Hi, all. I'm still working on my map of the world project (haven't given up yet!), and two MAJOR countries are stumping me.

Russia and Brazil.

I have Russia in 4T red right now, but I'm hearing strong arguments for 1T as well (that is, if you think the collapse of Communism was a 4T rather than 3T). I'd really love to get this one nailed down, since it is the largest country in the world.

Second, Brazil, South America's biggest and most populous country. I haven't colored it in yet, but a quick Wikipedia check indicates that Brazil is possibly on the American/Anglo/Canadian/European timeline; i.e., entering 4T. Brazil was supposedly even harder hit by the Depression than the U.S., experienced severe social turmoil in the '60s, and had stagflation at the same time we did - late '70s, early '80s. Is it a good idea to put Brazil in red?

Input appreciated.

Oh, and in addition, Turkey. The same problem as Russia - 4T or 1T? If 1T, you have to consider the 1990s Balkans wars to have been a Crisis for Turkey.

So Turkey, Russia, and Brazil I need help with.

Doh, I didn't expect to cause a sh*tstorm between John and Kiff.

Originally Posted by Odin

Doh, I didn't expect to cause a sh*tstorm between John and Kiff.

No worries. We've butted heads before.

Originally Posted by 1990

Hi, all. I'm still working on my map of the world project (haven't given up yet!), and two MAJOR countries are stumping me.

Russia and Brazil.

I have Russia in 4T red right now, but I'm hearing strong arguments for 1T as well (that is, if you think the collapse of Communism was a 4T rather than 3T). I'd really love to get this one nailed down, since it is the largest country in the world.

Second, Brazil, South America's biggest and most populous country. I haven't colored it in yet, but a quick Wikipedia check indicates that Brazil is possibly on the American/Anglo/Canadian/European timeline; i.e., entering 4T. Brazil was supposedly even harder hit by the Depression than the U.S., experienced severe social turmoil in the '60s, and had stagflation at the same time we did - late '70s, early '80s. Is it a good idea to put Brazil in red?

Input appreciated.

Russia really bugs me, I am leaning toward WW2 being a 4T event for Russia and the period from the failed 1905 revolution to the death of Lenin being a 2T, but then when did the 4T end? With the death of Stalin and Kruschev's denounciation of him?

A large part of Latin America seems to be on the same saeculum as the US and Europe (with the many left-wing populists like Chavez and Obrador being GC-type figures). If Brazil is in a 4T is President Lula their GC?

Originally Posted by 1990

Oh, and in addition, Turkey. The same problem as Russia - 4T or 1T? If 1T, you have to consider the 1990s Balkans wars to have been a Crisis for Turkey.

So Turkey, Russia, and Brazil I need help with.

Turkey

I did a little research on Turkey, but it was inconclusive.

The Ottoman Empire fell in 1922, and no one would disagree that this was the climax of their crisis. So by around 1982, they would enter a "generational crisis era." In 1978 The PKK war began and intensified in 1984, lasting until 1999 with the capture of their leader, Ocalan. Things had heated up a bit recently, but a ceasefire was called a few months ago.

This was a terrorism/political war, but it had much evidence of brutality:

Originally Posted by Human Rights Watch

Evacuations were unlawful and violent. Security forces would surround a village using helicopters, armored vehicles, troops, and village guards, and burn stored produce, agricultural equipment, crops, orchards, forests, and livestock. They set fire to houses, often giving the inhabitants no opportunity to retrieve their possessions. During the course of such operations, security forces frequently abused and humiliated villagers, stole their property and cash, and ill-treated or tortured them before herding them onto the roads and away from their former homes. The operations were marked by scores of “disappearances” and extrajudicial executions. By the mid-1990s, more than 3,000 villages had been virtually wiped from the map, and, according to official figures, 378,335 Kurdish villagers had been displaced and left homeless.

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/turkey0305/3.htm

But this isn't something unexpected. If this is a "generational crisis era," you would expect to see this sort of energy. But was it enough? Was it enough to reset the cycle?

That's something I can't answer with the information I have. I'd lean that the PKK war was a non-crisis war in a crisis era, making Turkey well, readily approaching 5T, if not in it. However, if you really want the answer, you'll have to understand Turkey and how the war transformed society.

