Originally Posted by pbrower2a

Britain had the Crimean War perhaps a bit early for a Crisis Era -- and the nasty Sepoy Rebellion in India -- in the 1850s.

Jesus Christ, dude, I literally just referenced the Mutiny in my previous post. Finish the thread before hitting the respond button, next time.

And the Crimean War is too early for a Crisis Era, at least for Britain. Maybe for Russia and Turkey. I haven't thought about their 19th century saecula in a while.

As for the Fifth Turning bit, I'm actually in agreement with you, which you might have noticed if you had kept reading. There's no such thing, there are merely Crises that go "well" or "poorly". The Soviet Union is a good example of a political entity that failed to cohere during its Crisis, and fell apart. 1850s-1871 Britain is a good example of a country whose leadership steered them through the Crisis without succumbing to either internal revolt or major war, unlike their fellows to the east and across the pond, even further consolidating its empire abroad (vis a vis the establishment of things like the British Raj). Although, with the benefit of hindsight, considering how quickly the newly unified German Empire and United States would overtake them from the 1870s on, perhaps they could have done better. It depends on how far you choose to look out. They did well enough to keep Britain's Empire intact and growing for another saeculum.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

So how will the Millenials turn out if this 4T plays out out as weak or muted?

I believe the consensus is that Civic generations, absent a coming of age trial, turn out much like Adaptives. If the generation doesn't see institutions overturned, and new ones put in place by and for them (to an extent), they're just another group of slightly smothered individuals conforming to the dictates of a system they had no hand in building

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

In the last 4T era, Sweden entered the crisis at about the same tiem as the reswt of Europe, but exited the crisis early. They were the only country to apply Keynesian economics full-bore early in the depression era and without going to war. So the Swedish economy was fully recovered before the war got started in earnest. As a neutral, they avoided the devastaion and did some business with both sides. Because the kingdom had recovered but had no war expeses, Sweden became a supplier of non-lethal goods for much of the continent.

So, I wouldn't use Sweden as guide for that period. It's a bit unique.

Well, I don't know, I don't think the Asian powers are quite in Crisis yet. If we play our cards right, we could totally make a killing fomenting conflict and selling goods to both sides.

What, I can dream, can't I?

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

Jesus Christ, dude, I literally just referenced the Mutiny in my previous post. Finish the thread before hitting the respond button, next time.

But that was a vicious 4T event, and it led to the Crown takeover of the corrupt British East India Company, transforming most of India from a political entity run effectively by a corporation to a genuine colony.

And the Crimean War is too early for a Crisis Era, at least for Britain. Maybe for Russia and Turkey. I haven't thought about their 19th century saecula in a while.

Premature? That depends upon whether one considers the Napoleonic Wars a Crisis or part of a Crisis that includes the French Revolution. (Sparking the French Revolution was a volcanic eruption in Iceland (Laki, 1783-84) that forced a famine... and if one sees the end of the Crisis with the Battle of Waterloo, the eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815 that sent volcanic gases into the upper atmosphere and forced global cooling.... and crop failures.... for several years. Maybe a weak 1T shortens the cycle, allowing a Crisis Era to happen earlier than otherwise.

As for the Fifth Turning bit, I'm actually in agreement with you, which you might have noticed if you had kept reading. There's no such thing, there are merely Crises that go "well" or "poorly". The Soviet Union is a good example of a political entity that failed to cohere during its Crisis, and fell apart. 1850s-1871 Britain is a good example of a country whose leadership steered them through the Crisis without succumbing to either internal revolt or major war, unlike their fellows to the east and across the pond, even further consolidating its empire abroad (vis a vis the establishment of things like the British Raj). Although, with the benefit of hindsight, considering how quickly the newly unified German Empire and United States would overtake them from the 1870s on, perhaps they could have done better. It depends on how far you choose to look out. They did well enough to keep Britain's Empire intact and growing for another saeculum.

A 1T can be a time of hardships in the event of natural disasters. Europe should generally have recovered swiftly after the end of the chaos of the Napoleonic Wars, and the repressive order of Metternich in Austria and others elsewhere in Europe established little room for independent thought. Such could be the worst of all possible worlds. This was the time of the weird landscapes of British painter J M W Turner with their spectacularly-red sunsets and when Mary Shelley (stranded in Switzerland during the year Without A Summer) wrote Frankenstein and one of her friends wrote The Vampyre, a predecessor of Dracula. Add to that Byron wrote his gloomy Darkness.

Can a Saeculum fully miss an era? Not likely. A bad 1T might shorten the Saeculum, and a very bad 3T (think of Germany in the 1910s and 1920s) might lead to the worst sort of Crisis possible.

But that was a vicious 4T event, and it led to the Crown takeover of the corrupt British East India Company, transforming most of India from a political entity run effectively by a corporation to a genuine colony.

That is what I said, where is this "but" shit coming in? It was the climax of the Crisis FOR INDIA, and one of the things Britain dealt with during its Crisis period.

remature? That depends upon whether one considers the Napoleonic Wars a Crisis or part of a Crisis that includes the French Revolution. (Sparking the French Revolution was a volcanic eruption in Iceland (Laki, 1783-84) that forced a famine... and if one sees the end of the Crisis with the Battle of Waterloo, the eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815 that sent volcanic gases into the upper atmosphere and forced global cooling.... and crop failures.... for several years. Maybe a weak 1T shortens the cycle, allowing a Crisis Era to happen earlier than otherwise.

I've actually commented on this before, during the Hitler thread most recently, but you were "ignoring" every other post. I don't think the Napoleonic Wars were a 4T event at all, but a 1st. The Revolution was the 4T, on both sides of the Atlantic. The French Awakening started shortly after the restoration of the Bourbons.

Can a Saeculum fully miss an era? Not likely. A bad 1T might shorten the Saeculum, and a very bad 3T (think of Germany in the 1910s and 1920s) might lead to the worst sort of Crisis possible.

