Originally Posted by JDW

That’s an unfair characterization. Reagan promised to cut taxes and cut spending. Conservatives were very hopeful that he could deliver on that. He didn’t, and conservatives were disappointed. We can point fingers and say the Democrats wouldn’t cooperate with him on the spending part. We can even say that Reagan, Bush Sr and the other Republican leaders may not have been in earnest. But to suggest that the average current Tea Party voters did not care when Republicans were in power is simply not true. There simply was no alternative (other than third party presidential candidates, whom many voted for) promising to do what the Republicans had promised. The difference is that when Democrats are in power, the opposition party promises to do what conservatives like.

It's quite fair.

The fact is, since Reagan, we do not have conservatives in this country; we have reactionaries, and their policies are not legitimate or worthy of anything but opposition. They are a travesty, and are rooted in mere reaction to progress since the sixties. I think if you support this reaction, it may distort your view of history.

This is certainly correct: "The debt has been rising fast since Reagan, but as long as the Republicans were in power, the Tea Party folks were not worried about it, despite its explosion under Shrub II."

Reagan certainly delivered on cutting taxes; they were sharply reduced in 1981, although the resulting debt encouraged him to increase some of those taxes back part way, and he also supported increased social security taxes in 1986. But the result nevertheless was an historic explosion of the national debt from which we have never recovered.

The Tea Party and Republicans profess to be against debt. But it is Clinton who created a brief surplus and reduced the debt, and Reagan and Shrub who exploded it. Yet Clinton felt the unwavering wrath of the vast right-wing conspiracy, was impeached, and was almost immediately saddled with Newt Gingrich.

Once Bush II got in, the debt shot up again because of more huge tax cuts and greatly-increased spending for 2 arguably-unnecessary wars plus a prescription drug program. Did the Tea Party arise to oppose all this spending? NO, certainly not, because Bush reduced taxes on the wealthy, and because he was a Republican. BUsh increased the debt substantially, and the Republicans supported him fanatically. Concern over the debt is nothing but a smokescreen; Tea Party and Republican reactionaries just don't want to pay any taxes, and think it is not valid for the government to charge taxes. You can argue for this, and libertarians do; but it is certainly an extreme position to take.

Clinton slowed the deficit (he did NOT actually eliminate it, though he came close) only because Republicans demanded a slowing in spending (and those weren’t actual cuts). I never saw Democrats (other than Fritz Hollings adding his name to Graham-Rudman) clambering to pass a balanced budget.

Clinton created a surplus; I think that is eliminating the deficit, sir!

Clinton's Democrats passed budgets that resulted in this surplus. In 1993 their budget was passed with no Republican support whatsoever.

Graham-Rudman-Hollings was not a budget; it was a law.

Again, tell me how the Republicans have hindered Obama. If Congress does not give him his way, then the Supreme Court does. If that doesn’t work, Obama just goes ahead and does it anyway!

You’re right. The Tea Party folk have trouble stomaching that.

Obama is doing as he should. He was elected to get some things done. Why should he sit around and get nothing done for 6 or 7 years just because right-wing Americans are hooked on a stupid, reactionary ideology and consumed by racism? They block anything he proposes for the expressed purpose of blocking his re-election or making him unpopular. Now he is acting more strongly on his own, and his popularity is rising as a result.

The Tea Party can't stomach any amount of progress or government programs, or anything that might increase their taxes. That is the bottom line on this 4T. What Obama does or doesn't do on his own is irrelevant. They are simply opposed to anything he does, in any way, and they hate him.

Originally Posted by JDW

It was not necessarily new to history, but it was certainly a change from what had been politically acceptable in recent history.

Probably so, but nevertheless it is not correct to say that "government became the arbiter of freedom and security." It is always that; that is its function.

But in response to 9-11, the Patriot Act and the NSA spying regime have increased surveillance on Americans, and later the NDAA that Obama signed legalized putting Americans in jail without trial. Things like that I oppose, and feel are unwarranted violations of our freedom. They make us more like our enemies; and the torture and renditions that were carried on under Bush-Cheney certainly did that even more.

But I don't think these policies and laws have changed the mood of the country. Unjust imprisonments have happened under both Bush and Obama, but they are a very small number of people, and most people continue to live normal lives despite all the surveillance programs, airplane boarding inspections and such-like. And there's little evidence that NSA spying has as yet resulted in oppression or unjust imprisonment of Americans, except for a few who spoke out against or revealed the NSA policies.