Russia

I think Russia is in the same place as Turkey, but I'm more certain of this. You could create an analogy likening the PKK war for Turkey to the Chechen War for Russia.

What did you find for India/Pakistan?

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Turkey

I did a little research on Turkey, but it was inconclusive.

The Ottoman Empire fell in 1922, and no one would disagree that this was the climax of their crisis. So by around 1982, they would enter a "generational crisis era." In 1978 The PKK war began and intensified in 1984, lasting until 1999 with the capture of their leader, Ocalan. Things had heated up a bit recently, but a ceasefire was called a few months ago.

This was a terrorism/political war, but it had much evidence of brutality:



http://www.hrw.org/reports/2005/turkey0305/3.htm

But this isn't something unexpected. If this is a "generational crisis era," you would expect to see this sort of energy. But was it enough? Was it enough to reset the cycle?

That's something I can't answer with the information I have. I'd lean that the PKK war was a non-crisis war in a crisis era, making Turkey well, readily approaching 5T, if not in it. However, if you really want the answer, you'll have to understand Turkey and how the war transformed society.

Russia

I think Russia is in the same place as Turkey, but I'm more certain of this. You could create an analogy likening the PKK war for Turkey to the Chechen War for Russia.

What did you find for India/Pakistan?

As always, you are very informed, moreso than I. (Hey, I'll justify it by you being one year older)

First of all, what is a 5T? Did I miss something? Are you suggesting that Turkey and/or Russia are neither in Crisis/4T nor High/1T, but somewhere in between?

As for your question, I haven't looked into Pakistan, though it's probably in a similar place as India. India I pretty much assumed to be 4T along with much of the former British Empire. Because of being colonized by the British, India was a big Allied force in WWII, and given that its tumultuous independence was in 1947 (Gandhi = Grey Champion?), it would seem to conform with the Western cycle, i.e. entering 4T right now. Pakistan would presumably be in the same era as India, but I don't know what effect the religious differences may play - for example, is Pakistan's mood more influenced by that of India, entering 4T like Europe and the major Western powers, or Iran, currently the most influential Muslim country and entering a very clear 2T?

I'm having that same problem M&L was having...

Anyway, here is what I was trying to say about Russia.

Russia
Russia's Crisis was the Revolution ending in 1928. If I were to evaluate this before World War Two, there would be no doubt in my mind whatsoever that this were the crisis. Therefore, I have to stick with it following World War Two. A real detailed analysis of the 1940's for Russia is in order (for me at least), since this is the one war that I know of that reads like a crisis war, but in no way can be.

I think Russia is in a similar places as Turkey, but I'm more certain of this. You could create an analogy likening the PKK war for Turkey to the Chechen War for Russia. You have a crisis-era with a non-crisis war. I do not think this period transformed society in such a way to begin new generational cycle for the Russians.[/quote]

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

I'm having that same problem M&L was having...

Anyway, here is what I was trying to say about Russia.

Russia
Russia's Crisis was the Revolution ending in 1928. If I were to evaluate this before World War Two, there would be no doubt in my mind whatsoever that this were the crisis. Therefore, I have to stick with it following World War Two. A real detailed analysis of the 1940's for Russia is in order (for me at least), since this is the one war that I know of that reads like a crisis war, but in no way can be.

So this would suggest both Russia and Turkey in 1T?

I mean, it sounds like they had similar phenomena at play at the same time. Turkey had a 4T with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and Russia with the famous Revolution and Civil War. Then the next 4T would have started in the '80s. I am admittedly dumb about Turkish history, but your analysis seems sufficient, and I know well that the Soviet Union began deteriorating severely. The Berlin Wall fell in '89 and basically ended the Cold War. Then Gorbachev was forced from office in 1991 in a bloody and very 4T-ish uprising. This sounds like the climax to a 4T for Russia and most of the former Soviet states. Thus they would all be in 1T right now (conveniently, this timeline coincides with that of the Balkan states).

So isn't that your argument? If so, it seems a compelling reason to paint Russia and Turkey blue. Please tell me if I'm misunderstanding you; I'm still new at this stuff.

Oh, and what are your thoughts on Brazil? And India/Pakistan, since you brought it up?

Originally Posted by 1990

First of all, what is a 5T? Did I miss something? Are you suggesting that Turkey and/or Russia are neither in Crisis/4T nor High/1T, but somewhere in between?