*sigh*

Couldn't help yourself, could you?

Conceivably this 4T could turn out to be (relatively) mild if it's emphasis is economic. S & H mentioned this as a possibility, with Millenials heroically rebuilding the economy. I believe that something like this occurred in Japan after World War II. Would that confirm Millies in the Hero role?

As I was pointing out earlier, I don't think that people have to shoot each other in large numbers for it to be a Crisis. Even during WWII, the majority of American GIs (the generation, obviously) never saw combat. It;s a matter of coming together and building something new. I think it's the sense of shared purpose and agency that's important. Now, if we didn't have a war, or a revolution, and things limped along more or less unchanged all through 4T/1T, then we might have cause either to question the theory or declare Millies a "failed" Civic generation.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

> I also really question whether you can call Afghanistan's crisis
> over after just 5 years. After all, the Taliban regime fell after
> only five years, and never had full control of the
> country.

Afghanistan's Crisis era (which is different from the crisis war) was
longer than that. If the previous crisis war was the revolt that
climaxed in 1929, then the next Crisis era would have begun around
1987. The Crisis era ended with the climax of the civil war in 1996,
and so the Crisis era in this case was actually nine years long.

As a general rule, a crisis era starts about 58 years after the climax
of the previous crisis war. The regeneracy, which starts the real
crisis war, unites all the generations and all the ideologies behind
the leader, so that, in effect, the "constellation of generations,"
which drove politics and policies up to that point, is merged into a
single multi-generation generation or a single multi-ideology
ideology, to become a unified fighting force whose goal is to preserve
the country and its way of life. So, it's literally impossible for
the crisis era to continue past the crisis war climax. The crisis war
climax ends both the crisis war and the crisis era, and the country
immediately enters a Recovery Era (First Turning).

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

> To go back to an earlier point, where you mentioned how Russia
> never seemed to reach the point of "individual human life having
> no value", defining a 4T.

Once again, a 4T is not the same as a crisis war (or, in S&H's terms,
a "crisis"). A crisis must unify the generations behind the
country's leader to take any steps necessary to preserve the
country and its way of life. The individual human life having
no value is just a small part of the overall crisis war
dynamics.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

> Even if there is no direct involvement in the Crisis, a country
> can endure the tension of one nearby. So if a country like the
> Netherlands had this pattern:

> 3T >> Great Depression and cataclysmic war >> 1T

> it more likely went this way for Sweden:

> 3T >> Great Depression and evasion of a cataclysmic war >> 1T

> The generational constellation for a 1T after a weak, muted, or
> evaded Crisis is practically identical to that of a 1T following a
> cataclysmic war.

I've never looked much at the Sweden example, but I assume that Sweden
is similar to the examples that have been previously discussed, such
as Iceland and Switzerland and Kansas.

When the Fifth Turning issue is discussed, it's usually in the context
of Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Turkey and Russia. What are your
thoughts about those examples?

*** 2-Oct-13 World View -- Drug cartel networks move to Honduras from Mexico and Colombia

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Vatican Bank reacts to allegations of international money-laundering
• Drug cartel networks move to Honduras from Mexico and Colombia

****
**** Vatican Bank reacts to allegations of international money-laundering
****


Vatican Bank

For the first time in its history, the Institute for the Works of
Religion (IOR), usually referred to as the Vatican Bank, has published
an annual report. According to the report, the 2012 earnings are 86.6
million euros, with 5 billion euros in assets.

At the same time, the IOR may be forced to close all its international
embassy accounts. This is consequence of a three-year investigation
that appears to indicate that Iran, Iraq and Indonesia have been using
the IOR to launder tens of millions of dollars. The investigation
began in 2009, but was blocked several times by other Vatican
officials. When Francis became Pope several months ago, he revived
the investigation, resulting in the resignation on July 1 of the
director of the Vatican Bank under allegations of money laundering.
Catholic Herald and Reuters

****
**** Drug cartel networks move to Honduras from Mexico and Colombia
****

Because of counter-narcotics policies in Colombia and Mexico organized
crime syndicates have been forced relocate to other Latin American
countries, where they're meeting a lot less resistance. The model is
Venezuela, where deals between drug gangs and Hugo Chávez turned
Venezuela into a narcostate. Now, Honduras is being targeted, thanks
to the political chaos that followed the 2009 attempt by the Marxist
Chávez acolyte Manuel Zelaya to illegally modify the constitution.
Zelaya's Marxist allies are encouraging drug trafficking in Honduras
in order to make the country ungovernable, allowing a Marxist coup.
By 2011, Honduras had one of the highest homicide rates in the world,
with 91.6 homicides per 100,000 residents. Today, the US State
Department’s 2013 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report
estimates "87 percent of all cocaine smuggling flights departing South
America first land in Honduras." AEI


KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Vatican Bank,
Institute for the Works of Religion, IOR,
Iran, Iraq, Indonesia,
Honduras, Colombia, Mexico, Manuel Zelaya,
Venezuela, Hugo Chavez

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

As I was pointing out earlier, I don't think that people have to shoot each other in large numbers for it to be a Crisis. Even during WWII, the majority of American GIs (the generation, obviously) never saw combat. It;s a matter of coming together and building something new. I think it's the sense of shared purpose and agency that's important. Now, if we didn't have a war, or a revolution, and things limped along more or less unchanged all through 4T/1T, then we might have cause either to question the theory or declare Millies a "failed" Civic generation.

The US showed strong signs of heading into a 1T in the late 1930s. America had made huge political reforms that made a return to the bad old days of the 1920s (and the 1920s really were a slum of a decade), unions became powerful institutions, and the New Deal coalition of western agrarian reformers, organized labor, conservationists, and economic reformers had established a solid direction for the future. Consumer spending was back, and what wasn't back was wild speculation in the securities markets.