It doesn't matter whether the 4T started in 2001 or 2008. This is a 4T like no other (if indeed there even are such things). Been on about it before, but to me it looks more like a train wreck in slow motion than what you would expect from a 4T.

Just consider the Howian idea of "regeneracy". I never understood why a 4T would necessarily need to include one, but it's there in his schematics and according to TFT every supposed American 4T as of yet is supposed to have it. The regeneracy should turn up within 5 years of the catalyst. So, if 2008 was our 1929 (Catalyst), then we are currently in 1936. Anyone expecting "regeneracy" soon? The last cycle met theirs in 1932 for America and, for example, in 1933 in the case of Germany.

If you think an earlier date than 2008 might have been the catalyst, then 2008 might theoretically have served the role as regeneracy, but that too has been out of the picture for quite some time. One needs only to compare with the previous regeneracy to see why it fails mightily. In 2008, no policies were changed. US foreign engagements carried on as before and US domestic policy carried on as before. The remedy to the financial crisis worldwide has been to supply the banks with ever increasing credit potential at ever lowered central bank interest rates. However, this hasn't translated into increased buying power and real growth. Instead, for lack of demand and productive investment opportunities, it only ends up in financial institutions blowing up huge asset bubbles. This is precisely the same dynamic that led to the 2008 crash in the first place. The system is run according to the exact same 3T fake economy Milton Friedman logic: The only instrument we use to influence the economy are the interest rates, and when those levers don't work we throw up our arms in despair and have no idea what to do. Actually, it would have been smarter to simply print up the money and hand it out to ordinary people in cash. In other words, an even bigger crash ought to be looming in the years ahead.

To sum up, if this is a 4T it isn't like a normal 4T. Time is running out for 2008 to be the catalyst, so you might as well pick 2001 as having been the actual catalyst, setting the slow moving train wreck in motion. Incidentally, that would line up better with the saeculum as it was experienced from an early 80's proponent viewpoint: 3T: 1980-2001 = 21 years.

Maybe the lack of regeneracy and other anomalies regarding the present Turning is indicative of a failed 4T? America hasn't experienced one before, so maybe it's about time now? What we can be certain about, this is no rerun of the New Deal with FDR coming to rescue and then triumphing in glorious wars. And it would explain a lot of the bewilderment about the present on this board.

Originally Posted by Tussilago

To sum up, if this is a 4T it isn't like a normal 4T. Time is running out for 2008 to be the catalyst, so you might as well pick 2001 as having been the actual catalyst, setting the slow moving train wreck in motion. Incidentally, that would line up better with the saeculum as it was experienced from an early 80's proponent viewpoint: 3T: 1980-2001 = 21 years.

Maybe the lack of regeneracy and other anomalies regarding the present Turning is indicative of a failed 4T? America hasn't experienced one before, so maybe it's about time now? What we can be certain about, this is no rerun of the New Deal with FDR coming to rescue and then triumphing in glorious wars. And it would explain a lot of the bewilderment about the present on this board.

This rings true to me and I wrote this elsewhere:

At the end of the day I believe this 4T will continue to be a mild one because the status quo isn't exactly stifling enough to the everyman (who is pretty comfortable with binge watching life) for a complete overhaul and the elite won't allow the real issues to change yet. Meanwhile, I don't see us getting involved in a big deal war because no country is going to start one with us at this point in time.

What's going on in Washington is people just doing busy work to make us think stuff is happening. I was listening to a guy on NPR talking about his next 100 years predictions and he believes the US biggest problem is that we are insecure with our Global Power status. I can see that and/ or also consider that the themes of this 4T prove that we can't fix shit and therefore aren't the shit like we try to portray.

So this 4T is an IDENTITY CRISIS.

Since reading this thread initially several months ago, I have given this subject some thought and I keep coming back to the same answer, albeit a simplistic one. In my opinion the 4T would have started in 2008 because that is when I noticed the collective "mood" changing.

Tussilago does raise some good points about lack of a regeneracy and the possibility of this being a failed fourth turning (and I certainly hope it is not) and for some reason this thought leads itself to the current political situation where it looks like we are going to have an appointee for the Blue candidate and we have a clown circus on the Red side with a serious possibility of winding up with Bush - Clinton the sequel. If that doesn't say "failed" I don't know what does.

