I'm a sceptic that the 4th Turning started in 2008

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-07-2020, 02:17 PM)TeacherinExile Wrote: I think back to the Weather Underground in the Sixties setting off bombs everywhere, even on a college campus.  They managed to pull off quite a few bombings before going into hiding.  Here’s my point: a guerilla group (Boogaloo Boys, let’s say) operating today would find it much, much harder to organize and map out strategy, communicate throughout the organization, and execute armed violence without being detected by the increasingly sophisticated surveillance of the state. Guerillas with their AR-15s might inflict significant casualties on their targets at first. But once their cells are located, they would quickly be dispatched by the superior tactics and weaponry of law enforcement and/or the American military. And who or what would the guerillas target exactly? Minorities? That’s the “wet dream” of a paramilitary group like the Boogaloo Boys—to start a race war. Good luck with that; our population is too diverse and our law enforcement and military too integrated to have that notion get very far.  

No, more likely than guerilla warfare is the no-less-palatable prospect of more Lone Wolf attacks which, given our saturated gun culture, is a hairy thought too. In short, anarchic violence.

Finally, America is still very much a capitalist nation, and anything or anyone that seriously threatens that political economy with widespread violence will quickly be squashed—by either a Biden or Trump administration. Barring outright societal collapse, of course.

Overall, I agree.  I might supplement the analysis a bit.

The Boogaloo Bois are partnering with Trump’s secret police to promote violence.  They might have trouble using this tactic against someone who listens to the people, who doesn’t deliberately match the violence with violence, who gives the protestors what they are protesting for.

Targeting infrastructure hasn’t happened.  Stuff like wind turbines, power lines and bridges are spread out enough that they will be very hard to defend.  I thought at the time of September 11th that someone would shift targets, but they went after highly symbolic office space.  Good luck running the US out of office space, but it was enough to bring the US into the Middle East.  Still, this form of violence just is not taking place.  It doesn’t seem to be glamorous enough for the average terrorist.

I have heart the Boogaloos Bois are deliberately decentralizing to avoid surveillance or infiltration.  As much as they can, each cell works on its own.  This seems prudent these days.  Put as little as possible on line or shared.  As an approach it makes something bigger hard to do.

[Eric the Green]

(08-07-2020, 02:43 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-07-2020, 02:17 PM)TeacherinExile Wrote: I think back to the Weather Underground in the Sixties setting off bombs everywhere, even on a college campus.  They managed to pull off quite a few bombings before going into hiding.  Here’s my point: a guerilla group (Boogaloo Boys, let’s say) operating today would find it much, much harder to organize and map out strategy, communicate throughout the organization, and execute armed violence without being detected by the increasingly sophisticated surveillance of the state. Guerillas with their AR-15s might inflict significant casualties on their targets at first. But once their cells are located, they would quickly be dispatched by the superior tactics and weaponry of law enforcement and/or the American military. And who or what would the guerillas target exactly? Minorities? That’s the “wet dream” of a paramilitary group like the Boogaloo Boys—to start a race war. Good luck with that; our population is too diverse and our law enforcement and military too integrated to have that notion get very far.  

No, more likely than guerilla warfare is the no-less-palatable prospect of more Lone Wolf attacks which, given our saturated gun culture, is a hairy thought too. In short, anarchic violence.

Finally, America is still very much a capitalist nation, and anything or anyone that seriously threatens that political economy with widespread violence will quickly be squashed—by either a Biden or Trump administration. Barring outright societal collapse, of course.

Overall, I agree.  I might supplement the analysis a bit.

The Boogaloo Bois are partnering with Trump’s secret police to promote violence.  They might have trouble using this tactic against someone who listens to the people, who doesn’t deliberately match the violence with violence, who gives the protestors what they are protesting for.

Targeting infrastructure hasn’t happened.  Stuff like wind turbines, power lines and bridges are spread out enough that they will be very hard to defend.  I thought at the time of September 11th that someone would shift targets, but they went after highly symbolic office space.  Good luck running the US out of office space, but it was enough to bring the US into the Middle East.  Still, this form of violence just is not taking place.  It doesn’t seem to be glamorous enough for the average terrorist.

I have heart the Boogaloos Bois are deliberately decentralizing to avoid surveillance or infiltration.  As much as they can, each cell works on its own.  This seems prudent these days.  Put as little as possible on line or shared.  As an approach it makes something bigger hard to do.