World War II of course got in the way, and forced its own changes upon America. Without World War II America would have had a Crisis Era much like those of Sweden and Switzerland.

I wouldn't count out the Millennial Generation yet. When it gets involved in politics it will be in it deep, and it will act far differently from the Silent and Boomer politicians that it replaces.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

I've never looked much at the Sweden example, but I assume that Sweden
is similar to the examples that have been previously discussed, such
as Iceland and Switzerland and Kansas.

When the Fifth Turning issue is discussed, it's usually in the context
of Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Turkey and Russia. What are your
thoughts about those examples?

World War II was a Crisis War for the Soviet Union, so I figure that Russia is probably in a Crisis Era. I see the end of Communism in the former Soviet bloc as largely a late 3T event because of the rejection of collectivist ideology. But add to that, Russia is heavily involved in vicious wars in the Caucasus region. That looks much like a low-grade Crisis, but it is Crisis.

Mexico has had some nasty squabbles between law enforcement and drug cartels. There is much dispute over who really commands much of Mexico. Drug gangs who can murder at will and who can affix decapitated bodies to expressway overpasses as trophies demonstrating their power over formal authority leave doubt on who really rules. That looks like a very nasty Crisis Era -- thanks in no small part to Americans who buy illegal drugs and to Americans who purchase firearms smuggled into Mexico to the drug lords. Mexico is 4T -- thank you, American addicts and weapons traffickers and the enablers of the latter, for having so much blood on your hands.

Morocco, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey? I can't characterize either well.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

I believe the consensus is that Civic generations, absent a coming of age trial, turn out much like Adaptives. If the generation doesn't see institutions overturned, and new ones put in place by and for them (to an extent), they're just another group of slightly smothered individuals conforming to the dictates of a system they had no hand in building

I honestly think this is a silly notion. By that measure, you could say that if Idealists fail to make an impact in an Awakening, they turn into Nomads by default (because they'd just be another bunch of non-conforming individualists who had no hand in changing the mores of the time period). If you're going to argue that, just go back to the old Biblical measure of a generation: 40 years. In such "lineup" one could then argue that what we call "Idealists & Nomads" and "Civics & Artists" are just two halves of the same generation--like what we consider to be two waves. And, I'm joking when I say that.

Anyway, Britain clearly had a Civic generation from the time period--you can see them especially throwing their weight around after the Crisis. Most of the time in media taking place in the time period they're depicted as spouting off how serving in India or journeying through Africa was marvelous... etc. And like the rest of the Civic generation on the European continent at the time, the males of that generation enjoyed dressing up in uniforms, dancing to Strauss, and doing the big new hit: the Polka. Not to mention the Polka Mazurka, and all the large group ballroom dances.

~Chas'88

That's actually really funny. I would have sworn up and down that you were one of the people advocating the notion. Guess I was wrong. Care to elaborate? I've been slowly coming round to the notion that that instance is a possible scenario this time around. For those of us in the American empire, that is. Weren't workhouses part of the package for their 1T? Cultural history isn't my strong suit, and it's what seems relevant in this case.

*** 3-Oct-13 World View -- Buddhist violence against Muslims in Burma/Myanmar continues to spread

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Russia charges Greenpeace activists with piracy
• Buddhist violence against Muslims in Burma/Myanmar continues to spread
• Venezuela's president Maduro backs Putin for Nobel Peace Price

****
**** Russia charges Greenpeace activists with piracy
****


Greenpeace activist Anthony Perrett waits for trial in a cell in Murmansk

Last week, activists from the "eco-terrorist" group Greenpeace
attempted to scale a a Gazprom offshore oil platform in the Arctic
Ocean, hoping that the big publicity stunt would embarrass the
Russians. ( "25-Sep-13 World View -- Greenpeace tangles with the wrong country -- Russia"
)

Russia arrested 30 Greenpeace activists, and towed their boat back to
the port of Murmansk. All 30 are expected to be held at least until
November 24, but on Wednesday, 14 of them were charged with piracy,
which carries a possible sentence of 15 years. The rest are expected
to be charged with piracy tomorrow. Greenpeace called the piracy
charges "absurd." Moscow Times

****
**** Buddhist violence against Muslims in Burma/Myanmar continues to spread
****

Large mobs with hundreds of Buddhists attacked Muslims with knives and
sticks in the coastal city of Thandwe in Burma/Myanmar on Tuesday
evening, stabbing one 94-year-old Muslim woman to death, and burning
down dozens of homes and a mosque. Muslim residents fled into the
woods to escape the attacks. Tuesday's attack is the latest in a
series of attacks by Buddhists of Muslims in Burma, killing hundreds
of Muslims, and displacing hundreds of thousands from their homes,
forcing them into refugee camps.

The leader of the Buddhist anti-Muslim jihad is Buddhist monk Ashin
Wirathu, who says that he's just trying to protect Burma from Muslims.
He calls his movement the "969" movement, where 969 is a historic
Buddhist sign, referring to the nine qualities of Buddha, the six
qualities of Buddha's teaching, and nine qualities of the Buddhist
community. 969 is supposed to promote peace and happiness, although
Wirathu's 969 movement is a vehicle promoting violence,

Burma's president Thein Sein has condemned the violence in general,
but has refrained from criticizing Wirathu or the 969 movement. Then
there's opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, who is one of the world's
Nobel Peace Prize winners, but who won't speak out against Burma's
Buddhists smashing innocent Muslims.