Originally Posted by Tussilago

It doesn't matter whether the 4T started in 2001 or 2008. This is a 4T like no other (if indeed there even are such things). Been on about it before, but to me it looks more like a train wreck in slow motion than what you would expect from a 4T.

People forget although I point it out all the time. I don't know why that is. The cycles are clear. The 2010s are the new 1850s. In the 1850s we were stuck and leadership was abominable. The nation was divided, waiting for a civil war. That's where we are. Our times are the 1850s redux, with aspects of the 1930s and 1770s too. The authors put 1850s in a 3T, just as people want to look at the 2010s as still 3T or lacking a regeneracy.

Just consider the Howian idea of "regeneracy". I never understood why a 4T would necessarily need to include one, but it's there in his schematics and according to TFT every supposed American 4T as of yet is supposed to have it. The regeneracy should turn up within 5 years of the catalyst. So, if 2008 was our 1929 (Catalyst), then we are currently in 1936. Anyone expecting "regeneracy" soon? The last cycle met theirs in 1932 for America and, for example, in 1933 in the case of Germany.

If the civil war 4T included the 1850s, as should be clear, then the regeneracy did not come until late in the 4T. That is what's happening now. No-one, given the cycles in play, should expect a regeneracy in the 2010s. In any case, Black Tuesday ruled it out at the start. Congress has been gerrymandered for national stagnation. No-one should expect a regeneracy under a congress like the USA has now. It is impossible. Millies will need to vote in midterms before any regeneracy occurs.

I have predicted when the upsurge in activism will occur for decades now. There's no reason to ignore my prediction when most everything in the last 2 decades has happened as I foretold.

To sum up, if this is a 4T it isn't like a normal 4T. Time is running out for 2008 to be the catalyst, so you might as well pick 2001 as having been the actual catalyst, setting the slow moving train wreck in motion. Incidentally, that would line up better with the saeculum as it was experienced from an early 80's proponent viewpoint: 3T: 1980-2001 = 21 years.

Maybe the lack of regeneracy and other anomalies regarding the present Turning is indicative of a failed 4T? America hasn't experienced one before, so maybe it's about time now? What we can be certain about, this is no rerun of the New Deal with FDR coming to rescue and then triumphing in glorious wars. And it would explain a lot of the bewilderment about the present on this board.

If we "experience one now," you can kiss America goodbye, and perhaps much of the world too through climate change.

There's no reason to see 1980 as the cut off point of an abbreviated Awakening, after a first turning that was also abbreviated; and no reason to see 2001 as the start of a failing 4T. This 4T will be more like the civil war, due to the double rhythm. So an FDR-type victory will not happen without a wrenching trial of our own nation, though civil war, revolution or at-least major change that disturbs the right-wing that now dominates us out of fear of that very thing which is due. A Lincoln reminding us of the very cause of freedom and justice on which our nation was founded, is more likely.

You can call THAT the "identity crisis." Can we recover our true identity, amidst the deception of Reaganomics? It's always a challenge for America to "live up to the true meaning of (our) creed" as MLK Jr. said.

Our Crisis today is not due to terrorists abroad. It is due to our own failure of freedom and justice at home. We need a new birth of freedom, and an end to the phony freedom of trickle-down Reaganomics. Change at home is the real meaning of most 4Ts, in fact. We either face-up to the need for change, or we fail as a nation.

But a change that requires upsetting the well-rooted powers that be, like the civil war era, does not come so easily as "happy days are here again" or sending King George home. This time, the PTB are not giving it up without a fight, and it takes time for the people to realize this and to be willing to fight for change in our own country. It is easier to wallow in the woe and put off the evil deed; as we did in the 1850s and are doing now.

Originally Posted by noway2

Since reading this thread initially several months ago, I have given this subject some thought and I keep coming back to the same answer, albeit a simplistic one. In my opinion the 4T would have started in 2008 because that is when I noticed the collective "mood" changing.

Tussilago does raise some good points about lack of a regeneracy and the possibility of this being a failed fourth turning (and I certainly hope it is not) and for some reason this thought leads itself to the current political situation where it looks like we are going to have an appointee for the Blue candidate and we have a clown circus on the Red side with a serious possibility of winding up with Bush - Clinton the sequel. If that doesn't say "failed" I don't know what does.