Sorry...

Briefly, the 5T is the real separation from the GD and S&H model. The S&H model can't allow for a 5T. The 5T occurs about 80 years after the end of the previous crisis, so you have a typical crisis era coming to a close... but with no crisis. Things get crazy here, because your Prophets are gone, your Nomads are in charge, Heroes are middle-aged, and "Artists" are young adults...and still no crisis.

There is information scattered around this thread with details about the 5T. It is another way of thinking about the Civil War.

As for your question, I haven't looked into Pakistan, though it's probably in a similar place as India. India I pretty much assumed to be 4T along with much of the former British Empire. Because of being colonized by the British, India was a big Allied force in WWII, and given that its tumultuous independence was in 1947 (Gandhi = Grey Champion?), it would seem to conform with the Western cycle, i.e. entering 4T right now. Pakistan would presumably be in the same era as India, but I don't know what effect the religious differences may play - for example, is Pakistan's mood more influenced by that of India, entering 4T like Europe and the major Western powers, or Iran, currently the most influential Muslim country and entering a very clear 2T?

I dunno. Have you given thought to the possibility that India might have separate timelines?

This inability to edit is killing me.

Originally Posted by 1990

So this would suggest both Russia and Turkey in 1T?

I mean, it sounds like they had similar phenomena at play at the same time. Turkey had a 4T with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and Russia with the famous Revolution and Civil War. Then the next 4T would have started in the '80s. I am admittedly dumb about Turkish history, but your analysis seems sufficient, and I know well that the Soviet Union began deteriorating severely. The Berlin Wall fell in '89 and basically ended the Cold War. Then Gorbachev was forced from office in 1991 in a bloody and very 4T-ish uprising. This sounds like the climax to a 4T for Russia and most of the former Soviet states. Thus they would all be in 1T right now (conveniently, this timeline coincides with that of the Balkan states).

So isn't that your argument? If so, it seems a compelling reason to paint Russia and Turkey blue. Please tell me if I'm misunderstanding you; I'm still new at this stuff.

OK, now you got me confused. Where did you get that idea?

"I think Russia is in a similar places as Turkey, but I'm more certain of this. You could create an analogy likening the PKK war for Turkey to the Chechen War for Russia. You have a crisis-era with a non-crisis war. I do not think this period (1990s) transformed society in such a way to begin (a) new generational cycle for the Russians."

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

This inability to edit is killing me.



OK, now you got me confused. Where did you get that idea?

"I think Russia is in a similar places as Turkey, but I'm more certain of this. You could create an analogy likening the PKK war for Turkey to the Chechen War for Russia. You have a crisis-era with a non-crisis war. I do not think this period (1990s) transformed society in such a way to begin (a) new generational cycle for the Russians."

Okay, I think I get it now. Because there was no real crisis war in the crisis, the crisis isn't really resolved...so both Turkey and Russia could still be in limbo?

How odd. Maybe I should ignore Eastern Europe for a while and go back to Brazil. And India/Pakistan.

Originally Posted by 1990

Okay, I think I get it now. Because there was no real crisis war in the crisis, the crisis isn't really resolved...so both Turkey and Russia could still be in limbo?

How odd. Maybe I should ignore Eastern Europe for a while and go back to Brazil. And India/Pakistan.

Yes lol. If Turkey didn't experience a crisis war in the PKK War, they'd be in a 5th turning generational alignment. If Russia didn't experience a crisis (war) in the early 1990's, then they would be approaching a 5th turning generational alignment.

Let me just correct something I said earlier, since I can't edit. I meant to say "The S&H model doesn't allow for a 5th turning," meaning it isn't included.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Yes lol. If Turkey didn't experience a crisis war in the PKK War, they'd be in a 5th turning generational alignment. If Russia didn't experience a crisis (war) in the early 1990's, then they would be approaching a 5th turning generational alignment.

Let me just correct something I said earlier, since I can't edit. I meant to say "The S&H model doesn't allow for a 5th turning," meaning it isn't included.

Okay then. I am officially not dealing with Eastern Europe until I must.

