New book updates Strauss & Howe's "The Fourth Turning"

Special promotional price for "Fourth Turning" forum members

Last decade's brilliant groundbreaking book The Fourth Turning
by William Strauss and Neil Howe showed how generational changes in
America since World War II have led to changes in America itself. The
book became widely acclaimed after 9/11 because those attacks were
the kind of unexpected surprise that the book had warned Americans to
expect.

Now a new book, Generational Dynamics: Forecasting America's
Destiny, by John J. Xenakis, brings The Fourth Turning up
to date and completes it. Thanks to several years of additional
research, the new book does the following:

• Finally provides a solid theoretical underpinning for the
  generational analysis of history, making it suitable for scholarly
  study and comparative history applications.
• Resolves several anomalies and inconsistencies in The Fourth
  Turning, including historical events surrounding the Great
  Depression, the American Civil War and England's Glorious Revolution.
• Extends the generational paradigm to apply to all nations and
  societies at all times, not just to American history.
• Relates historical crisis wars to financial crises, showing how
  they go hand in hand, and how a war crisis worsens a financial
  crisis and how a financial crisis makes a crisis war more likely.
• Develops a brand new principle in the Theory of War, the
  "Principle of Localization," which shows how local, regional wars
  follow generational cycles at all countries and all times in history.
  Toynbee and others have attempted and failed to discern cycles in
  history, but the "Principle of Localization" succeeds because
  generational cycles are localized.
• Relates Generational Dynamics to Harvard Professor Samuel P.
  Huntington's book, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of
  World Order, to show how the Principle of Localization works
  together with Huntington's fault line analysis and "Identity Group
  Expansion" principle to provide a textured forecast of the coming
  "clash of civilizations" fourth turning crisis.
• Integrates Generational Dynamics with other forecasting
  methodologies, especially technological forecasting, to provide more
  powerful techniques for predicting / forecasting financial and
  political trends.

According to well-known historian David Kaiser, "John Xenakis has
creatively explored the implications of an important new historical
theory." Kaiser is author of several books, including American
Tragedy: Kennedy, Johnson, and the Origins of the Vietnam War.

Special price for fourthturning.com forum members

The author wishes to thank the members of the fourthturning.com forum
for all their help over many months in supporting this effort.

Between now and February 29, 2004, a special promotional price of
$9.95 will be offered to all fourthturning.com forum members.

To take advantage of the promotional price, go to the web site
http://www.jjxpub.com and enter the following promotional code:

Code:

               ft217

About the Author

John J. Xenakis is an MIT grad, a journalist, writer, technologist,
researcher and analyst who became interested in study and analysis of
world history and how generational changes over the centuries have led
nations into everything from humiliation to greatness. The result is
Generational Dynamics, a technique for analyzing history and for
understanding how nations change their beliefs and attitudes as
generations change.

Contact Information

Review and desk copies are available. Author available for interviews.

John J. Xenakis
40 Wilson Drive
Framingham, MA 01702
Phone: 508-875-4266

E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Quantity purchases: http://www.jjxpub.com

This is generous. Thank you for the offer.

~*~*~

Dear Tim,

You're welcome, but the book wouldn't have been nearly as good
without the support of the people in this forum.

John

Dear Tim,

Originally Posted by Tim Walker

> It was an act of inspiration that combined Strauss & Howe and
> Huntington-and other phenomena-in the form of "fault lines."

Thanks. The real breakthrough was combining the Generational
Dynamics "Principle of Localization" with Huntington's Identity Group
Principle. Putting these two principles together explains both the
cause and timing of war in a way that no has previously been able to
do. I think this is a real breakthrough in the Theory of War.

Originally Posted by Tim Walker

> Interesting how some fault lines seem relevant to particular
> saeculae only, while long term ones repeat cyclically with the
> saeculum. And that some are internal to a society but others lie
> between different societies/civilizations.

> What some clever historian needs to do now is analyze fault lines
> in relation to the issues & attitudes/ideologies/goals of Prophet
> elders.

The Holy Grail of projects in this area -- which I'd love to do if I
can figure out a way to get someone to fund it -- is to develop a
model of the entire world. I believe that there are about 1000 or so
regional societies / tribes, and the project would develop a
computerized database of all of them, with information about
generational timelines, historical fault lines, and historical
identity groups. I think this model would take about a year to
complete and, once available, would permit some highly reliable
predictions about regional wars and the likelihood of their becoming
larger wars.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

P.S.: I'm a little confused right now, because the message I'm
responding to seems to have disappeared. I hope this makes sense.