What it says is, this 4T is not quite ready for prime time. Nor can it be with our current congress. The presidency alone can't bring the needed changes or regeneracy. Millies have to vote in midterms and stay liberal, or the nation is lost.

Originally Posted by Tussilago

It doesn't matter whether the 4T started in 2001 or 2008. This is a 4T like no other (if indeed there even are such things). Been on about it before, but to me it looks more like a train wreck in slow motion than what you would expect from a 4T.

Just consider the Howian idea of "regeneracy". I never understood why a 4T would necessarily need to include one, but it's there in his schematics and according to TFT every supposed American 4T as of yet is supposed to have it. The regeneracy should turn up within 5 years of the catalyst. So, if 2008 was our 1929 (Catalyst), then we are currently in 1936. Anyone expecting "regeneracy" soon? The last cycle met theirs in 1932 for America and, for example, in 1933 in the case of Germany.

If you think an earlier date than 2008 might have been the catalyst, then 2008 might theoretically have served the role as regeneracy, but that too has been out of the picture for quite some time. One needs only to compare with the previous regeneracy to see why it fails mightily. In 2008, no policies were changed. US foreign engagements carried on as before and US domestic policy carried on as before. The remedy to the financial crisis worldwide has been to supply the banks with ever increasing credit potential at ever lowered central bank interest rates. However, this hasn't translated into increased buying power and real growth. Instead, for lack of demand and productive investment opportunities, it only ends up in financial institutions blowing up huge asset bubbles. This is precisely the same dynamic that led to the 2008 crash in the first place. The system is run according to the exact same 3T fake economy Milton Friedman logic: The only instrument we use to influence the economy are the interest rates, and when those levers don't work we throw up our arms in despair and have no idea what to do. Actually, it would have been smarter to simply print up the money and hand it out to ordinary people in cash. In other words, an even bigger crash ought to be looming in the years ahead.

To sum up, if this is a 4T it isn't like a normal 4T. Time is running out for 2008 to be the catalyst, so you might as well pick 2001 as having been the actual catalyst, setting the slow moving train wreck in motion. Incidentally, that would line up better with the saeculum as it was experienced from an early 80's proponent viewpoint: 3T: 1980-2001 = 21 years.

Maybe the lack of regeneracy and other anomalies regarding the present Turning is indicative of a failed 4T? America hasn't experienced one before, so maybe it's about time now? What we can be certain about, this is no rerun of the New Deal with FDR coming to rescue and then triumphing in glorious wars. And it would explain a lot of the bewilderment about the present on this board.

The imprint of the delusional and dangerous "end of history" meme, which featured during the 2nd half of the most recent 3T, has been strong, and has led to one nasty protracted hang over. Anyone with half a brain realized that the reputed post-Cold-War Utopia depicted by Fukuyama then popularized by hacks like Thomas L. Friedman was, assuming it ever really existed at all, weakened by 9/11/2001 then shattered by the Great Recession and following geopolitical decline. Nonetheless, many still cling to the tired and naive delusions. Even on this forum there are people who tout notions such as there will never again be war between major states / great powers, the only way a 4T will happen in the US is a Civil War (as if there will never again be an enemy who hits us with a sneak attack or even not so sneaky attack), we'll just slop our way into the next 1T without any sort of catastrophic events. Wow, such powerful Kool Aid. I must give credit to those late 1980s and early 1990s Utopians who came up with all the globalist post-historical notions that have led to all this flawed logic. Their curse lives on and on. What it means to me is, when the SHTF, the deer-in-the-headlights factor will be unreal.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

What it means to me is, when the SHTF, the deer-in-the-headlights factor will be unreal.