So here are the countries I am most concerned with (at the moment), and I would LOVE people's input on:

• Brazil and India/Pakistan. I already mentioned these. I brought up Brazil; you, MichaelEaston, brought up India/Pakistan. I am leaning toward Brazil and India in 4T red and Pakistan, I dunno. I need thoughts from people.
• Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Two major Middle Eastern countries; I have Saudi Arabia in red because Xenakis and others suggested that it is on our Western timeline, but Wikipedia doesn't have sufficient history for me to be sure, and since much of the Middle East is in Awakening green, I have to be positive about Saudi Arabia. As for Jordan, I am leaning toward painting it green since it was at the center of all that Middle Eastern 4T ugliness in the '70s and '80s -- the Lebanon Civil War, the Iranian Revolution, the Iran-Iraq war, etc. But I want input.
• Indonesia. This is one of the world's most important countries, and yet I have put zero thought into it for my project. I have to think it is neither 1T nor 3T, but one of the "biggies" (2T or 4T). If you consider the overthrow of Sukarno in 1965 an Awakening event, then Indonesia is on our Western timeline and in red. If, however, you think of it as a Crisis event, Indonesia is on the same timeline as other major Muslim countries like Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, etc. I'm really 50/50 on this one.

So I'm going to forget about Russia, Turkey, and the rest of Iron Curtain- and Balkan-land for a while now. I'd like to settle the above 6 countries! Anyone's contributions are welcome.

A 5th Turning is like when Mars goes backwards, and you must needs create an epicycle to keep your model intact.

Pax,

Dave Krein '42

Dear Professor Krein,

Originally Posted by David Krein

> A 5th Turning is like when Mars goes backwards, and you must needs
> create an epicycle to keep your model intact.

> Pax,

> Dave Krein '42

I always appreciate the guidance that your scholarly inputs provide
to me.

The work on "fifth turnings" is very recent, and is based on evidence
that came out after the London subway bombings. I wrote a lengthy
explanation a year ago.
http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...178#post158178

One of the great unanswered questions of The Fourth Turning is
why there are long saeculae, and why they aren't accounted for in
Strauss and Howe's generational model. This question has turned into
the following: What happens if the fourth turning goes by and there's
no crisis war?

My answer is based on new research on suicide bombers that was done
by Prof. Robert Pape, and publicized following last year's 7/7 London
subway suicide bombings. Prof. Pape's study revealed that most
suicide bombers overwhelmingly come from just two countries: Saudi
Arabia and Morocco. And it's precisely these two countries that have
the greatest inter-crisis war periods -- the length of time since
their last crisis wars. Saudi Arabia's last crisis war was the Ibn
Saud conquest, ending in 1925, and Morocco's was the Rif War, ending
in 1927. Thus, in both of these countries, the fourth turning has
passed with no crisis war.

So I proposed a "fifth turning" concept, and, based on Pape's
research, tried to explain why the young adult generation in fifth
turning societies are so much more likely than young adults in 3rd
and 4th turning societies to become suicide bombers. That's why I
referred to them as "super-nomads."

You may be aware, Professor Krein, that if you read or hear the words
of academics, journalists, pundits, and politicians, you usually hear
some gobbledegook about hopelessness, desperate poverty, despair, even
though the London subway bombers were in none of these states. What
Generational Dynamics provides, through the concept of "fifth
turnings," is a generational explanation of where suicide bombers
come from, and why they do what they do.

This is better than the gobbledegook that you hear from your
scholarly academic friends, isn't it?

I'll be looking forward, as usual, to your next mordant comment, but
if I don't hear from you before New Years, let me wish you a Merry
Christmas and happy holiday season.

Sincerely,

John

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

Mr. Xenakis - A Fourth Turning does not require a war of any kind.

And a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you.

In all sincerity,

Dave Krein '42

Dear Professor Krein,

Originally Posted by David Krein

> Mr. Xenakis - A Fourth Turning does not require a war of any kind.

I don't disagree with this, but not for the reason you think.

A crisis era with no crisis war is mentioned by Strauss and Howe as a
theoretical possibility, but every Fourth Turning identified by
Strauss and Howe contains a crisis war. In particular, the so-called
"Glorious Revolution fourth turning" contains TWO crisis wars -- it
begins with King Philips war and ends smack in the middle of the War
of the Spanish Succession.

However, I agree with you anyway. For example, Iceland and
Switzerland had no crisis wars during the World War II period.

Sincerely,

John

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

John - and so did Britain between 1857 and 1873.