The USA has been great at tracking down terrorist cells. On the other hand, militia groups seem to be organizing and operating easily and effectively. Social media would allow them to coordinate, at least for a little while.

I see these right-wing militias that have been around for a while, and are loading up with guns and attracting trumpists, rather than the boogaloo bois, as the principle source of a right wing rebellion.

[TeacherinExile]

(08-07-2020, 02:43 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-07-2020, 02:17 PM)TeacherinExile Wrote: I think back to the Weather Underground in the Sixties setting off bombs everywhere, even on a college campus.  They managed to pull off quite a few bombings before going into hiding.  Here’s my point: a guerilla group (Boogaloo Boys, let’s say) operating today would find it much, much harder to organize and map out strategy, communicate throughout the organization, and execute armed violence without being detected by the increasingly sophisticated surveillance of the state. Guerillas with their AR-15s might inflict significant casualties on their targets at first. But once their cells are located, they would quickly be dispatched by the superior tactics and weaponry of law enforcement and/or the American military. And who or what would the guerillas target exactly? Minorities? That’s the “wet dream” of a paramilitary group like the Boogaloo Boys—to start a race war. Good luck with that; our population is too diverse and our law enforcement and military too integrated to have that notion get very far.  

No, more likely than guerilla warfare is the no-less-palatable prospect of more Lone Wolf attacks which, given our saturated gun culture, is a hairy thought too. In short, anarchic violence.

Finally, America is still very much a capitalist nation, and anything or anyone that seriously threatens that political economy with widespread violence will quickly be squashed—by either a Biden or Trump administration. Barring outright societal collapse, of course.

Overall, I agree.  I might supplement the analysis a bit.

The Boogaloo Bois are partnering with Trump’s secret police to promote violence.  They might have trouble using this tactic against someone who listens to the people, who doesn’t deliberately match the violence with violence, who gives the protestors what they are protesting for.

Targeting infrastructure hasn’t happened.  Stuff like wind turbines, power lines and bridges are spread out enough that they will be very hard to defend.  I thought at the time of September 11th that someone would shift targets, but they went after highly symbolic office space.  Good luck running the US out of office space, but it was enough to bring the US into the Middle East.  Still, this form of violence just is not taking place.  It doesn’t seem to be glamorous enough for the average terrorist.

I have heart the Boogaloos Bois are deliberately decentralizing to avoid surveillance or infiltration.  As much as they can, each cell works on its own.  This seems prudent these days.  Put as little as possible on line or shared.  As an approach it makes something bigger hard to do.

Your evidence for the Boogaloo Bois “partnering” with Trump’s “secret police”? I’m not saying such a collaboration doesn’t exist. Indeed, it wouldn’t shock me very much at all. But can you point us to a source?

Would decentralizing a paramilitary group into cells necessarily avoid surveillance or infiltration for very long? So often, individual members of Islamist cells perpetrating attacks in Europe were already on the “radar“ of intelligence and law enforcement agencies, but could not be arrested until legal hurdles had been satisfied. Too late by then, oftentimes. Unless authorities decide to bend or flout “the rules.” We certainly have ample precedent for that here. Edward Snowden pretty much pulled back the curtain on the warrantless data mining of Americans’ electronic communications after 9/11.  As for infiltration of paramilitaries, those of us old enough to remember the Sixties do recall how the FBI’s COINTELPRO illegally and—yet effectively—planted snitches and agents provocateurs inside radical groups deemed as threats to our national security.  Among other violations of activists’ civil rights, such nefarious domestic espionage led to the veritable assassination of Black Panther revolutionary Fred Hampton in the 60s, soon to be dramatized in a major motion picture, by the way.

If street violence does erupt in the wake of the 2020 election, even running gun battles with the police or National Guard, I still contend that such lawlessness will be met with overwhelming force.  Whoever is Commander in Chief will have ever more sophisticated surveillance tools at his disposal: drones and facial recognition (TBD) coming on stream, not to mention cameras of every kind everywhere by which to document whatever can later be used as evidence in court or before a tribunal, if it comes to that. I just don’t see how disparate paramilitary groups—each differing from the rest either in composition or ideology—can coalesce into a unified guerrilla force with a common goal, such as overthrowing the US government or, God forbid, creating a white nationalist state.