Last year in my home town, when the power went out for a few days, by the 2nd day large numbers of people were lined up down the road to try to get into a McDonald's. It wouldn't take much of a SHTF type event, only one that causes a disruption of about 3 days but on a large enough scale as to prevent a mobilization coupled with a good dose of fear to create a serious self fulfilling prophecy of doom, especially in the Urban Blue areas.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

The imprint of the delusional and dangerous "end of history" meme, which featured during the 2nd half of the most recent 3T, has been strong, and has led to one nasty protracted hang over. Anyone with half a brain realized that the reputed post-Cold-War Utopia depicted by Fukuyama then popularized by hacks like Thomas L. Friedman was, assuming it ever really existed at all, weakened by 9/11/2001 then shattered by the Great Recession and following geopolitical decline. Nonetheless, many still cling to the tired and naive delusions. Even on this forum there are people who tout notions such as there will never again be war between major states / great powers, the only way a 4T will happen in the US is a Civil War (as if there will never again be an enemy who hits us with a sneak attack or even not so sneaky attack), we'll just slop our way into the next 1T without any sort of catastrophic events. Wow, such powerful Kool Aid. I must give credit to those late 1980s and early 1990s Utopians who came up with all the globalist post-historical notions that have led to all this flawed logic. Their curse lives on and on. What it means to me is, when the SHTF, the deer-in-the-headlights factor will be unreal.

Fukuyama was baloney, and Friedman has wised up. But I do think it's possible for cycles to repeat, and if so, then we are due for a universal state of peace. War is obsolete; who really wants more wars between major states? And they don't seem to exist much anymore, and where they do (as in the US invasion of Iraq) they are unnecessary and not desired by anyone except some delusional imperialists who probably read Fukuyama or some such bull.

One thing that has changed since Hitler and Stalin; it is generally accepted that a state should not violate the borders of another. In the rare cases where it happens, it is frowned upon and usually reversed. It happened in 1991, and the UN supported the war to reverse it.

Ethnic disputes and civil/revolutionary wars replaced the wars between major states when the Cold War ended. These limited wars may go on for a while, as long as greed and oppression exist. I don't think nations should disarm until they feel ready, and coalitions are still needed to restrain ambitious and crazy invaders like the IS and genocidal tyrants like Assad. Still, no more war is a feasible notion. It's the truth of our nature. If we can see it, it can happen.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Fukuyama was baloney, and Friedman has wised up. But I do think it's possible for cycles to repeat, and if so, then we are due for a universal state of peace. War is obsolete; who really wants more wars between major states? And they don't seem to exist much anymore, and where they do (as in the US invasion of Iraq) they are unnecessary and not desired by anyone except some delusional imperialists who probably read Fukuyama or some such bull.

One thing that has changed since Hitler and Stalin; it is generally accepted that a state should not violate the borders of another. In the rare cases where it happens, it is frowned upon and usually reversed. It happened in 1991, and the UN supported the war to reverse it.

Ethnic disputes and civil/revolutionary wars replaced the wars between major states when the Cold War ended. These limited wars may go on for a while, as long as greed and oppression exist. I don't think nations should disarm until they feel ready, and coalitions are still needed to restrain ambitious and crazy invaders like the IS and genocidal tyrants like Assad. Still, no more war is a feasible notion. It's the truth of our nature. If we can see it, it can happen.

What you or I want matters not a whit. The question is, what will we actually experience?

Originally Posted by Tussilago

It doesn't matter whether the 4T started in 2001 or 2008. This is a 4T like no other (if indeed there even are such things). Been on about it before, but to me it looks more like a train wreck in slow motion than what you would expect from a 4T.

Just consider the Howian idea of "regeneracy". I never understood why a 4T would necessarily need to include one, but it's there in his schematics and according to TFT every supposed American 4T as of yet is supposed to have it. The regeneracy should turn up within 5 years of the catalyst. So, if 2008 was our 1929 (Catalyst), then we are currently in 1936. Anyone expecting "regeneracy" soon? The last cycle met theirs in 1932 for America and, for example, in 1933 in the case of Germany.

If you think an earlier date than 2008 might have been the catalyst, then 2008 might theoretically have served the role as regeneracy, but that too has been out of the picture for quite some time. One needs only to compare with the previous regeneracy to see why it fails mightily. In 2008, no policies were changed. US foreign engagements carried on as before and US domestic policy carried on as before. The remedy to the financial crisis worldwide has been to supply the banks with ever increasing credit potential at ever lowered central bank interest rates. However, this hasn't translated into increased buying power and real growth. Instead, for lack of demand and productive investment opportunities, it only ends up in financial institutions blowing up huge asset bubbles. This is precisely the same dynamic that led to the 2008 crash in the first place. The system is run according to the exact same 3T fake economy Milton Friedman logic: The only instrument we use to influence the economy are the interest rates, and when those levers don't work we throw up our arms in despair and have no idea what to do. Actually, it would have been smarter to simply print up the money and hand it out to ordinary people in cash. In other words, an even bigger crash ought to be looming in the years ahead.