Pax,

Dave Krein '42

Notice that Mike didn't make any comment on what I had written, or what I had posted about the battle of Somme. I doubt that he even read it. I know that he didn't read what I wrote about Malplaquet when I posted that analysis a few weeks ago, and it's pretty clear that he didn't read this either. He lists three urls for previous posts

This is not true. In the first citation you were talking about the WSS. You say this:

Now we're going to try to apply that same algorithm to a single
battle, rather than to an entire war.

You discuss the WSS in your treatment of point 4.

The thing that's REMEMBERED about Malplaquet is the high number of war deaths, and there was a desire at the Utrecht conference in 1714 to avoid for as long as possible another violent conflict such as the one that had just ended.

And the Treaty of Utrecht was successful, since there were no more European wars until the French Revolution, 75 years later.

Here you make an assertion that the Battle of Malaplaquet was remembered in a special way that it created a desire to avoid another conflict like the WSS at the Treaty of Utrecht conference. The evidence you supply that this desire existed is the bolded statement, [b]which is false[b]. I DID point out that this statement was false (negating your point). You said you made "a slight error" and didn't address the point further. Anyways I did respond to this post.

You second post says this
[quote]I've said many times that number of war deaths is not a factor in determining whether a war is a crisis war. Still, a hundred thousand war deaths within a few days at the beginning of the Battle of the Somme does focus the mind, and at least requires further investigation.
The two bolded statements contradict each other. If war deaths are not a factor, then they are irrelevant. They shouldn't focus the mind and don't require any investigation. On the other hand if they require investigation that means they may be a factor. I did point this out in my "of course statement" you quote above. So I responded to this post too.

The third post says this

A total of 40,000 men were killed at Malplaquet, and close to 100,000
were killed in the first day at Somme. That looks like a much higher
figure until you compare the total sizes of the armies. Second, at Malplaquet, 40% of the entire army was lost in the melee, but at Somme, 12% of the assigned armies were killed.

Here John tries to show that Malaplaquet was more impactful than the Somme because a larger fraction of the armies that fought at Malplaquet were killed in the first day than at the Somme.

Why does this matter? When Aaron Burr shot Alexander Hamilton, the loses in that battle were 50%. Is that duel an example of genocidal fury?

It seems to me that one has to do some comparisons to the size of the population affected. The French population for the WSS was about half that for WW I. 100,000 dead in one day at the Somme has a bigger impact than 40,000 dead in one day at Malaplaquet.

I addressed this point in posts to Mike E. about how the French were traumatized by the war, pointing out that a much smaller fraction of the population was traumatized by Malaplaquet than at the Somme.

Mike claims, "What one can then do it see if you can come up with
a set of rules that can be used to define turnings, political eras or
crisis wars. I have done this for turnings and for political eras."

Once again, this is nonsense. He's done nothing of the sort.

I analyzed Mike's list of McGuiness Turnings, and I refuted it at all
levels. I showed that the list was arbitrary, that the methodology
was wrong, that the justification was circular and inconsistent, and
that they didn't correspond to actual historical events.

Now do McGuiness' turning shave ANYTHING AT ALL to do with the bolded statement. Of course not. It's completely irrelevant. He's always going off on tangents. He says he is going to apply the algorithm to the Battle of Malpalquet in the first post discuss above and then he talks about Lebanon in the discussion about point 2.

I did the same thing with the event list. I showed that there's no possible logical reason for these choices, and the only remaining possibility
is bias. three urls for previous posts are given

The first url is about the McGuiness tangent. The second url is all about K-cycles, another tangent having nothing to about my methodology. Finally we get to the third url which actually addresses the point.

For reference the methodology John is critiquing involves looked for period of higher than normal "religious or spiritual activity". "Activity" is measured by the frequency of events that can reasonably considered as religious or spiritual in nature. I use a lot of Catholic material because Catholics have documented birth years for a large number of saints that I can use as examples of "people who do spiritual/religious things" and whose birth years might fall more in Prophet generations than in any other generation. Catholic sites list dates for apparitions of Mary. I can find from other sources dates for the founding of various Protestant sects (another type of religious event) after the Reformation, Before the Reformation the equivalent date would be the rise of heresies, for which I again have to go to Catholic sources. So this is what John has to say:

You selected a site that focuses on Catholic apparitions. Well obviously you're biased toward Catholic apparitions. Not to mention a separate Catholic source - the New Advent encyclopedia. Why not Greek Orthodox apparitions? Why not a site on the history of Zionism to include Jewish events? Why not a site on history of Buddhism or history of Taoism or history of Hinduism?