From the point of view of Generational Dynamics it's pretty obvious
that a full-scale crisis civil war building between the Buddhists and
the Muslims. (See "5-Apr-13 World View -- Meiktila, Burma, violence has echoes of Kristallnacht"
.) That's going to explode into a major
bloodbath before too much longer. LA Times and CS Monitor and CNN (April)

****
**** Venezuela's president Maduro backs Putin for Nobel Peace Price
****

Russia's president Vladimir Putin has been nominated for Nobel
Peace Prize, and so he may be joining the esteemed ranks of
president Barack Obama and Burma's opposition leader
Aung San Suu Kyi. Venezuela's president Nicolás Maduro
is supporting Putin's nomination, saying:

<QUOTE>"If anyone deserves the Nobel Peace Prize at this
historic moment in time it is President Vladimir Putin, who helped
stop a war that would have destroyed the lives of many who deserve
to live in peace, like those of the Syrian people."<END QUOTE>

Putin has been supplying heavy weapons to Syria's psychopathic
president Bashar al-Assad, for use, along with chemical weapons, in
genocidal slaughtering of masses of innocent Syrian civilians.
Instead of Putin getting the Nobel Peace Prize, perhaps what would
make the most sense of all is if al-Assad got the Nobel Peace Prize.
The Nobel Peace Prize will be awarded on October 11. Moscow Times

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Russia, Greenpeace, Gazprom, Murmansk,
Burma, Myanmar, Buddhism, Ashin Wirathu, 969 movement,
Thein Sein, Aung San Suu Kyi,
Vladimir Putin, Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro,
Syria, Bashar al-Assad, Nobel Peace Prize

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

I believe the consensus is that Civic generations, absent a coming of age trial, turn out much like Adaptives. If the generation doesn't see institutions overturned, and new ones put in place by and for them (to an extent), they're just another group of slightly smothered individuals conforming to the dictates of a system they had no hand in building

I recall that the Glorius were deemed less hubristic than the G.I. or Republicans. I figure that there may be a minimum thresh hold if a generation is to be confirmed as Civic.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

I believe the consensus is that Civic generations, absent a coming of age trial, turn out much like Adaptives. If the generation doesn't see institutions overturned, and new ones put in place by and for them (to an extent), they're just another group of slightly smothered individuals conforming to the dictates of a system they had no hand in building

Return, of course, to the original book in the series (Generations) in which the life course of the Progressive Generation, raised to be a Civic Generation, largely got its heroic tendencies stifled because the Civil War began before even the earliest part of the generation could enter adulthood. Still youth, they suddenly found a repressive family life as a norm. Contrast the GIs who were as old as 28 (and fully adult) when the first Crisis event (the Great Stock Market Crash of 1929) hit. Some GIs were already starting such careers as were possible during the Great Depression and were starting businesses when the Crisis War struck. GIs were late-bloomers in culture, but such GI creators as Walt Disney, Billy Wilder, Glenn Miller, and Orson Welles were already establishing an omnibus culture. Some (like Clark Clifford) were already advisors to a President, and future President Lyndon Johnson was already in Congress. The oldest of the Progressive Generation were only 14 during the Panic of 1857 and 16 at the time of John Brown's raid and Bleeding Kansas. By the late 1850s everyone knew what the Crisis would be about, and Progressive kids knew enough to toe the line.

As it turns out, the Gilded Generation included many who took on Civic characteristics (a long stay in public office, social cohesion, secularism, a love for doing things on a big scale, prudery, and an indulgent pattern of child-raising) -- of course if one got away with participating in the war on the winning side. The Gilded were the closest thing to a Civic generation between the Republicans of Jefferson and the GIs of JFK. One aspect of being a Civic generation was that a young Idealist generation (the Missionaries) found them brittle targets for political and religious dissent.

A few years ago I could have easily imagined Generation X becoming a sort of Reactive-Civic hybrid much like the Gilded if the Crisis of 2020 hit early and hard and was over quickly because they would be the bulk of the heroes of the Crisis War. But the "War on terror" has not catapulted political careers. The bulk of soldiers of any Crisis War this time will be Millennial young adults whose oldest have just turned 31. The Millennial Generation has yet to establish much cultural creativity; at that they show the GI and Republican marker as late-bloomers in culture.

What if the Crisis culminates in disaster? German, Italian, and Japanese contemporaries of the American and British GI Generation have well-defined civic characteristics. Only the Civic mentality could have allowed the postwar economic miracles of Germany, Italy, and Japan.

Well, Boomers definitely made an impact during the last 2T. I do recall that a Prophet generation was hard hit by the Irish potato famine-and acted like (devastated) Nomads afterwards.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

That's actually really funny. I would have sworn up and down that you were one of the people advocating the notion. Guess I was wrong. Care to elaborate? I've been slowly coming round to the notion that that instance is a possible scenario this time around. For those of us in the American empire, that is. Weren't workhouses part of the package for their 1T? Cultural history isn't my strong suit, and it's what seems relevant in this case.

I can argue S&H dogma when needed, but upon further examination I've simply found that S&H date the Second Great Awakening far too late (IMO so they could throw Lincoln in as a Prophet to fit their "Grey Champion" narrative)--when if you look at his life story he comes across as a Cusper at the very least, if not an outright Nomad. Lincoln's childhood actually parallels Obama's in a lot of ways in that he was drug around to different spiritual events as a child by his kool-aid drinking parents, and he was more a kid observing what the adults around him were doing, than actively participating. In Lincoln's mind his parents were the ones changed by the revivalism of the Second Great Awakening, just like Obama considers his mother to be the "Boomer" to his "post-Boomer" self. In fact Lincoln was nebulous on his opinion of religion until the Civil War, the loss of his son, and the Crisis finally inspired him to take a more tentative supportive stance on religion. And he's not alone, a lot of late 1800s cohorts, if you look into their early childhood have stories of what we'd call "parental neglect" or "disinterest". Whitman (who I'd regard as a cusper who leans Idealist) marked that one of his most cherished childhood memories was when a complete stranger payed him the slightest bit of attention as a child. That doesn't scream Prophet childhood to me. And most of them have memories of being drug around to these religious revivals as children (often wandering off to do their own thing) as their parents participated, but they couldn't be less interested.