To sum up, if this is a 4T it isn't like a normal 4T. Time is running out for 2008 to be the catalyst, so you might as well pick 2001 as having been the actual catalyst, setting the slow moving train wreck in motion. Incidentally, that would line up better with the saeculum as it was experienced from an early 80's proponent viewpoint: 3T: 1980-2001 = 21 years.

Maybe the lack of regeneracy and other anomalies regarding the present Turning is indicative of a failed 4T? America hasn't experienced one before, so maybe it's about time now? What we can be certain about, this is no rerun of the New Deal with FDR coming to rescue and then triumphing in glorious wars. And it would explain a lot of the bewilderment about the present on this board.

IMO the current severe political-cultural polarization of American society IS the Crisis, and each side of the divide had their own regeneracy, Occupy was the start of the Blue regeneracy and the Tea Party was the start of the Red Regeneracy.

The Panic of '08 and the election of a Black person as President were the points of no return. The regeneracy took longer for Blue America because it took a whole for people to realize that Obama was not the Second Coming of FDR.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

What it says is, this 4T is not quite ready for prime time. Nor can it be with our current congress. The presidency alone can't bring the needed changes or regeneracy. Millies have to vote in midterms and stay liberal, or the nation is lost.

I don't think this is true. We can't assume every 4T is successful, and failed ones may have their own benefits. We're fighting the hangover from the last 4T. Businessmen (almost all men) didn't like the idea that they were not able to manipulate the world as they wished to do, once FDR's New Deal started to take hold. It took them decades to reacquire their previous prestige, and you can bet they won't relinquish it easily.

This time, they built several layers of firewalls to keep hoi polloi at bay, and their defenses are holding up pretty well. Their very success may plant the seeds of their destruction, but not soon. Their vigilance is too high right now. Only two things change alter that:

1. MAJOR CRISIS: If we have a total crash of the economy or we have a major war emerge out of greed, then the backlash will be enough to clear the cobwebs' and trigger real change. This is possible, but not that likely
2. HUBRIS: Eventually, even the most predatory of the PTB will get tired of being vigilant if no one is challenging them very aggressively. They will start to gloat, and brush-off the demands of the many for simple fairness. That will generate an opposition that may be able to overturn them. Frankly, I don't see a generation alive today that can be energized enough to do much. I suspect the next Prophets may be the leading edge, but I won't be here to know.

So I'm counting on time to do the hard work, and that will require a failed 4T. I wish we could resolve this sooner, but I'm becoming more convinced that this is highly unlikely.

Originally Posted by Odin

IMO the current severe political-cultural polarization of American society IS the Crisis, and each side of the divide had their own regeneracy, Occupy was the start of the Blue regeneracy and the Tea Party was the start of the Red Regeneracy.

The Panic of '08 and the election of a Black person as President were the points of no return. The regeneracy took longer for Blue America because it took a whole for people to realize that Obama was not the Second Coming of FDR.

I can see this as the source of sclerosis, but I can't see how this gets resolved one way or the other. Something has to happen to tilt the field one way or the other, and nothing happening now seems to be moving us in any direction, good or bad.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

I don't think this is true. We can't assume every 4T is successful, and failed ones may have their own benefits. We're fighting the hangover from the last 4T. Businessmen (almost all men) didn't like the idea that they were not able to manipulate the world as they wished to do, once FDR's New Deal started to take hold. It took them decades to reacquire their previous prestige, and you can bet they won't relinquish it easily.

This time, they built several layers of firewalls to keep hoi polloi at bay, and their defenses are holding up pretty well. Their very success may plant the seeds of their destruction, but not soon. Their vigilance is too high right now. Only two things change alter that:

1. MAJOR CRISIS: If we have a total crash of the economy or we have a major war emerge out of greed, then the backlash will be enough to clear the cobwebs' and trigger real change. This is possible, but not that likely
2. HUBRIS: Eventually, even the most predatory of the PTB will get tired of being vigilant if no one is challenging them very aggressively. They will start to gloat, and brush-off the demands of the many for simple fairness. That will generate an opposition that may be able to overturn them. Frankly, I don't see a generation alive today that can be energized enough to do much. I suspect the next Prophets may be the leading edge, but I won't be here to know.