I am simply looking at whether the frequency of religious events from any tradition show period fluctuations in frequency. Why is it relevant from what tradition I obtain my events? I am not trying to make a statement about any particular religious tradition. This criticism is irrelevant, just another irrelevant tangent like the stuff about McGuiness or the K-cycle.

The he says this

A second one is that you haven't proven that your list of events
relates to awakenings.

S&H call certain periods "Awakenings". Using the list of what I call religious/spiritual events, I define periods marked by greater than normal frequency of these events. These periods detected by a high frequency of such events closely match with S&H awakenings in a statistically significant fashion. That is, the alignment is too good for it to be random luck.

There are two possibilities. One is the periods that can be characterized by higher than normal frequencies of formation of new religious groups or ideas, apparitions of Mary, saints in rising adulthood, etc. are the same thing as what S&H call awakenings. The other is selection bias. I unconsciously or consciously selected events preferentially from S&H awakenings periods and not from other periods.

The exact sort of events were selected really is irrelevant. What matters is whether they show periodicity in frequency. Of course selecting just any type of event will like produce random frequency variations. I showed this by analyzing several other types of events in a similar way. For example, are classical composers more likely to come from some generations and not others? I obtained a list of about 1000 composers and their birthdates. I performed a variety of frequency analyzes. There was no regular periodicity. I found cycles, but they were spurious cycles of the sort called Yule-Slutzky cycles. The religious event cycles show a regular periodicity that make them very unlike to be Yule-Slutsky cycles.

I deliberately put bias into analysis by selection a subgroup of what I considered "important composers" basically those I had heard of. Still no cycles. I did the same thing for the construction of great buildings. More Yule-Slutsky cycles. I then combined the two together into a composition cycle that actually lines up with some of S&H's Highs. But when formally analyzes for alignment I found that there two cycles were not in fact aligned in a statistically significant fashion. In other words despite all my massaging and trying to force an S&H periodicity into the data--it still came out as random noise. It is not so easy to "make the data come out the way you want" when you are dealing with large quantities of events.

John confuses bias. An example of a bias that matters would be if I looked into Awakening periods and record all the events I could find, but then did not do the same of the other period, simply recording the most famous events that occurred at those times.

Bias is not using mostly Catholic events or events that might be Vietnamese. Choosing these doesn't not tilt the periodicity towards favoring Awakenings. In fact incorporating Vietnamese events would make the cycle less clear because it would be mixing timelines. I really shouldn't have Cao Daism in the list of events because Vietnam probably is on a different timeline, but I don't know this.

If I leave it out, I could be open to a charge of bias because this event is one of those making up the 1910-1929 period of high spiritual/religious events, which was a S&H Unraveling. It is the only period I detected that did not match up. Taking out Cao Daism and a lot more events from the 1920's would serve to push the high frequency period earlier than where it is not. I did a worst-case analysis by including Cao Daism because it does not strengthen my case--it weakens it.

In a crisis war, the cycle is reset by the end or climax of the crisis. The generational fulfillment is complete and society passes through that gate.

But what if there is no crisis war? What criteria must push it to 1T instead of 5T, or vice versa? I suppose if nothing happens, then a 5T is in order. But what about Russia and Turkey, who each experienced "interesting" 4Ts.

Dear David,

Originally Posted by David Krein

> John - and so did Britain between 1857 and 1873.

I don't know if you've seen any of it, but we've been discussing this
question fairly heatedly off an on for the last year.

I think I can summarize the debate briefly as follows:

• England was, according to what I've read, at war somewhere in the
  world every single day of Queen Victoria's reign.
  
• Therefore, the question arises: Is it possible that England
  somehow got a "pass" on a crisis war, because of being in so many
  non-crisis wars for decades?
  
• On the other hand, does the Franco-Prussian war somehow count as
  a crisis war for England? The reasoning would be similar to
  Switzerland in WW II: The country was neutral, but they were
  preparing for a major war with Germany, which was aborted when
  Germany was defeated. Similarly, is it possible that the English
  were preparing to be involved in the F-P war, but the preparations
  were aborted when Napoleon surrendered at Sedan?
  