Dear Tim,

Originally Posted by Tim Walker

> It was an act of inspiration that combined Strauss & Howe and
> Huntington-and other phenomena-in the form of "fault lines."

Thanks. The real breakthrough was combining the Generational
Dynamics "Principle of Localization" with Huntington's Identity Group
Principle. Putting these two principles together explains both the
cause and timing of war in a way that no has previously been able to
do. I think this is a real breakthrough in the Theory of War.

Originally Posted by Tim Walker

> Interesting how some fault lines seem relevant to particular
> saeculae only, while long term ones repeat cyclically with the
> saeculum. And that some are internal to a society but others lie
> between different societies/civilizations.

> What some clever historian needs to do now is analyze fault lines
> in relation to the issues & attitudes/ideologies/goals of Prophet
> elders.

The Holy Grail of projects in this area -- which I'd love to do if I
can figure out a way to get someone to fund it -- is to develop a
model of the entire world. I believe that there are about 1000 or so
regional societies / tribes, and the project would develop a
computerized database of all of them, with information about
generational timelines, historical fault lines, and historical
identity groups. I think this model would take about a year to
complete and, once available, would permit some highly reliable
predictions about regional wars and the likelihood of their becoming
larger wars.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

P.S.: I'm a little confused right now, because the message I'm
responding to seems to have disappeared. I hope this makes sense.

Dear Tim,

Originally Posted by Tim Walker

> It was an act of inspiration that combined Strauss & Howe and
> Huntington-and other phenomena-in the form of "fault lines."

Thanks. The real breakthrough was combining the Generational
Dynamics "Principle of Localization" with Huntington's Identity Group
Principle. Putting these two principles together explains both the
cause and timing of war in a way that no has previously been able to
do. I think this is a real breakthrough in the Theory of War.

Originally Posted by Tim Walker

> Interesting how some fault lines seem relevant to particular
> saeculae only, while long term ones repeat cyclically with the
> saeculum. And that some are internal to a society but others lie
> between different societies/civilizations.

> What some clever historian needs to do now is analyze fault lines
> in relation to the issues & attitudes/ideologies/goals of Prophet
> elders.

The Holy Grail of projects in this area -- which I'd love to do if I
can figure out a way to get someone to fund it -- is to develop a
model of the entire world. I believe that there are about 1000 or so
regional societies / tribes, and the project would develop a
computerized database of all of them, with information about
generational timelines, historical fault lines, and historical
identity groups. I think this model would take about a year to
complete and, once available, would permit some highly reliable
predictions about regional wars and the likelihood of their becoming
larger wars.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

P.S.: I'm a little confused right now, because the message I'm
responding to seems to have disappeared. I hope this makes sense.

Generational Dynamics included "The Crusty Old Bureaucracy" theory. Society's institutions gradually become sclerotic. A depression forces them to adapt or disappear.

In The Great Boom Ahead by Harry Dent an Unraveling sees explosive growth in entrepreneurship-in a cutting edge industry. There are many start ups. Then the economy falls into a 4T hole, and less fit fledgling companies disapprear.

(~*~)

Generational Dynamics included "The Crusty Old Bureaucracy" theory. Society's institutions gradually become sclerotic. A depression forces them to adapt or disappear.

In The Great Boom Ahead by Harry Dent an Unraveling sees explosive growth in entrepreneurship-in a cutting edge industry. There are many start ups. Then the economy falls into a 4T hole, and less fit fledgling companies disapprear.

(~*~)

Generational Dynamics included "The Crusty Old Bureaucracy" theory. Society's institutions gradually become sclerotic. A depression forces them to adapt or disappear.

In The Great Boom Ahead by Harry Dent an Unraveling sees explosive growth in entrepreneurship-in a cutting edge industry. There are many start ups. Then the economy falls into a 4T hole, and less fit fledgling companies disapprear.

(~*~)

Dear Tim,

The stock market has been going up since 1982, and explosively so
since 1995. It's hard for me to see how anyone could possibly
believe that explosive growth is going to continue for another five
years. It's just wishful thinking.

I posted the following graph in another thread a few weeks ago, but I
still consider it the best and most accurate representation of where
the stock market is going, based on past history:



This graph has the following features:

(*) The red squiggly line is actual stock prices (S&P 500 index)

(*) The black straight line is a best-fit exponential growth curve.
Stock prices oscillated around this line.