So I'm counting on time to do the hard work, and that will require a failed 4T. I wish we could resolve this sooner, but I'm becoming more convinced that this is highly unlikely.

Right! I think the Civil War one was a successful and a failed 4T at the same time. Failure because it didn't address issues that lead to the Gilded Age and those issues had to be resolved during the Progressive one. Also a President did die and Jim Crow began.

But we still left this 4T a united country (in theory) and slavery did end (at least on paper).

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

I don't think this is true. We can't assume every 4T is successful, and failed ones may have their own benefits. We're fighting the hangover from the last 4T. Businessmen (almost all men) didn't like the idea that they were not able to manipulate the world as they wished to do, once FDR's New Deal started to take hold. It took them decades to reacquire their previous prestige, and you can bet they won't relinquish it easily.

This time, they built several layers of firewalls to keep hoi polloi at bay, and their defenses are holding up pretty well. Their very success may plant the seeds of their destruction, but not soon. Their vigilance is too high right now. Only two things change alter that:

1. MAJOR CRISIS: If we have a total crash of the economy or we have a major war emerge out of greed, then the backlash will be enough to clear the cobwebs' and trigger real change. This is possible, but not that likely
2. HUBRIS: Eventually, even the most predatory of the PTB will get tired of being vigilant if no one is challenging them very aggressively. They will start to gloat, and brush-off the demands of the many for simple fairness. That will generate an opposition that may be able to overturn them. Frankly, I don't see a generation alive today that can be energized enough to do much. I suspect the next Prophets may be the leading edge, but I won't be here to know.

So I'm counting on time to do the hard work, and that will require a failed 4T. I wish we could resolve this sooner, but I'm becoming more convinced that this is highly unlikely.

I don't think you can name a failed 4T. Businessmen may not like the idea that they lost the 4T, but they lost nevertheless. We can certainly expect that a later 4T (our current one), coming in the wake of a later great Awakening, will also defeat the reactive forces that have recaptured our country.

A failed 4T will mean a failed nation, and no coming Awakening at all. If this 4T fails, there will BE no United States of America. That's always the question and challenge of 4Ts. Will our nation, our country, survive; or NOT? A failed 4T means the end of our country. There is NO middle ground, and no complacent acceptance of and acquiesence in the power of the country's enemies (the Republicans) will have any constructive value at all.

The line it is drawn, the curse it is cast. The slow one now will later be fast, as the present now will later be past. The order is rapidly fading, and the first one now will later be last, for the times, they are a-changing!

Our 4T crisis is primarily internal. It consists of the revival and entrenchment of the 3T Reaganoid delusions and reactive businessmen who want to reverse the Awakening and the previous 4T. That IS the crisis, demonstrated in government shutdowns, in blackmail through threatened default, in dysfunction and gridlock. That IS the crisis, of which the ongoing great recession is just the symptom. Republicans ARE the Crisis, embodied and personalized. The vigilance and firewalls make up the Crisis we face. The job of our 4T is to break it down and destroy it utterly.

It is time for the millennials to realize their destiny as the generation that will break that wall and keep our nation moving forward again after the Crisis. To fulfill this destiny, they must learn how to be civics, stay informed and engaged politically, and vote in midterms. Institutions must change in a 4T; Awakenings only create agendas and movements. Institutions must be changed by a generation that believes in institutions. That can only be a civic generation, not prophets.

The PTB will get "tired" and be overturned soon, during this 4T. It won't even take a major war or economic/ecological crash. The threats of such will be enough. The demands for fairness are abroad in the land today. Pisces today will be followed by Aries tomorrow. The people will rise up and take action, action, action. Bet on it, even if it doesn't happen until 2025.

Don't be deceived by the nature of our Crisis today. Our Gridlock Crisis will not be sustainable. It cannot outlast this 4T.

Eric, you say, "I don't think you can name a failed 4T" and that may be all about perspective. I mean what did the non new dealers think of the last one?

Reagan seemed a President who didn't think we had a lot of big domestic wins!

Originally Posted by millennialX

Right! I think the Civil War one was a successful and a failed 4T at the same time. Failure because it didn't address issues that lead to the Gilded Age and those issues had to be resolved during the Progressive one. Also a President did die and Jim Crow began.

But we still left this 4T a united country (in theory) and slavery did end (at least on paper).