Violence might very well unfold in the wake of a disputed 2020 election, should the outcome—or court verdict—inflame the political passions even more. And if malicious actors were to seize on the moment to instigate some kind of war, I don’t think the American people as a whole would tolerate—much less, stomach—it for very long. We are, more than ever, a visual people.  Images of bloodshed and brutality might play on TV and the movies, but as for cameraphone videos of the real damn thing happening on the streets of America...well, whatever kind of war occurs, it won’t last long. Besides, it would be too disruptive of the commerce on which we all rely, and COVID-19 has disrupted our lives enough as it is. Frankly, fighting off this pesky pandemic may well exhaust any collective energy we have left to wage any kind of war, at least for the foreseeable future.

Bob, I’ve heartily agreed with you all along that it would take a “spiral of violence” sufficiently bloody and prolonged to lead on to the kind of 4T war America has fought in the past—civil or otherwise. Our global battle against this pandemic (or the next)...maybe that’s the “real war” in this 4T.  That, or else the oncoming climate catastrophe which, let’s face it, has the potential to exact a greater human toll than any war ever fought.  What if that is the true existential crisis we’re all up against—here and around the world?  Russia and China, too. Come to think of it, America may never have a better opportunity than now to pursue detente with our enemies, to mutually disarm—or at least deescalate tensions—while there is still time to re-direct global resources away from militaries and toward our common enemy—climate change. (Sigh). One can always hope.

I’ll be signing off for awhile. Go strictly read-only. You and others have given me much to ponder, as always, whatever our differences. I could use a little break from 4T rumination, maybe go fishing, and save my emotional capital for after the election.  See you all on the other side (of November 3rd, that is). If we get a new administration, maybe we can shut down this incarnation of the forum, start over with version 3.0.  Just a thought...

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-07-2020, 07:34 PM)TeacherinExile Wrote: Your evidence for the Boogaloo Bois “partnering” with Trump’s “secret police”? I’m not saying such a collaboration doesn’t exist. Indeed, it wouldn’t shock me very much at all. But can you point us to a source?

I can't point to a source other than the usual attributions of their motives.  Trump wanted to show violence so he could present himself as law and order.  The Boogaloo Bois are instigating violence in aims of overthrowing a system they believe can only be changed through violence.  Each group seems to look like they should oppose one another, but is out to instigate violence for one reason or another.  One shows how they are strong in crushing violence, the other for instigating the only means they have for instigating change.

I don't think they are actually talking to one another.  They don't have to.  They are just trying to use each other to achieve conflicting ends.  At least one is going to fail miserably to win their ends.  Likely both.

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-07-2020, 07:34 PM)TeacherinExile Wrote: I’ll be signing off for awhile. Go strictly read-only. You and others have given me much to ponder, as always, whatever our differences. I could use a little break from 4T rumination, maybe go fishing, and save my emotional capital for after the election.  See you all on the other side (of November 3rd, that is). If we get a new administration, maybe we can shut down this incarnation of the forum, start over with version 3.0.  Just a thought...

Likely prudent. Fishing would probably be more productive. Alas, the virus has left me with too much time.

See you, eventually!

[Mikebert]

(08-04-2020, 03:23 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-03-2020, 04:16 PM)Mikebert Wrote: The Armada doesn't even look like a 4T.  Have you ever seen anyone use examples from THAT crisis to illustrate 4T issues. A few of theorists did talk about the Glorious and WotR 4Ts, but I cannot recall anyone comparing anything to the Armada.  It's so forgettable of a 4T because it isn't a 4T at all. There were no structural changes made. It was just a war, one of the dozens that happened all the time back then.

Chas and I derived pre-1435 turnings for England going back the mid-9th century. I used generations as one of the structural elements, as well as empirical data and Bob's concept of "spirals of violence" a "spiral" that fizzled out means it was not a social moment turning. One that did not indicates one. I also used Chas's idea of archetypical generations playing roles in history analogous to archetypical characters playing roles in a drama, sort of a riff on "all the world's a stage".  Using all these tools I managed to cobble together turnings and running them by Chas for input.