(*) The green wavy line is the major new development. It's a
smoothing of the stock price curve, but it ignores the two bubbles
and their aftermaths.

Notice how closely the the wavy line matches the stock price line if
you ignore the bubbles. I believe this curve represents the natural
oscillation of the stock market, based on technology advances. The
four annotations show the various technological advances that fuel
each of the increases.

Now, if you look only at the wavy line, then Harry Dent is right --
and I suspect that it's exactly this analysis that drives Dent's
result, because the wavy line peaks at 2010, which is what he
predicts.

But what he overlooks is the effect of the generational bubble that
occurred in the 1990s, and that's the whole point. It's almost
mathematically impossible for the stock market to continue along a
growth path after the 1990s distortion.

The "Crusty Old Bureaucracy" theory was my way of trying to explain
in ordinary words why generational financial crises occur. America
renewed itself in the 1930s (and 1850s and 1770s) because every
organization -- business, government, etc. -- had to start over again
almost from scratch. But over the years, the country as a whole
builds up a bureaucracy, and another renewal is forced.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Tim,

The stock market has been going up since 1982, and explosively so
since 1995. It's hard for me to see how anyone could possibly
believe that explosive growth is going to continue for another five
years. It's just wishful thinking.

I posted the following graph in another thread a few weeks ago, but I
still consider it the best and most accurate representation of where
the stock market is going, based on past history:



This graph has the following features:

(*) The red squiggly line is actual stock prices (S&P 500 index)

(*) The black straight line is a best-fit exponential growth curve.
Stock prices oscillated around this line.

(*) The green wavy line is the major new development. It's a
smoothing of the stock price curve, but it ignores the two bubbles
and their aftermaths.

Notice how closely the the wavy line matches the stock price line if
you ignore the bubbles. I believe this curve represents the natural
oscillation of the stock market, based on technology advances. The
four annotations show the various technological advances that fuel
each of the increases.

Now, if you look only at the wavy line, then Harry Dent is right --
and I suspect that it's exactly this analysis that drives Dent's
result, because the wavy line peaks at 2010, which is what he
predicts.

But what he overlooks is the effect of the generational bubble that
occurred in the 1990s, and that's the whole point. It's almost
mathematically impossible for the stock market to continue along a
growth path after the 1990s distortion.

The "Crusty Old Bureaucracy" theory was my way of trying to explain
in ordinary words why generational financial crises occur. America
renewed itself in the 1930s (and 1850s and 1770s) because every
organization -- business, government, etc. -- had to start over again
almost from scratch. But over the years, the country as a whole
builds up a bureaucracy, and another renewal is forced.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Dear Tim,

The stock market has been going up since 1982, and explosively so
since 1995. It's hard for me to see how anyone could possibly
believe that explosive growth is going to continue for another five
years. It's just wishful thinking.

I posted the following graph in another thread a few weeks ago, but I
still consider it the best and most accurate representation of where
the stock market is going, based on past history:



This graph has the following features:

(*) The red squiggly line is actual stock prices (S&P 500 index)

(*) The black straight line is a best-fit exponential growth curve.
Stock prices oscillated around this line.

(*) The green wavy line is the major new development. It's a
smoothing of the stock price curve, but it ignores the two bubbles
and their aftermaths.

Notice how closely the the wavy line matches the stock price line if
you ignore the bubbles. I believe this curve represents the natural
oscillation of the stock market, based on technology advances. The
four annotations show the various technological advances that fuel
each of the increases.

Now, if you look only at the wavy line, then Harry Dent is right --
and I suspect that it's exactly this analysis that drives Dent's
result, because the wavy line peaks at 2010, which is what he
predicts.

But what he overlooks is the effect of the generational bubble that
occurred in the 1990s, and that's the whole point. It's almost
mathematically impossible for the stock market to continue along a
growth path after the 1990s distortion.

The "Crusty Old Bureaucracy" theory was my way of trying to explain
in ordinary words why generational financial crises occur. America
renewed itself in the 1930s (and 1850s and 1770s) because every
organization -- business, government, etc. -- had to start over again
almost from scratch. But over the years, the country as a whole
builds up a bureaucracy, and another renewal is forced.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

I had suspected that he had gotten some of the details wrong. Dent's 2010 date was in contrast to Strauss & Howe's 2005 start date for the Crisis.

