Democrat who ran dropped out a while ago.  Pete Buttigieg.  Maybe 2024 for them to take back the white house but even that looks doubtful unless they get their factions in order.

[Kinser79]

(05-16-2020, 05:42 PM)Isoko Wrote: Bob,

Thanks for your information on the matter at hand.
To be honest though, I don't understand why people on the forum seem to think a progressive agenda is always the way to go and that America in particular could afford to go down this route right now.

I was chatting to a guy in South Africa once and he told me that the left and progressives are essentially bankrupt on ideas. They have nothing new to add. All the new ideas are coming predominately from the right. You can see this trend amongst key thinkers these days. Most are likely to be on the right, not the left.

However, I think that this is predominantly a European phenomenon. The critical thinkers in Europe tend to hold a more alt right inspired point of view and it is these people who will eventually start to influence politics in Europe in the coming decades...

America though does need reforms so I can concur you guys need to be more progressive. I can see it now. Europe did all this stuff decades ago and now is shifting to the right where as America still needs to catch up. 

However, you need to have a huge radical transformation for this to occur. Basically you need a Thatcher or a Putin to heavily stabilise the ever declining fortunes of your country which in turn will eventually lead to more reforms.

That isn't just Europe but America as well.  Our rightism seems to take a more Libertarian flavor than the Idenitarian European variety but then again our history is substantially different from Europe's.

As for the whole "progressivism is the way to go thing" for lack of a better term, you'll find the Boomers on here, and in particular the Blue ones, are blind to the fact that what is and is not progressive is determined after the fact.  History is after all written by the victors.

[Bob Butler 54]

(05-16-2020, 10:30 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: As for the whole "progressivism is the way to go thing" for lack of a better term, you'll find the Boomers on here, and in particular the Blue ones, are blind to the fact that what is and is not progressive is determined after the fact.  History is after all written by the victors.

I would counter that the arrow of progress is real.  The debate between the two factions goes on through the unraveling and early crisis.  What the crises are is set long before the history books are written.  The conservatives just aren't thrilled to admit they are clinging to past privilege when they were wrong to do so.  Kings, slaves, and expansionist fascists had to go.  The government had to regulate the economy.  Science counts.  Clinging to the way things were has its limits.

[Kinser79]

(05-16-2020, 11:25 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(05-16-2020, 10:30 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: As for the whole "progressivism is the way to go thing" for lack of a better term, you'll find the Boomers on here, and in particular the Blue ones, are blind to the fact that what is and is not progressive is determined after the fact.  History is after all written by the victors.

I would counter that the arrow of progress is real.  The debate between the two factions goes on through the unraveling and early crisis.  What the crises are is set long before the history books are written.  The conservatives just aren't thrilled to admit they are clinging to past privilege when they were wrong to do so.  Kings, slaves, and expansionist fascists had to go.  The government had to regulate the economy.  Science counts.  Clinging to the way things were has its limits.

Bob we've had this discussion before.  You are a Whig Historian and as such fall subject to the facilities they are susceptible to.  I'm sure that had Hitler won the war you'd have argued that the Jew Bolsheviks and or Jew Capitalists would have had to go too.

Rather what I see in the US currently is that the Blues aren't happy with the fact that they didn't get the Grey Champion they wanted.  Honestly Sanders really did have a chance but that was 2016--he was cheated out of a nomination and then worse cucked to Killary; he will never be taken seriously on the national stage again.  Instead we got one who would be Grey were it not for Bronzer and Hair Dye.  But I'm fine with an Orange Champion.

Also: Epstein didn't kill himself.

[Bob Butler 54]

(05-17-2020, 07:41 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Bob we've had this discussion before.  You are a Whig Historian and as such fall subject to the facilities they are susceptible to.  I'm sure that had Hitler won the war you'd have argued that the Jew Bolsheviks and or Jew Capitalists would have had to go too.

Nope. That's part of your fantasies. I have for a long time favored the three Enlightenment virtues of human rights, democracy and equality. [understatement] Hitler didn't exemplify those qualities. [/understatement] As soon as the adjective Jew was applied, you go against equality specifically.

[Kinser79]

(05-17-2020, 08:06 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(05-17-2020, 07:41 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Bob we've had this discussion before.  You are a Whig Historian and as such fall subject to the facilities they are susceptible to.  I'm sure that had Hitler won the war you'd have argued that the Jew Bolsheviks and or Jew Capitalists would have had to go too.

Nope.  That's part of your fantasies.  I have for a long time favored the three Enlightenment virtues of human rights, democracy and equality.  [understatement]  Hitler didn't exemplify those qualities.  [/understatement]  As soon as the adjective Jew was applied, you go against equality specifically.

Hardly you have admitted in the past to being a Whig historian.  That isn't a fantasy.  

As for equality I do not actually believe that people are equal.  Are we all equally tall?  No.  Equally smart?  No.  Each individual is supposedly unique and thus differently gifted and as such equality is a pipe dream at best.