That's the point. The 4T was successful, and the country survived and moved forward. If the 4T had failed, the nation would have fallen apart, just as Lincoln warned. There would have been no rebirth of freedom. A nation half-slave and half free would not have stood. The USA as we know it today would not exist, with all that this would have meant for a world torn apart by ambitious nationalist, imperialist warlords. The people rose up and fought for the nation in a successful 4T. They are our models, and the civil war continues today. Now we are called upon to save the country again. The time to decide has indeed come. The curse has been cast, and Heroism is summoned. We await the coming of a new Lincoln, not a new FDR. As one historian from Burns' Civil War series says, the Civil War is not over until we each have done our part in fighting it.

So, what are YOU doing to fight it?

Originally Posted by millennialX

Eric, you say, "I don't think you can name a failed 4T" and that may be all about perspective. I mean what did the non new dealers think of the last one?

Reagan seemed a President who didn't think we had a lot of big domestic wins!

Reagan was a charming actor who deceived the people. The enemy, the Reagan Tea Party Republicans, want you to think that way. It's money in their 1% pockets! They want to deceive you that slavery is freedom. They use that very word to deceive you. They want to take your freedom away in the name of freedom. Don't be deceived. No, the perspective of the enemy of our country, the losing side in the 4T, is not correct. The non-new dealers were just wrong. They remain wrong.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

What you or I want matters not a whit. The question is, what will we actually experience?

But what we as a people experience, depends on what we want, and what we will allow. The people of the world no longer have any stomach for wars between great powers. It won't happen, ever again. All wars from now on are revolutions.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

I can see this as the source of sclerosis, but I can't see how this gets resolved one way or the other. Something has to happen to tilt the field one way or the other, and nothing happening now seems to be moving us in any direction, good or bad.

And if you had lived in 1852 you would have said the same thing.

And note that the Crisis was resolved and the battle joined in the 1860s without there having been either a great depression or external invasion to catalyze it.

Originally Posted by millennialX

Eric, you say, "I don't think you can name a failed 4T" and that may be all about perspective. I mean what did the non new dealers think of the last one?

Reagan seemed a President who didn't think we had a lot of big domestic wins!

Actually during and for a while after the Great Power 4T, Reagan, who in fact was an FDR Democrat during the 1930s and 1940s, was a very typical Civic of that era. Even after he personally moved to the right during the mid - late 1T, he never completely lost his Civic-ness.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

But what we as a people experience, depends on what we want, and what we will allow. The people of the world no longer have any stomach for wars between great powers. It won't happen, ever again. All wars from now on are revolutions.

The people of the world ... here you seem to assume that everyone (or a majority) of the people of the world share a modernist/post-modernist Western "Progressive" mindset. Have you actually traveled around in the so called "developing world," in the PRC, in the Middle East, or in the former Soviet Union?

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

Actually during and for a while after the Great Power 4T, Reagan, who in fact was an FDR Democrat during the 1930s and 1940s, was a very typical Civic of that era. Even after he personally moved to the right during the mid - late 1T, he never completely lost his Civic-ness.

No, but he became the apostle of non-civic-ness. He was the unraveller; the figure of 3T delusion. He was the instigator of the attempted breakdown and reversal of the victory for the people in the previous 4T. He is nothing but a charming actor who deceives. He was one of the worst and most corrupt presidents in history. He was as bad as previous 3T and early 4T presidents.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

The people of the world ... here you seem to assume that everyone (or a majority) of the people of the world share a modernist/post-modernist Western "Progressive" mindset. Have you actually traveled around in the so called "developing world," in the PRC, in the Middle East, or in the former Soviet Union?

Why assume that everyone has to travel to a place these days in order to know what's going on? People today have TV and the internet. Travel is not necessary to be informed.

Younger people have a progressive, post-modern mindset, yes. Mostly, they just want the freedom and opportunity that others have, and that's their "mindset." Some people, especially in the Middle East, apparently do not have it. Some Africans do not. The terrorists and dictators try to impose the Dark Ages on the people. They won't succeed. They have the means to deceive and mislead, for a while. The dictators deceive many people that their backward ways will create the freedom and opportunity that they want, just like the Reaganoid Tea Party fanatics do in the USA. You can't fool all the people all the time, however. The fools will fall. Don't get fooled again!