Though the weeding out of less fit fledgling companies.... That certainly makes sense .

(~*~)

I had suspected that he had gotten some of the details wrong. Dent's 2010 date was in contrast to Strauss & Howe's 2005 start date for the Crisis.

Though the weeding out of less fit fledgling companies.... That certainly makes sense .

(~*~)

I had suspected that he had gotten some of the details wrong. Dent's 2010 date was in contrast to Strauss & Howe's 2005 start date for the Crisis.

Though the weeding out of less fit fledgling companies.... That certainly makes sense .

(~*~)

By the crieteria you have listed would you regard the recent Iraq conquest to be a Crisis war or mid-cylcle war?

(~*~)

Dear Tim,

Originally Posted by Tim Walker

> By the criteria you have listed would you regard the recent Iraq
> conquest to be a Crisis war or mid-cycle war?

This was a crisis period war for America, and an awakening period war
for Iraq.

One important relevant point is that journalists and pundits have
been expressing unending concern that America's presence in Iraq is
liable to trigger a civil war between the Sunnis and the Shi'ites.

Such a civil war is almost impossible, given that it's an awakening
period. The Iraqis have already had their crisis war -- the
extremely violent Iran/Iraq war of the 1980s -- and there's no way
that they want to go to war with each other.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

Dear Tim,

Originally Posted by Tim Walker

> By the criteria you have listed would you regard the recent Iraq
> conquest to be a Crisis war or mid-cycle war?

This was a crisis period war for America, and an awakening period war
for Iraq.

One important relevant point is that journalists and pundits have
been expressing unending concern that America's presence in Iraq is
liable to trigger a civil war between the Sunnis and the Shi'ites.

Such a civil war is almost impossible, given that it's an awakening
period. The Iraqis have already had their crisis war -- the
extremely violent Iran/Iraq war of the 1980s -- and there's no way
that they want to go to war with each other.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

Didn't the Brits have an Awakening Civil War from 1640-1649 that resulted in Charles I having his head chopped off and Oliver Cromwell assuming the reins of power over a Puritan non-monarchy? The issues weren't fully resolved until the Glorious Revolution of 1688 (crisis).

Originally Posted by The Wonk

> Didn't the Brits have an Awakening Civil War from 1640-1649 that
> resulted in Charles I having his head chopped off and Oliver
> Cromwell assuming the reins of power over a Puritan non-monarchy?
> The issues weren't fully resolved until the Glorious Revolution of
> 1688 (crisis).

That whole thing never made sense to me when I first read it in S&H,
and at this point I disagree with it entirely. The English Civil War
was a crisis period, the Glorious Revolution was an awakening period,
and the War of Spanish Succession was the next crisis war. That's
the only way that makes sense.

The power struggle between the the British Crown and the British
Parliament has been a feature of British politics for centuries, and
even today the role of the Crown is hotly debated.

Britain's Great Civil War began with the Scottish rebellion in 1638.
By 1642, the war was engulfing all of England, with parliament and the
king serving as the main protagonists, battling each other for power,
and control of the army. The British Monarchy was destroyed when the
King was beheaded in 1649, and was restored in 1660 when a new king
was crowned.

Once the monarchy was restored in 1660, the tensions between the Crown
and parliament came back as well, since nothing had changed in terms
of the balance of power.

By 1688, tensions had grown so great that there might have been
another civil war, but this was an awakening period, so the problem
was resolved peacefully. The violent Great Civil War was still in
everyone's memory, and no one wanted another civil war. The English
Parliament invited the Dutch Prince William (husband of the King's
daughter Mary) to invade England, and William did so, and conquered
England without a shot being fired, leading to the reign of William
and Mary.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

.................................................. .................................................. ............

Dear Tim,

Originally Posted by Tim Walker

> Strauss & Howe indicated that the saeculum in Britian began with
> the Arthurian generation. So lets list the post-Medieval Crises
> ....

Towards the end when I was finishing up my book, I wanted to do
something to refute the notion that the generational cycles don't
apply prior to the 1500s. So I added material to bring the English
timeline back to the Norman conquest:

> Medieval England from Norman Conquest, 1066
>>> The Norman Conquest, 1066
>>> Civil War, 1135-54
>>> War with Normandy and Magna Carta, 1204-15
>>> Civil war and war with Wales, 1264-1282
>>> Hundred Years' War begins, 1337-47
>>> Civil war and Welsh Revolt, 1386-1409
>>> Wars of the Roses, 1455-85
>>> War with Spain, 1559-88
>>> Britain's Great Civil War, 1638-60

The period from the Norman conquest to the next civil war is itself a
great example of a generational change, since it's a fairly pure
example.