Anyways not all 4T's are equal. Some are obvious, like the Viking crisis. the Norman invasion and the WotR. Others like the 12th century crisis (its not the Anarchy, it simply happened too early) seem stretched, and the 10th and 13th century 4Ts are pretty small beer, like the Armada. 

I don't take the extended crises before the beginning of the Industrial Age seriously.  Sure, you can find where people are less enthusiastic about crisis wars when lots of folks remember the last one.  Also when people can't afford a big war, a little time goes by as the economy recovers.  That much is there.  However you are often not changing the culture.  One bunch of autocrats is fighting another with not much difference between them.  Only later did the rural - urban divide form as some people wanted to continue with power based on land ownership while the other favored urban life and building stuff.  Things started to get a little more hot.

I understand the sentiment, but then you are throwing out half of the cycles, relying on just three, one of which the authors say was anomalous, leaving little to stand on.

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-08-2020, 09:48 AM)Mikebert Wrote: I understand the sentiment, but then you are throwing out half of the cycles, relying on just three, one of which the authors say was anomalous, leaving little to stand on.

I would take the English Civil War seriously enough, initiating the rural-urban divide and initiating the Cousin's Wars.  Prior to that it was more or less Agricultural Age autocrats squabbling.  You have to decide the age boundary initiates somewhere.  When the issues starting to effect the Industrial Age begin to effect the crisis wars, things get hotter.  The Reformation?  The Enlightenment?  Somewhere around there.

[Mikebert]

(08-07-2020, 03:51 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: History has operated by slightly-different rules in the Industrial Age than in the Agrarian Age, and may operate differently in the post-Industrial age.

True

Quote:Generations define themselves earlier in life, at least in cultural values, in their teens instead of their thirties.

Do you mean current generations defined themselves earlier? That seems backwards. Younger teenagers in the agrarian age lived adult lives. They worked in adult occupations and were punished as adults for transgressions.  The medieval world was young. The leading figures were older, but the bulk of the population were children and teens. And since labor productivity was low, most people were working like from age 7 on.  The modern world is old, with an extended childhood, and an intermediary adolescent stage that extends beyond agrarian age life expectancy.

Quote:It is in modern times that teenagers such as Juan Crisostomo Arriaga and Anne Frank could develop middle-aged competence so early due to formal education and excellent training.

These are exceptional people. There have been well-educated people throughout history. And history had many examples of young people making competent decisions and older people failing to. Edward II was 24 when he became king and made a real has of it. His son became king at 14. His stepfather served as regent, and was trying to squeeze Ed out of power. When was still 17 Edward seized power by assassinating his stepfather and proceeded to govern the country quite competently. He had four sons, none of whom ever rebelled against his, by all accounts we loved his wife and they had a good marriage.

Quote:It's when kids started having some disposable income that they could influence the culture of their time through their purchases.  Adults had to accommodate, and they often did by letting kids read books with adult concepts accessible to smart kids.

Smart kids in the past were often inducted into church service and sent to the universities created to train such people. Some of the great theologians came from modest backgrounds.

Quote:If anyone thinks that this Crisis Era is nasty, then it is a paper tiger in contrast to the Crisis of 1940 and the Crisis of 2100 stands to have global warming as its focus with the cataclysm of inundation of huge swaths of prime farmland

I don't think anyone thinks this era is nasty. If the last two decades had played out like the nasty times that past 4Ts were, then this thread would not exist. Also, if you think global warming is going to be the focus in 2100, have I a bridge to sell you. GW is a focus of THIS crisis era. Just because we are choosing not to focus on that (or anything else) doesn't mean GW's time is in the future. It just means today is not a time of focus on problems (i.e. its still a 3T in mood).  It's just as nastier Russian-style 3T, but not yet a 4T.

The issue today is paralysis. No action can be taken on  anything because there is no consensus on what sort of action is desirable. Paralysis contain continue as long as their are options, choices of which road we want to go down (which includes not choosing). At some point, freedom to not choose is withdrawn and we are forced to go down a certain road by an external force. For example, simple geography meant Belgium ceased to have a choice on its foreign policy in 1940. The hegemonic US maintained independence of action throughout the last 4T. Even Germany, the second strongest power, came to a point where Hitler had no better option than to eat a bullet.