• In fact, does F-P even count as a crisis war for Germany that was
  aborted by Napoleon's surrender? It clearly was a crisis war for
  France when the genocidal French Commune civil war is
  included.

I'm aware that you're an expert on this history of this period. If
you have any insight into this situation, I would be interested in
your thoughts.

Sincerely,

John

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

Originally Posted by 1990

Okay then. I am officially not dealing with Eastern Europe until I must.

So here are the countries I am most concerned with (at the moment), and I would LOVE people's input on:

• Brazil and India/Pakistan. I already mentioned these. I brought up Brazil; you, MichaelEaston, brought up India/Pakistan. I am leaning toward Brazil and India in 4T red and Pakistan, I dunno. I need thoughts from people.
• Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Two major Middle Eastern countries; I have Saudi Arabia in red because Xenakis and others suggested that it is on our Western timeline, but Wikipedia doesn't have sufficient history for me to be sure, and since much of the Middle East is in Awakening green, I have to be positive about Saudi Arabia. As for Jordan, I am leaning toward painting it green since it was at the center of all that Middle Eastern 4T ugliness in the '70s and '80s -- the Lebanon Civil War, the Iranian Revolution, the Iran-Iraq war, etc. But I want input.
• Indonesia. This is one of the world's most important countries, and yet I have put zero thought into it for my project. I have to think it is neither 1T nor 3T, but one of the "biggies" (2T or 4T). If you consider the overthrow of Sukarno in 1965 an Awakening event, then Indonesia is on our Western timeline and in red. If, however, you think of it as a Crisis event, Indonesia is on the same timeline as other major Muslim countries like Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, etc. I'm really 50/50 on this one.

So I'm going to forget about Russia, Turkey, and the rest of Iron Curtain- and Balkan-land for a while now. I'd like to settle the above 6 countries! Anyone's contributions are welcome.

Bumping this so it doesn't get totally ignored.

Dear Matt,

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

> In a crisis war, the cycle is reset by the end or climax of the
> crisis. The generational fulfillment is complete and society
> passes through that gate.

> But what if there is no crisis war? What criteria must push it to
> 1T instead of 5T, or vice versa? I suppose if nothing happens,
> then a 5T is in order. But what about Russia and Turkey, who each
> experienced "interesting" 4Ts.

I don't know the complete answer to this question, but it would have
to depend on the level of involvement in the crisis war.

Apparently what distinguishes a crisis war from a non-crisis war is
that, in a crisis war, the anxieties are so great that population and
the government simply panic. As the "shocks and surprises" pile up,
the population and the government panic even more, and become
genocidal. After the war ends, they're horrified not only by the
atrocities their enemies committed, but almost as much by the
atrocities that they committed on their enemies. (But as I've said
before, among later generations, people never remember the acts of
atrocity their society perpetrated, and never forget the acts of
atrocity perpetrated on their society.)

So what happens if there's no crisis war? Is there a transition into
a first turning or a fifth turning? Well, I would hypothesize the
following:

• If the country was viscerally involved in the war (as in the case
  of Switzerland in WW II), then feelings of anxiety are purged, and
  there's a transition to a first turning. In particular, the Hero
  generation imposes exactly the same kinds of austere rules on society
  as if there had been an actual war; this gives rise to a rebellion by
  the new Prophet generation, leading to an Awakening and a
  continuation of the cycle as usual.
  
• But if not, then something quite different happens. The would-be
  Hero generation becomes placidly middle-aged, without imposing any
  austere rules. Without the war, the would-be Artist generation grows
  up into an extremely angry "Super-Nomad" generation that's very
  anxious for war, even to the point of becoming "altruistic" suicide
  bombers. Furthermore, there are no austere rules provided by the
  placid would-be Heroes, so the transition is into a so-called fifth
  turning, an era which is distinctly different from any of the other
  eras studied by S&H.

Sincerely,

John

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

Originally Posted by 1990

Bumping this so it doesn't get totally ignored.

Dear Nathaniel,

I haven't forgotten; I have a bunch of messages that are going to take
some additional thought, and I'll try to get to all of them over the
weekend.

Sincerely,

John