The Normans, under William the Conqueror, completed their conquest of
England from the Saxons in 1066.

With that, England and France were united, with Norman kings running
both regions. This brought peace between the two regions for
decades.

Naturally, a fault line developed among the kids born in England and
the kids born in Normandy after the conquest. Their parents knew
each other from before and during the war, but the kids had no
personal connection with each other. As these kids reached their
20s, a generation gap would have resulted in an awakening.

The issues raised by the awakening periods in England and France
would have been different, and probably antithetical. Since their
English and French parents were so chummy with one another, the
English kids would have rebelled against the English deference to the
French, and the French kids would have rebelled against the French
deference to the English.

So when the old folks died off, and the kids were in charge, then
whatever caused the war prior to 1066 caused another war.

This is about as clearcut and pure an example as you can hope for.
There was a new war between the English and Normans in 1135 and then
another one like clockwork in 1204.

Not only is this example pure and clearcut, it's also timeless. It
shows how generational dynamics applies to all nations and societies
at all times. It also shows how the "Principle of Localization" has to
be used.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com

I'd use a link but I am frustrated when I attempt to access the paleo 4T site.
So I pulled an old print out from my paper files.

Paleo 4T site, *Beyond America* What Happens When You Lose A War?, Feb. 9, 1998. Quoting Steve Ryan:

"A couple of months ago, Kurt '63 posted a link to an article by John Reilly, wherein he discussed the Chinese Taiping Rebellion of 1850-1864. John drew a comparison of the Taiping with American Great Awakening of 1730-1745, and as such part of an Awakening. Kurt reviewed subsequent Chinese history, and declared that the Taiping Rebellion *must* have been part of a Crisis. He drew a comparison with Nazism in Germany, which has been declared a part of a Crisis. John Reilly referenced a book I had not heard of before, Disaster and the Millenium by Michael Barkun. The book sounded interesting, and relevant to this discussion, so I found it, and read it. What Michael Barkun discusses is millenarian movements around the world, focusing particularly on those that were large-scale, and widely known. I will not bother to discuss a lot of his theory, because it is not relevant to this discussion. Let me just say that I read this book looking for any linkage with the Howe & Strauss Generations theory. Micheal listed a great number of millenarian movements, such as the cargo cults of Melanesia, and the Indian Ghost Dancers, but I will leave them aside for now. This is because I have no generational data from which to place the movement within a particular turning. Now, my first assumption was that millenarianism would be linked directly to Awakenings. This seemed logical. However, of the largest movements, the Chinese Taiping Rebellion, the English Puritan Revolution, the Russian October Revolution, the German Nazi party, and the Chinese Communist Revolution, nearly all are disputed as to what turning they actually belong to! How does Michael Barkun define a millenarian movement?

"The literature describing such movements is vast and spill over into political science, sociology, anthropology, religion, history, and psychiatry. Even a cursory examination of that literature suggest that any millenarian movement mgiht be characterized by most or all of the following: intense emotional expression; aims so sweepingly comprehensive that outsiders regard them as impossible to attain; claims to esoteric knowledge and some measure of control of basic social and historical processes; dependence upon charismatic leadership; blanket condemnation of the existing social and political order, couple with a total renunciation of its claims to legitimacy; association with periods of disaster, change, and social upheaval; breach of accepted norms, laws, and taboos; high risk-taking; and withdrawal from conventional social, political, religious, and economic relationships. In short, millenarian movements lay claim to a total, all-encompassing truth and make concomitantly broad demands upon their members. Membership is neither nominal nor clearly demarcated from other areas of life and thus differs from traditional conceptions of, say, political party membership or interest-group affilitation. The movement enfolds its members in a belief system that provides meaning and explanation for virtually all problems and in a round of activities, that allays feelings of personal insecurity and builds a new and strong sense of identity.

"As we can see, these millenarian movements contain aspects of both Awakening and Crisis turnings. Therefore, this explains why certain events are disputed as to what turning they belong to, with some pointing to the Awakening aspects, while others point to the Crisis aspects. Now, what triggers a millenarian movement?"