Today the role of Germany is occupied by the US, and so it can come to pass when our options become constricted to one.  Germany did not have to take the path that led to that May 1945 decision in the bunker.  Neither do we.  But if just continue to drift, maybe that's where we end up, 10, 20, 30 years from now.  I doubt it will take all the way to 2100 for the issues we face to finally be resolved for us in a way we aren't going to like.

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-08-2020, 10:50 AM)Mikebert Wrote: If you think global warming is going to be the focus in 2100, have I a bridge to sell you. GW is a focus of THIS crisis era. Just because we are choosing not to focus on that (or anything else) doesn't mean GW's time is in the future. It just means today is not a time of focus on problems (i.e. its still a 3T in mood).  It's just as nastier Russian-style 3T, but not yet a 4T.

I am inclined to think Biden if elected will try to undo all the damage Trump did.  Part of it would be reinstating the global warming treaties.  The economy will be a mess.  I am not confident that he will go beyond the currently planned half measures.  Still, if building infrastructure will help the economy by putting people to work for the common good, it could be part of things.

A major part of what is going on is accepting the science in making government policy.  I feel fairly sure of the half measures at least.

Come the awakening, I anticipate the new prophets will yell about the global warming issue if they stick to half measures in the crisis... big time.  I am not sure this crisis will see as much attention as global warming deserves, but come the 2T?  Can the problem be addressed by protest, non violence and legislation, a pattern set by the 1960s awakening?  I concur that it won't be delayed as long as the next crisis.

I will credit COVID as being a true trigger, not a catalyst.  I do see the Black Lives Matter issue rising to a similar crisis level.  It is not clear that other issues will be drawn in given the economic hardships of the time.  A third trigger?  Last time around we had an economic and a military phase during the crisis prophet - nomad - civic generational alignment.  Two I quite believe.  A third?  I will wait a bit until it happens.  I'm not sure that it will, but it might.

[Eric the Green]

(08-08-2020, 01:26 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-08-2020, 10:50 AM)Mikebert Wrote: If you think global warming is going to be the focus in 2100, have I a bridge to sell you. GW is a focus of THIS crisis era. Just because we are choosing not to focus on that (or anything else) doesn't mean GW's time is in the future. It just means today is not a time of focus on problems (i.e. its still a 3T in mood).  It's just as nastier Russian-style 3T, but not yet a 4T.

I am inclined to think Biden if elected will try to undo all the damage Trump did.  Part of it would be reinstating the global warming treaties.  The economy will be a mess.  I am not confident that he will go beyond the currently planned half measures.  Still, if building infrastructure will help the economy by putting people to work for the common good, it could be part of things.

A major part of what is going on is accepting the science in making government policy.  I feel fairly sure of the half measures at least.

Come the awakening, I anticipate the new prophets will yell about the global warming issue if they stick to half measures in the crisis... big time.  I am not sure this crisis will see as much attention as global warming deserves, but come the 2T?  Can the problem be addressed by protest, non violence and legislation, a pattern set by the 1960s awakening?  I concur that it won't be delayed as long as the next crisis.

I will credit COVID as being a true trigger, not a catalyst.  I do see the Black Lives Matter issue rising to a similar crisis level.  It is not clear that other issues will be drawn in given the economic hardships of the time.  A third trigger?  Last time around we had an economic and a military phase during the crisis prophet - nomad - civic generational alignment.  Two I quite believe.  A third?  I will wait a bit until it happens.  I'm not sure that it will, but it might.

Waiting for the Awakening for solving problems is not a good prophecy. Awakenings are inspirational. They bring out the protests. They lay out what needs to be done. They are generally the times of taking half-measures. But getting things done is the province of 4Ts. So, we get it done sufficiently to sustain our civilization in this 4T, or it never gets done. How much are "half measures" I'm not sure. But we must shift society, and turn the corner. Whatever the trigger is, the meat of the crisis remains basically two fold, as it has been for at least 12 years already: the national divide, and climate change. These issues have been "drawn in" already. Just curing the pandemic will not accomplish anything of what was set for us to accomplish by the 1960s-70s Awakening. Pandemics were not a big sixties item. But pollution and climate change was put on the agenda then, as was our national divide, and the race issue too.

I have predicted that come circa 2029-2030 we will be debating whether we have entered a 1T, just as we have continually discussed whether and when we became 4T. Things are a bit fuzzy this time about turning timings, just as they were two saecula ago.