Most religious fervor began on the frontier around 1800 (Cane Ridge Revival of 1801 actually starts the Second Great Awakening fervor according to most non-S&H historians--and if you read up about these revivals they come across as multiple Woodstocks--different social classes intermingling, blacks and whites intermingling--masters and slaves worshiping together, religious conversions, crowd agitation, speakers who only have to look at someone and inspire them to collapse to the ground in religious ecstasy, people rolling around in the dirt and crying out for God--and people are coming for miles upon miles and months in advance to attend these revivals--regularly I might add--with the main period of activity being between 1801 - 1830), shifting gears in the 1810s to spread to a large percentage of people and by the 1820s hit the East Coast middle class. S&H pick up the story in the 1820s when the East Coast middle class adapts (they're actually seen as being on the end of the trend by most other historians--late adapters). It would be like saying that the Boom Awakening started when the South started to show signs of having entered the Awakening towards the latter half with the creation of what we now know as modern "Red Neck culture" a la Dukes of Hazzard, Smokey and the Bandit, Best Little Whorehouse in Texas, and Urban Cowboy. All right not really that late, but you get the picture. S&H start the Second Great Awakning at the end of the actual social event.

Any Awakening sensibility ends in my books by 1833 at earliest (after the Nullification Crisis dies down--it was the Air traffic Controllers issue of its day) and most DEFINITELY by 1837 at latest. The parallels of John Quincey Adams = Carter, Jackson = Reagan, and Van Buren = H.W. Bush are about as obvious as can be IMO. The "Market Revolution" of the 1830s is an obvious parallel to the "Corporatism" of the 1980s, and it's technological transformation of America over the 1830s and 1840s is roughly comparable to the technological transformation we underwent in the 1980s and 1990s:

By the 1830s and 1840s, trade and specialization among the four port/hinterland regions were creating an integrated sectional market embracing the northeast as a whole. Meanwhile commercial agriculture spread over the west and the south; and during the second half of the nineteenth century, the northeast market reached out to incorporate these sections into an integrated national market. By mid century, capital and technology were converting enough central workshops into mechanized factories to convert the market revolution into a staggeringly productive industrial revolution.

Also the Amistad was more of a 3T issue, not a 2T one--and JQ Adams being a better "post-president" actually fits the Carter analogy better. Also over the course of the 1830s and beyond into the 1840s the religious scene gets darker and darker as backlashes to immigration occur, and a general fragmentation of society takes over. The Second Great Awakening had been a Protestant-themed Awakening that sought to inspire newly converted "born again" Evangelicals to go out into the world and make it a better place by turning America into a "New Eden". Over the course of the 1830s and 1840s the "awakened" Evangelicals were horrified to find Catholics and the Irish (aka "a nigger turned inside out", as they used to refer to the Irish) were polluting their perfect "New Eden" and were actually demanding that they take the King James version of the bible out of the public schools or ask for funds to set up their own private Catholic schools! "Those dirty Catholics don't want to be good Americans (which in that "New Eden" meant being an Evangelical Protestant) and want to remain ignorant because they refuse to send their children to our public schools." This led to a culture war of sorts--with attacks, riots, and burnings of Catholic churches occurring in the 1830s, 1840s, and 1850s.

The "Era of Good Feelings" of post War of 1812 is everything that S&H say it is in politics, but in terms of popular culture you have a popular culture (The Leatherstocking Tales book series by James Fenimore Cooper is one example) that's celebrating the spirit of a strong rugged individualistic figure who's rebellious against society--not really your typical 1T fodder, but it's classic 2T entertainment.

Then if you actually look at the physical records of the childhood of the Gilded generation, as an old poster ASB'65 once did as she had access to letters and other primary resources to draw upon to get a good picture of Gilded childhood. You find they were actually one of the most protected generations compared to previous generations up to that point. They were the generation that were the first to receive the modern notion of a "childhood" as we know it today. They were actually the first generation to not receive the "mini-adult" treatment that just about every generation prior to them received.

~Chas'88

___________________________________

P.S. By the way, if S&H had actually given the "Gray Champion" story a deeper glance, they'd notice that the Gray Champion according to Hawthorne is only supposed to appear to defend New England, when it's in danger.

Originally Posted by Chas'88

> Any Awakening sensibility ends in my books by 1833 at earliest
> (after the Nullification Crisis dies down--it was the Air traffic
> Controllers issue of its day) and most DEFINITELY by 1837 at
> latest. The parallels of John Quincey Adams = Carter, Jackson =
> Reagan, and Van Buren = H.W. Bush are about as obvious as can be
> IMO. The "Market Revolution" of the 1830s is an obvious parallel
> to the "Corporatism" of the 1980s, and its technological
> transformation of America over the 1830s and 1840s is roughly
> comparable to the technological transformation we underwent in the
> 1980s and 1990s.

The Crisis Era (Fourth Turning) begins when the previous Artist
generation completely loses influence in society, and that happens
almost unvaryingly and inexorably about 58 years after the climax of
the preceding crisis war. The Revolutionary War climaxed in 1782, and
58 years later is 1840. That's when the Crisis era leading to
the Civil War began.

In the 1840 time frame, here's an introductory description to
the Mexican-American war:

<QUOTE>The Mexican-American War (1846-1848) marked the
first U.S. armed conflict chiefly fought on foreign soil. It
pitted a politically divided and militarily unprepared Mexico
against the expansionist-minded administration of U.S. President
James K. Polk, who believed the United States had a “manifest
destiny” to spread across the continent to the Pacific Ocean. A
border skirmish along the Rio Grande started off the fighting and
was followed by a series of U.S. victories. When the dust cleared,
Mexico had lost about one-third of its territory, including nearly
all of present-day California, Utah, Nevada, Arizona and New
Mexico.

Causes of the Mexican-American War

Texas gained its independence from Mexico in 1836. Initially, the
United States declined to incorporate it into the union, largely
because northern political interests were against the addition of
a new slave state. The Mexican government was also encouraging
border raids and warning that any attempt at annexation would lead
to war.