Further quoting Steve Ryan's post:

"'Millenarian movements almost always occur in times of upheaval, in the wake of cultural contact, economic dislocation, revolution, war, and natural catastrophe.' P45.

"Therefore, when a nation experiences a particularly devastating Unraveling or even High, large-scale millenarian movements are likely to result. Before the rise of Nazism, Germany went through a devastating period beginning with World War I, Russia's devastation began in 1905, and China's began with the rise of warlodism and revolution. These millenarian turnings are considered particularly frightening by those nations or peoples that surround such a millenarian movement or state. This is (partly) because such movements contain the most powerful aspects of both Awakenings and Crises. Now, I am not saying that if a nation loses a war that they are *certain* of experiencing a millenarian turning. As a matter of fact the author went out of his way to show that for all of it's troubles, Ireland never experienced a millenarian movement. It appears that there needs to be a relatively lengthy series of disasters. The disasters have to be of sufficient scale to weaken the social bonds, and make people insecure in the older societal structure.

"'As the gap widens between what an individual percieves to be his legitimate expectations on the one hand and the means for satisgying them on the other, he becomes progressively more discontented.' P46. 'The collasped social structure renders traditional authority releationships less effective and traditional statuses less meaningful. Under these conditions, millenarian movements appear.' P55."

Further quoting Steve Ryan's post:

"OK, SO WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A MILLENARIAN CRISIS AND A NORMAL ONE?

"During a normal Crisis, the sociey rallies to a common set of values that were established during the previous Awakening. There is a continuity seen betweeen history and these values, and adherence to them is expected. For example, during the American Revolution, both the Tories and the Rebels saw themselves as adhering to traditional values. Durng a millenarian Crisis, the values that were established during the Awakening are rejected and replaced. Adherence to these new values is compulsory, with dissent being considered traitorousness deserving the maximum punishment. Think of the difference between Germany under Hitler, and the US under Roosevelt. Strangely, millenarian Crises seem to usually be led by Nomads, such as Hung Hsiu-Ch'uan, Hitler, and Mao.

"DONT'T ALL AWAKENINGS HAVE THEIR MILLENARIAN ASPECTS?

"I think so. What I think we're talking about here is a matter of scale. During all Awakenings, there are many groups who flout the old values, but do not challenge the civic order. The Weatherman Underground leaps to mind. During a millenarian Awakening, the millenarian movement rises up, and sweeps the old civic order aside. This is what happened during the British Puritan Awakening. Here we see a combination of new values and new civic order going hand in hand. The Puritan Awakening though, suggests that these new civic orders are weak compared with those set up during millenarian Crises. The Brits brought back the king, the Russians didn't bring back the Czar.

"IF MILLENARIAN TURNINGS ARE BOTH CRISIS AND AWAKENING, THEN IS IT POSSIBLE FOR ONE TO FLIP THE SAECULUM?

"I don't see why not. I think that that has been suggested as what happened to France during the Revolution, Crisis/millenarian turning/Awakening. Now, Michael Barkun didn't reference revolutionary France at all, this is just me talking off of the top of my head."

(~*~)

I predict that the coming 4T will be a mixed one, with both millenarian and normal aspects. One poster also stated that 4Ts are merely secularized versions of 2Ts, which is something I tend to agree with. This might hold especially true this time around as the "dire" threats we faced are the same ones discovered during the 2T. Where would we find millenarianism during this 4T?

A worst case scenario would have a very strong racial split. It is very conceivable that many blacks and whites could reject the early 2T dream of an America free from the constraints of race. Already, many blacks and whites have already rejected that dream, and are now racial nationalists. It is, however, very unlikely for these trends to become widespread, although possible.

Another possible one would lead to an even worse version of the socialist versus fascist fight that characterized the last 4T. The sudden reemergence of both communist movements and fascists are very likely during this 4T. The question, however, is whether these movements will become widespread, which I doubt. This could lead to a Civil War similar to that of Spain during the prior 4T. This would be a rejection of the rejection of both ideologies during the 2T.

And of course, we have the possibility of a MAJOR political scandal. During the last 2T, Watergate was the event that destroyed trust in the establishment. Imagine what such a scandal could do during a 4T. I am more inclined to think that this would fit under the category of "normal" since this would likely be society rallying to a common set of values. However, this could also degenerate into a millenarian movement. Just picture how the French Revolution turned out, and imagine this happening to America.