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-08-2020, 10:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Waiting for the Awakening for solving problems is not a good prophecy. Awakenings are inspirational. They bring out the protests. They lay out what needs to be done. They are generally the times of taking half-measures. But getting things done is the province of 4Ts. So, we get it done sufficiently to sustain our civilization in this 4T, or it never gets done. How much are "half measures" I'm not sure. But we must shift society, and turn the corner. Whatever the trigger is, the meat of the crisis remains basically two fold, as it has been for at least 12 years already: the national divide, and climate change. These issues have been "drawn in" already. Just curing the pandemic will not accomplish anything of what was set for us to accomplish by the 1960s-70s Awakening. Pandemics were not a big sixties item. But pollution and climate change was put on the agenda then, as was our national divide, and the race issue too.

I have predicted that come circa 2029-2030 we will be debating whether we have entered a 1T, just as we have continually discussed whether and when we became 4T. Things are a bit fuzzy this time about turning timings, just as they were two saecula ago.

I have seen awakenings as becoming transforming.  In the last awakening the GIs were willing to write decisive legislation to solve problems.  You had protest, do non violence and get legislation.  I am seeing the 1960s as setting our only example for how 2Ts work in the Information Age.  If 4Ts are no longer centered on a crisis war that transforms, the 2T is the time where transformation had better happen.

In the last 2T we were concerned with dirty water.  We built a lot of sewage treatment plants near big cities.  Global Warming wasn't a big issue yet.  I anticipate the next big push to be in the 2T again.  

But part of the national divide is whether we accept science to inform policy.  If there is a yes on COVID, global warming could follow.  It should, except the economy will be in a mess.  If Biden was not such an establishment figure I might anticipate real action on warming.  As is, fusion may be just around the corner.  Once big oil has extracted their profits, they may allow the replacement technology.  We might build fusion reactors everywhere.  Infrastructure building during the high is a traditional thing.  A shift in priorities during the crisis period could happen.

But I am not seeing it yet.  I am seeing COVID, Black Lives Matter, the economy, but global warming is still on the back burner.  There has been no movement that I have observed yet.  I am hopefully known for calling on people to check their opinions against reality.  Those who think global warming ought to be a priority are allowing their perception to be shaped by their desires.  Check reality.

[David Horn]

(08-07-2020, 02:17 PM)TeacherinExile Wrote: I know, I know...you and Eric are talking about an internal war (civil, guerilla or otherwise), not an external conflict... But I would rule out even a guerilla war in the U.S. lasting for very long, and here’s why—

I think back to the Weather Underground in the Sixties setting off bombs everywhere, even on a college campus.  They managed to pull off quite a few bombings before going into hiding.  Here’s my point: a guerilla group (Boogaloo Boys, let’s say) operating today would find it much, much harder to organize and map out strategy, communicate throughout the organization, and execute armed violence without being detected by the increasingly sophisticated surveillance of the state. Guerillas with their AR-15s might inflict significant casualties on their targets at first. But once their cells are located, they would quickly be dispatched by the superior tactics and weaponry of law enforcement and/or the American military. And who or what would the guerillas target exactly? Minorities? That’s the “wet dream” of a paramilitary group like the Boogaloo Boys—to start a race war. Good luck with that; our population is too diverse and our law enforcement and military too integrated to have that notion get very far.  

No, more likely than guerilla warfare is the no-less-palatable prospect of more Lone Wolf attacks which, given our saturated gun culture, is a hairy thought too. In short, anarchic violence.

Finally, America is still very much a capitalist nation, and anything or anyone that seriously threatens that political economy with widespread violence will quickly be squashed—by either a Biden or Trump administration. Barring outright societal collapse, of course.

I agree that a successful rebellion is unlikely, unless the entire point is not victory but chaos. Chaos requires no planning or organization. If the number of alienated individuals is large enough, it can go on far longer than we will tolerated it. Typically, the result is the opposite of the intent, so something approaching autocracy is a more likely end.

[David Horn]

(08-07-2020, 02:43 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I have heart the Boogaloos Bois are deliberately decentralizing to avoid surveillance or infiltration.  As much as they can, each cell works on its own.  This seems prudent these days.  Put as little as possible on line or shared.  As an approach it makes something bigger hard to do.