Nonetheless, annexation procedures were quickly initiated after
the 1844 election of Polk, who campaigned that Texas should be
“re-annexed” and that the Oregon Territory should be
“re-occupied.” Polk also had his eyes on California, New Mexico
and the rest of what is today the U.S. Southwest. When his offer
to purchase those lands was rejected, he instigated a fight by
moving troops into a disputed zone between the Rio Grande and
Nueces River that both countries had previously recognized as part
of the Mexican state of Coahuila."<END QUOTE>

http://www.history.com/topics/mexican-american-war

So the United States completely reversed policy, becoming much more
belligerent with respect to Mexico between 1836 and 1844. In 1836,
America avoided war. In 1844, America was much more nationalistic,
ready to embrace war because of "manifest destiny." What changed?
What changed was the end of influence of the preceding Artist
generation, and the rise of the new Nomad generation, and that's the
beginning of America's Fourth Turning, or Crisis Era.

Here's an example from modern times.

In 1991, U.S. and coalition forces had ejected Saddam Hussein's Iraq
from Kuwait, but stopped at Iraq's border. It was known with ABSOLUTE
CERTAINTY that Saddam had WMDs, since they had been used against the
Kurds and Iran in 1988. And yet, despite absolutely certainty that
Iraq had WMDs, and might use them again, a decision was made to ignore
them and stop the military action at Iraq's border, leaving the WMD
issue in the hands of U.N. inspectors. The public were simply not
very concerned about known WMDs in Iraq, or that Iraq might use them
again.

In 2003, U.S. forces were nowhere near the border of Iraq. It was
SUSPECTED that there were WMDs in Iraqi labs somewhere. That was
enough to launch a major military action inside Iraq. Whether you
love George Bush or hate him, there's no doubt that the public were
enormously concerned about WMDs in 2003, but were NOT concerned in
1991.

What changed? The Silents (the Artists of WW II) lost influence about
58 years after the climax of WW II, and Generation-X (the new Nomad
generation) was rising in 2003. That's when America's new Crisis Era
began. That's what changed between 1991 and 2003, and by the way
that's when all the criminal activity began in the banks, leading to
the current global financial crisis, which is far from over.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

The Crisis Era (Fourth Turning) begins when the previous Artist
generation completely loses influence in society, and that happens
almost unvaryingly and inexorably about 58 years after the climax of
the preceding crisis war. The Revolutionary War climaxed in 1782, and
58 years later is 1840. That's when the Crisis era leading to
the Civil War began.

In the 1840 time frame, here's an introductory description to
the Mexican-American war:

<QUOTE>The Mexican-American War (1846-1848) marked the
first U.S. armed conflict chiefly fought on foreign soil. It
pitted a politically divided and militarily unprepared Mexico
against the expansionist-minded administration of U.S. President
James K. Polk, who believed the United States had a “manifest
destiny” to spread across the continent to the Pacific Ocean. A
border skirmish along the Rio Grande started off the fighting and
was followed by a series of U.S. victories. When the dust cleared,
Mexico had lost about one-third of its territory, including nearly
all of present-day California, Utah, Nevada, Arizona and New
Mexico.

Causes of the Mexican-American War

Texas gained its independence from Mexico in 1836. Initially, the
United States declined to incorporate it into the union, largely
because northern political interests were against the addition of
a new slave state. The Mexican government was also encouraging
border raids and warning that any attempt at annexation would lead
to war.

Nonetheless, annexation procedures were quickly initiated after
the 1844 election of Polk, who campaigned that Texas should be
“re-annexed” and that the Oregon Territory should be
“re-occupied.” Polk also had his eyes on California, New Mexico
and the rest of what is today the U.S. Southwest. When his offer
to purchase those lands was rejected, he instigated a fight by
moving troops into a disputed zone between the Rio Grande and
Nueces River that both countries had previously recognized as part
of the Mexican state of Coahuila."<END QUOTE>

http://www.history.com/topics/mexican-american-war

So the United States completely reversed policy, becoming much more
belligerent with respect to Mexico between 1836 and 1844. In 1836,
America avoided war. In 1844, America was much more nationalistic,
ready to embrace war because of "manifest destiny." What changed?
What changed was the end of influence of the preceding Artist
generation, and the rise of the new Nomad generation, and that's the
beginning of America's Fourth Turning, or Crisis Era.

Here's an example from modern times.

In 1991, U.S. and coalition forces had ejected Saddam Hussein's Iraq
from Kuwait, but stopped at Iraq's border. It was known with ABSOLUTE
CERTAINTY that Saddam had WMDs, since they had been used against the
Kurds and Iran in 1988. And yet, despite absolutely certainty that
Iraq had WMDs, and might use them again, a decision was made to ignore
them and stop the military action at Iraq's border, leaving the WMD
issue in the hands of U.N. inspectors. The public were simply not
very concerned about known WMDs in Iraq, or that Iraq might use them
again.

In 2003, U.S. forces were nowhere near the border of Iraq. It was
SUSPECTED that there were WMDs in Iraqi labs somewhere. That was
enough to launch a major military action inside Iraq. Whether you
love George Bush or hate him, there's no doubt that the public were
enormously concerned about WMDs in 2003, but were NOT concerned in
1991.

What changed? The Silents (the Artists of WW II) lost influence about
58 years after the climax of WW II, and Generation-X (the new Nomad
generation) was rising in 2003. That's when America's new Crisis Era
began. That's what changed between 1991 and 2003, and by the way
that's when all the criminal activity began in the banks, leading to
the current global financial crisis, which is far from over.