Regarding democracy I'm fine with a republic having democratic institutions so long as those with the votes are those who pay the taxes.  Otherwise there will come a time when the unenlightened and and property-less will discover that they can vote themselves the property of others.

I'm fine with human rights so long as it is limited to life, liberty and the pursuit of property.

[Kinser79]

https://scroll.in/article/938775/this-bo...redecessor

I'm going to see if I can't find this guy's book. Might be an interesting read. The great thing about Smart Phones is now every public toilet can be the Library of Congress.

[David Horn]

(05-16-2020, 10:30 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: … As for the whole "progressivism is the way to go thing" for lack of a better term, you'll find the Boomers on here, and in particular the Blue ones, are blind to the fact that what is and is not progressive is determined after the fact.  History is after all written by the victors.

This is true, but what transformational agenda does the Trump/GOP have on tap? It looks awfully corrupt and revanchist to me. Can that be defined as any form of progress? I say no … hell no!

[David Horn]

(05-17-2020, 09:26 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: … Regarding democracy I'm fine with a republic having democratic institutions so long as those with the votes are those who pay the taxes.  Otherwise there will come a time when the unenlightened and and property-less will discover that they can vote themselves the property of others.

I'm fine with human rights so long as it is limited to life, liberty and the pursuit of property.

Wow! When you swing politically, its all the way.

[Bob Butler 54]

(05-17-2020, 09:26 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: I'm fine with human rights so long as it is limited to life, liberty and the pursuit of property.

Life? You seem to be anti-life with respect to COVID 19. I thought you would put a price on your grandmother?

[Kinser79]

(05-18-2020, 05:54 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(05-16-2020, 10:30 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: … As for the whole "progressivism is the way to go thing" for lack of a better term, you'll find the Boomers on here, and in particular the Blue ones, are blind to the fact that what is and is not progressive is determined after the fact.  History is after all written by the victors.

This is true, but what transformational agenda does the Trump/GOP have on tap?  It looks awfully corrupt and revanchist to me. Can that be defined as any form of progress? I say no … hell no!

Trump's agenda and faction is American Nationalism.  This means controlling immigration, controlling trade and high tariffs.  Is it corrupt?  Probably.  Revanchist?  Not so much.  Unless you consider taking back premier place in the world's economy revenge.  American Nationalists aren't very interested in war in foreign countries, or foreigners in general for that matter.

One could call it isolationist, but isolationism is the opposite of revanchism.

(05-18-2020, 05:59 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(05-17-2020, 09:26 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: … Regarding democracy I'm fine with a republic having democratic institutions so long as those with the votes are those who pay the taxes.  Otherwise there will come a time when the unenlightened and and property-less will discover that they can vote themselves the property of others.

I'm fine with human rights so long as it is limited to life, liberty and the pursuit of property.

Wow! When you swing politically, its all the way.

Not hard when you realize that given universal suffrage the have-nots will eventually figure out a way to vote themselves the property of the haves.  Then you get Venezuela.  Since I'm not interested in the US becoming Venezuela Del Norte it is best to limit the franchise.  I figure we could probably swing property requirements though I'd prefer restricting the franchise to Veterans in the same vein of Heinlein's Starship Troopers.

[Isoko]

Kinser,

There is truth to this. The American right has always been about libertarianism. The idea of being able to build your own fortune and the freedom to do it applies very true to the American right. However the Millennials in American down right scare me. 

They want basically socialism which works well in Europe and even in Russia because it has long been established. But in America? It's way too late to enact such reforms without bankrupting the entire economy even further. 

I've got to say, if America is going to pull itself out of its problems, it does need to go back to that ye olde American wilderness spirit with libertarian values. Although to be honest, I think that is more likely to be the next Awakening over there as the Millennials are just too crazy to reason with as a majority.

As for Europe, spot on. It has always been identitarian. This is why the Alt Right does better in Europe (the exception being the UK). It is no surprise that the majority of French Millennials supported Marine Le Pen over Macron. The argument? "Globalisation is destroying our future and our culture." Europeans tend to take this more seriously then Americans.

I think that ultimately the climax of this turning is going to be Europe turning back towards identitarism and having to build a new way in the world without the EU. Whether it leads to a new EU, quabbling nation states or a new Russian policeman on the bloc remains to be seen.

[pbrower2a]

(05-16-2020, 10:25 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(05-16-2020, 02:31 PM)naf140230 Wrote: If 2020 is a climax year, then I doubt Trump will be president for much longer.

And he would be replaced by whom?  Biden?  The man doesn't even know where he is half the time.  If the Dimocrats plan on defeating Trump then they are going to have to find a decent candidate.  Unfortunately the only decent Democrat who ran dropped out a while ago.  Pete Buttigieg.  Maybe 2024 for them to take back the white house but even that looks doubtful unless they get their factions in order.

His successor, his VP choice, will at least know which way the wind is blowing. To be sure, Trump is far worse as a dreadful combination of immaturity and senility with a nasty mean streak..