While certainly true, it makes small things more likely. Remember, the Oklahoma City Bombing was the work of two guys.

[Eric the Green]

(08-08-2020, 10:52 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-08-2020, 10:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Waiting for the Awakening for solving problems is not a good prophecy. Awakenings are inspirational. They bring out the protests. They lay out what needs to be done. They are generally the times of taking half-measures. But getting things done is the province of 4Ts. So, we get it done sufficiently to sustain our civilization in this 4T, or it never gets done. How much are "half measures" I'm not sure. But we must shift society, and turn the corner. Whatever the trigger is, the meat of the crisis remains basically two fold, as it has been for at least 12 years already: the national divide, and climate change. These issues have been "drawn in" already. Just curing the pandemic will not accomplish anything of what was set for us to accomplish by the 1960s-70s Awakening. Pandemics were not a big sixties item. But pollution and climate change was put on the agenda then, as was our national divide, and the race issue too.

I have predicted that come circa 2029-2030 we will be debating whether we have entered a 1T, just as we have continually discussed whether and when we became 4T. Things are a bit fuzzy this time about turning timings, just as they were two saecula ago.

I have seen awakenings as becoming transforming.  In the last awakening the GIs were willing to write decisive legislation to solve problems.  You had protest, do non violence and get legislation.  I am seeing the 1960s as setting our only example for how 2Ts work in the Information Age.  If 4Ts are no longer centered on a crisis war that transforms, the 2T is the time where transformation had better happen.

Possibly. I am sure we don't need a crisis war in a 4T for it to be transformational. I expect wars, though I don't hope for them.

Quote:In the last 2T we were concerned with dirty water.  We built a lot of sewage treatment plants near big cities.  Global Warming wasn't a big issue yet.  I anticipate the next big push to be in the 2T again.  

The global warming issue was brought up though in the 2T. It intensified in the 3T, but all along the issue of ecology in all its aspects and the dangers of industry were central to the 60s/70s 2T. Global warming is just an extended effect of the same lifestyle and the same effects of industry that the 2T brought up as something to move beyond.

Quote:But part of the national divide is whether we accept science to inform policy.  If there is a yes on COVID, global warming could follow.  It should, except the economy will be in a mess.  If Biden was not such an establishment figure I might anticipate real action on warming.  As is, fusion may be just around the corner.  Once big oil has extracted their profits, they may allow the replacement technology.  We might build fusion reactors everywhere.  Infrastructure building during the high is a traditional thing.  A shift in priorities during the crisis period could happen.

Yes, it will follow, if Biden gets in and is succeeded by Susan Rice. It will depend on who the Democrats nominate in 2024 whether the transformation goes beyond what Biden is willing to push for and support. A poor candidate like Kamala Harris will just lose, and that will be that. Horoscope scores and in general the quality of the candidate (which they successfully indicate) matters a lot. Fusion is not on the horizon in this 4T, but some progress on nuclear power may happen as infrastructure building ramps up in the 1T.

Quote:But I am not seeing it yet.  I am seeing COVID, Black Lives Matter, the economy, but global warming is still on the back burner.  There has been no movement that I have observed yet.  I am hopefully known for calling on people to check their opinions against reality.  Those who think global warming ought to be a priority are allowing their perception to be shaped by their desires.  Check reality.

No movement? It has been going on throughout the 4T and before. We just had big climate marches. The covid is naturally fron and center now, but which issue is at the top fluctuates. If Biden is elected, I expect the pandemic to be handled within a year. If Democrats can win the senate and overcome Republican resistance, then we can see the end of Reaganomics of the last 40 years and return to a society that helps its people. If not, then it will continue and the general decline of the USA will be precipitate. What if anything we can do about it remains to be seen. I expect elections could be put out of action if Trump wins.

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-09-2020, 01:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(08-08-2020, 10:52 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: In the last 2T we were concerned with dirty water.  We built a lot of sewage treatment plants near big cities.  Global Warming wasn't a big issue yet.  I anticipate the next big push to be in the 2T again.  

The global warming issue was brought up though in the 2T. It intensified in the 3T, but all along the issue of ecology in all its aspects and the dangers of industry were central to the 60s/70s 2T. Global warming is just an extended effect of the same lifestyle and the same effects of industry that the 2T brought up as something to move beyond.

From the Wiki global warming page...