I won't disagree with this thinking at all, though I manage to find a middle ground between your proposal and S&H dogma:

1769 - 1789 = 4T (Sons of Liberty begin to get active - Washington takes office)
1789 - ~1811 = 1T (Washington takes office - Spread of Revivals, by 1811 1/7 of US population is attending revivals and the numbers start sky rocketing up from there on out)
~1811 - 1833 = 2T (Spread of Revivals - Nullification Crisis)
1833 - 1850 = 3T (Nullification Crisis - Compromise of 1850)
1850 - 1869 = 4T (Compromise of 1850 - Grant's Reconstruction; Reconstruction under Johnson still marks me as a very tenuous Crisis period, especially in the South with the New Orleans Massacre, the rise and fall of the KKK from 1866 - 1869, and the heavy handed tactics of Governors like Brownlow in Tennessee who acts much like Scott Walker of Wisconsin did in this current Crisis; from 1865 - 1869 a lot of people in the North thought that fighting might start up again based upon what they were hearing out of the South, after 1869 the North stops giving a shit more or less).

Which roughly creates the following Generations:

1767 - 1786 = Compromise -- Artist (J.Q. Adams - Winfield Scott)
1787 - 1808 = Manifest -- Prophet (George Bethune English - Lysander Spooner)
1809 - 1829 = Gothic -- Nomad (Lincoln - Levi Strauss)
1830 - 1846 = Gilded -- Civic (this I'm confident of, considering these guys were actually the swath of the veterans from the Civil War who were either enlisted to fight, and later on were eligible for the draft)
1847 - 1865 = Progressive -- Artist (this I'm extremely confident of as figures like Edith Wharton (b.1863) and Jane Addams (b.1860) mark me more as Artists than they do as Prophets)

PrinceofCats67 has a model much like yours.

I'm less inclined to see the Mex-Am. war as a 4T style conflict, but I can see how the "aftereffects" of that war created the Crisis. I also don't consider 1849 that much of a Crisis year for rather obvious reasons. However the strong Fugitive Slave Law that was part of the Compromise of 1850 made people who even opposed to slavery culpable before the law if they failed to report a known slave to the authorities. It also sparked a conspiracy theory that grew to tremendous proportions that by 1857 people took it for fact that there was "Slave Power" in the government, meaning that a small cabal of Slave owners had bought out members of Congress and were supposedly bent on enforcing a "Slaveocracy". With the Dred Scott decision it looked like they had also bought out the Supreme Court and the President to be as well (Buchannan). So by dealing with the "aftereffects" of the Mex-Am. War, the US set itself up for the Crisis.

POC67's model, last I checked for the Civil War Crisis:

1846 - 1865

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

The generational constellation for a 1T after a weak, muted, or evaded Crisis is practically identical to that of a 1T following a cataclysmic war.

This time around definitely not an evaded Crisis for us.

*** 4-Oct-13 World View -- Russia evacuates diplomats from Libya after embassy attack

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Series of giant hornet attacks in China kill 41, injure thousands
• Libyans attack Russian embassy to avenge attack by Russian woman
• President Obama 'jawbones' the stock market down
• Obamacare web sites keep crashing because they're too popular?

****
**** Series of giant hornet attacks in China kill 41, injure thousands
****


The Asian giant hornet or Vespa mandarinia

A series of freak hornet attacks that began in July in northwest
China's Shaanxi Province have injured 1,640 people, 42 of them
fatally. The cause for the attacks is not known, but one expert
attributed the trend to local vegetation growth, which has increased
the area populated by hornets, and two months of continuous hot
weather, which has made the insects more active. Xinhua and National Post

****
**** Libyans attack Russian embassy to avenge attack by Russian woman
****

Russia has evacuated its diplomats from Libya on Thursday, sending
them next door to Tunisia, after a group of about 60 people on
Wednesday tried to force their way into the compound of Russia's
embassy in Tripoli. The perpetrators are believed to be relatives and
friends of a Libyan officer who was murdered by a Russian woman a day
before the attack, according to Russia's Foreign Ministry. No
Russians were injured, and two attackers were killed. Moscow Times and Tripoli Post

****
**** President Obama 'jawbones' the stock market down
****

Presidents always like to "jawbone" the stock market up, such as when
President Herbert Hoover said, in the middle of the 1930s financial
crisis, "Prosperity is just around the corner" and "Now is the
time to buy." But President Barack Obama is trying the
opposite strategy in the current financial crisis. An interview
with CNBC went like this:

<QUOTE>JOHN HARWOOD: You mentioned calm. Wall Street's been
pretty calm about this [the shutdown]. The reaction I would say,
generally speaking, has been, "Washington fighting, Washington
posturing, yaddah, yaddah, yaddah." Is that the right way for
them to look at it?

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: No, I think this time's different. I think
they should be concerned.<END QUOTE>

President Obama went on to explain that if he negotiated with the
Republicans now, then he'd be setting a precedent, and he'd have to
negotiate with the Republicans in the future -- "[W]e'd have to go
through it again six months from now and six months after that."
Real Clear Politics

****
**** Obamacare web sites keep crashing because they're too popular?
****

There have been numerous stories of Obamacare insurance exchange web
sites repeatedly crashing, ever since they opened on Tuesday.
Obamacare officials are saying that they're crashing because they're
too popular. For example, California officials claimed that the
state's web site got 5 million hits on Tuesday, causing it to crash.

As someone who's been a software engineer for several decades, I can
tell you that story is fishy. There are lots of web sites, like
Amazon.com for example, that handle many hits gracefully. And these
people have had three years to implement the Obamacare web sites.

What I believe happened, since I've seen it several times in my own
experience, is that some college graduates who implemented web sites
as homework assignments in computer programming courses, were put in
charge of implementing the Obamacare web sites. I can assure you,
Dear Reader, that that's a recipe for disaster.

And now it turns out that California's web site didn't get 5 million
hits on Tuesday after all. The corrected total: 645,000 hits.
LA Times


KEYS: Generational Dynamics, China, Vespa mandarinia,
Libya, Russia, Tunisia,
Barack Obama, Herbert Hoover, John Harwood

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail

Originally Posted by Chas'88

I won't disagree with this thinking at all, though I manage to find a middle ground between your proposal and S&H dogma:

1769 - 1789 = 4T (Sons of Liberty begin to get active - Washington takes office)
1789 - ~1811 = 1T (Washington takes office - Spread of Revivals, by 1811 1/7 of US population is attending revivals and the numbers start sky rocketing up from there on out)
~1811 - 1833 = 2T (Spread of Revivals - Nullification Crisis)
1833 - 1850 = 3T (Nullification Crisis - Compromise of 1850)
1850 - 1869 = 4T (Compromise of 1850 - Grant's Reconstruction; Reconstruction under Johnson still marks me as a very tenuous Crisis period, especially in the South with the New Orleans Massacre, the rise and fall of the KKK from 1866 - 1869, and the heavy handed tactics of Governors like Brownlow in Tennessee who acts much like Scott Walker of Wisconsin did in this current Crisis; from 1865 - 1869 a lot of people in the North thought that fighting might start up again based upon what they were hearing out of the South, after 1869 the North stops giving a shit more or less).

Which roughly creates the following Generations:

1767 - 1786 = Compromise -- Artist (J.Q. Adams - Winfield Scott)
1787 - 1808 = Manifest -- Prophet (George Bethune English - Lysander Spooner)
1809 - 1829 = Gothic -- Nomad (Lincoln - Levi Strauss)
1830 - 1846 = Gilded -- Civic (this I'm confident of, considering these guys were actually the swath of the veterans from the Civil War who were either enlisted to fight, and later on were eligible for the draft)
1847 - 1865 = Progressive -- Artist (this I'm extremely confident of as figures like Edith Wharton (b.1863) and Jane Addams (b.1860) mark me more as Artists than they do as Prophets)

PrinceofCats67 has a model much like yours.

I'm less inclined to see the Mex-Am. war as a 4T style conflict, but I can see how the "aftereffects" of that war created the Crisis. I also don't consider 1849 that much of a Crisis year for rather obvious reasons. However the strong Fugitive Slave Law that was part of the Compromise of 1850 made people who even opposed to slavery culpable before the law if they failed to report a known slave to the authorities. It also sparked a conspiracy theory that grew to tremendous proportions that by 1857 people took it for fact that there was "Slave Power" in the government, meaning that a small cabal of Slave owners had bought out members of Congress and were supposedly bent on enforcing a "Slaveocracy". With the Dred Scott decision it looked like they had also bought out the Supreme Court and the President to be as well (Buchannan). So by dealing with the "aftereffects" of the Mex-Am. War, the US set itself up for the Crisis.

POC67's model, last I checked for the Civil War Crisis:

1846 - 1865

~Chas'88

Hey Chas. For the record, I see the CWC Crisis-Period as starting in 1845 with some of the
larger contributing factors or 'symptoms'(depending on how one views Turnings) being:

1)The annexation and statehood of Texas(James K. Polk and the Mex-Am War),
2)The mis-interpretation and co-opting of John L. O' Sullivan's term: Manifest Destiny,
3)The publication of Frederick Douglass' first autobiography:
Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, and
4)The influx of immigrants into northern US cities due in part to The Great Famine


Prince

PS: Of course, that's considering that there actually are such things as Generations and/or Turnings.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Hey Chas. For the record, I see the CWC Crisis-Period as starting in 1845 with some of the
larger contributing factors or 'symptoms'(depending on how one views Turnings) being:

1)The annexation and statehood of Texas(James K. Polk and the Mex-Am War),
2)The mis-interpretation and co-opting of John L. O' Sullivan's term: Manifest Destiny,
3)The publication of Frederick Douglass' first autobiography:
Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, and
4)The influx of immigrants into northern US cities due in part to The Great Famine


Prince

PS: Of course, that's considering that there actually is such things as Generations and Turnings.

By that standard I could say that events going back as far as 1854 (Commodore Perry making the Japanese an offer that they couldn't refuse -- basically join the modern world or risk ruin including colonial conquest) contributed to WWII. "Seward's Folly" (Alaska) gave America some land closer to Tokyo than to Seattle. The Spanish-American War 'gave' America one of the bloodiest battlefields of the Pacific Theater. Mass immigration of Jews from central and eastern Europe around 1900 brought America a large number of people hostile to the Third Reich and to an American fascism (the Klan) that shared much the same bigotry of Nazism.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

By that standard I could say that events going back as far as 1854 (Commodore Perry making the Japanese an offer that they couldn't refuse -- basically join the modern world or risk ruin including colonial conquest) contributed to WWII. "Seward's Folly" (Alaska) gave America some land closer to Tokyo than to Seattle. The Spanish-American War 'gave' America one of the bloodiest battlefields of the Pacific Theater. Mass immigration of Jews from central and eastern Europe around 1900 brought America a large number of people hostile to the Third Reich and to an American fascism (the Klan) that shared much the same bigotry of Nazism.

I don't see where you're going with this, Pbrower.

Although there may be some contributing aspects to the GPC Crisis-Period with the events
you listed(i/r/t the environment to which the different generational archetypes were exposed),
a 4T generational-constellation of Prophet/Nomad/Civic-Hero wouldn't have been in-place.

Like John X was saying, a 4T begins around the time when Artists lose their societal influence.
Determining what the years are for different generations has always been a bit dodgy
(especially with the CWC), as well as the definitions of the characteristics of a specific Turning
(eg: a Crisis).


Prince

PS: Personally, I don't really like to discuss this stuff because I see it operate differently than
most of this MB's members. Plus, considering that this thread is a proprietary one constructed
by John X for his readers, I believe it may not be very appropriate for this sort of discussion.
The bottom-line for me is that I'm pretty certain that Chas understands where I'm coming from,
and that's really all I'm concerned with.