Wiki Wrote:The global warming problem came to international public attention in the late 1980s. Due to confusing media coverage in the early 1990s, issues such as ozone depletion and climate change were often mixed up, affecting public understanding of these issues. Although there are a few areas of linkage, the relationship between the two is weak.

This confirms my view that global warming problem did not begin to come into the public attention until well after the height of the awakening.  Other elements of pollution, sure, but awareness of global warming grew with the unraveling, becoming part of the political division.

(08-09-2020, 01:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: No movement? It has been going on throughout the 4T and before. We just had big climate marches. The covid is naturally fron and center now, but which issue is at the top fluctuates. If Biden is elected, I expect the pandemic to be handled within a year. If Democrats can win the senate and overcome Republican resistance, then we can see the end of Reaganomics of the last 40 years and return to a society that helps its people.

There have been protests, sure, but not the real action that I am looking for.  I agree that COVID and Reaganomics could be handled with about a year of Biden, and  then we will see how decisively he goes at the rest of the blue agenda.  

I am just falling into the trap of being disappointed in advance.  I expect hardly more action than was achieved in Obama's first few years, when the Democrats had a majority in both houses of Congress and the White House and was focusing on health care.  Biden is just too establishment.  He has to give more than campaign promise support to the global warming question.  If he does, great, but I will not give him points until he actually acts.

[Eric the Green]

I expect due to my reading of the cycles that a progressive era is due. So I hope we get the leadership we need. We'll see if Biden and the people alike are willing to embrace our destiny in this decade. We might not, but we might see more change than we expect or even bargain for. That happens in 4Ts.

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-09-2020, 02:00 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I expect due to my reading of the cycles that a progressive era is due. So I hope we get the leadership we need. We'll see if Biden and the people alike are willing to embrace our destiny in this decade. We might not, but we might see more change than we expect or even bargain for. That happens in 4Ts.

We can certainly hope. Prior 4Ts have produced results far greater than anyone anticipated going in. For that reason I traditionally think big.

But I am having trouble working up enthusiasm for Biden doing more than he already did given the chance.

[Eric the Green]

(08-09-2020, 02:05 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-09-2020, 02:00 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I expect due to my reading of the cycles that a progressive era is due. So I hope we get the leadership we need. We'll see if Biden and the people alike are willing to embrace our destiny in this decade. We might not, but we might see more change than we expect or even bargain for. That happens in 4Ts.

We can certainly hope.  Prior 4Ts have produced results far greater than anyone anticipated going in.  For that reason I traditionally think big.

But I am having trouble working up enthusiasm for Biden doing more than he already did given the chance.

I hope Trump is right that Biden is becoming a tool of the hard left. At least we know he's listening to Bernie and Elizabeth. I'm not enthusiastic for Biden either when you get right down to it. It will depend more on how the people respond and how they push him and in which direction, the liberal or the "classic" direction.

[David Horn]

(08-09-2020, 03:00 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(08-09-2020, 02:05 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-09-2020, 02:00 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I expect due to my reading of the cycles that a progressive era is due. So I hope we get the leadership we need. We'll see if Biden and the people alike are willing to embrace our destiny in this decade. We might not, but we might see more change than we expect or even bargain for. That happens in 4Ts.

We can certainly hope.  Prior 4Ts have produced results far greater than anyone anticipated going in.  For that reason I traditionally think big.

But I am having trouble working up enthusiasm for Biden doing more than he already did given the chance.

I hope Trump is right that Biden is becoming a tool of the hard left. At least we know he's listening to Bernie and Elizabeth. I'm not enthusiastic for Biden either when you get right down to it. It will depend more on how the people respond and how they push him and in which direction, the liberal or the "classic" direction.

The Trumpian 'tool' language is intended to stop anything resembling change by making it unacceptable.  Of course, Trump-change is fine!  Just ask him.

[jleagans]

Not playing catch up on this post, but what's wrong with 2001 being the start of the 4th turning? This only works if Biden wins and 2020 officially ends the Turning.

This would make years per turning:

1st - 1946-1964 (roughly) -19 years
2nd-1965-1983 (roughly)- 19 years
3rd-1984-2001-18 years
4th-2002-2020-19 years

I'm sorry but thats creepily balanced and overlays exactly to the generations (as it should).