Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: Objections to Generational Dynamics - Page 112







Post#2776 at 05-02-2008 06:59 PM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
05-02-2008, 06:59 PM #2776
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Quote Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis View Post
It's a shame that it's impossible for me to move those discussions here, but that's impossible, since this thread has pretty much been taken over by nutjobs and trolls, and discussion has become impossible.
Discussion is impossible when somebody doesn't directly answer any questions.

Is a nutjob somone who found S&H material that directly contradicts your claims? Is a troll someone who provides objections in an "Objections" thread?
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#2777 at 05-21-2008 12:49 PM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
05-21-2008, 12:49 PM #2777
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

South Africa

http://www.generationaldynamics.com/...080521#e080521
Quote Originally Posted by JJX
South Africa has several different generational timelines, based on ethnic groups:
  • The British colonists were on the United Kingdom generational timeline.
  • The Zulus originally came from east of Transvaal. In my recent article on Zimbabwe, I described how the Zulu tribe went from obscurity to world renown thanks to one leader, Shaka, and the extremely bloody and brutal war of extermination he led against other tribes in that region. This war was the Mfecane ("the crushing"), and it climaxed in 1828. The great Zulu Empire lasted for decades, until it was destroyed by the British in 1879 in the bloody Anglo-Zulu war. At the climax of that crisis war, the Zulus were dispersed, and the Zulu nation ended.
  • The Dutch settlers, mixing with French and German Protestants in the 1600s, took on a unique identity, Afrikaner, speaking a unique language, Afrikaans. The 1830s-40s crisis war with the British drove the Afrikaners (also called Boers) to form other colonies -- Natalia, Transvaal, Orange Free State -- in a huge migration known as the Great Trek.
    As we described in the recent article on Zimbabwe, the Great Trek displaced the Ndebele tribe members who had survived the Mfecane and drove them into what is now Zimbabwe.
    The Boer wars, starting in the 1890s and ending in 1902, were a British conquest of the Afrikaners. This was a crisis war for the Afrikaners, but a non-crisis war for the British.
On May 10, 1910, the Union of South Africa was created from the Cape Colony, Natalia, Transvaal, and Orange Free State. South Africa became an active part of the world community, and with the Afrikaner and tribal (Zulu) timelines merging into common generational Awakening and Unraveling eras, there were sharp political divisions along racial lines. Both the Zulus and the Afrikaners became extremely nationalistic.
All of these different timelines merged in World War II. Different political factions wished to side with the British or with the Germans, or stay neutral. But since South Africa was part of the British empire, it fought on the side of the Allies. South Africa's fighting troops were all whites, but blacks served in non-fighting roles like drivers and guard duties.
Today, 63 years after the end of World War II, South Africa is well into a generational Crisis era.
I've wondered if my analysis on South Africa is wrong. The 1950s era doesn't have the markings of a standard crisis. I think there are four possibilities here:

World War Two was a Crisis: Many South Africans participated, but there wasn't a real sense of the energy one would expect in a crisis era. I cannot see a climax here either. Furthermore, with the war occurring in mid-cycle years ~39-43, the chances of WWII being a crisis would be extremely slim; it would most likely require extraordinary circumstances. As far as I can tell, there are none of those either. This would mean the 1940s and 1950s would be a Recovery period, and the 1960s and the 1970s would be an Awakening era.

The events in the 1950s and perhaps beyond were a Crisis era: Internal turmoil, forced resettlement, mass arrests, panicking, restrictive/racist laws, and overreacting. However, the climax is hard to pinpoint and there are few, if any, Crises that this can be compared to.

The dismantling of Apartheid was a Crisis Era: There was almost a 'virtual' civil war, and there were many acts of terrorism, resulting in the deaths of thousands.

There has been no Crisis since the Boer Wars: This would be an extremely long mid-cycle period.

------------------------------------------------------------------

I said that I would attempt to draw up a brief generational history of the countries for which I created Crisis timelines for. On your website, you seem to have been doing a similar thing. Could you give me a list of which countries you would (or countries you would not) like me to study, so there is no overlap?







Post#2778 at 05-21-2008 04:46 PM by herbal tee [at joined Dec 2005 #posts 7,115]
---
05-21-2008, 04:46 PM #2778
Join Date
Dec 2005
Posts
7,115

I think that South Africa runs on the old Afrikaner saeculium. Consider the last 200 years. In 1815 they lost their political connection to the Netherlands and had a severe adjustment during the recovery period. About 20 years later, they had an awakening that led to the great trek and their first military encounter along the Great Fish River with the Zulu. The unraveling was marked with the huge mineral discoveries and renewed conflict with the British. This led to the Boer War crises which ended with their self founded states of Orange and the Transvaal being absorbed into a larger South Africa in 1910. Thus, they had a saeculium of nearly 100 years ending about 1910.
The period scince the founding of a white ruled South Africa in 1910 ended with the creation of a black majority ruled South Africa in 1994-which is 74 years after the first, white dominant South African state had been founded. Dispite the depression, during the 1930's there was a big movement amongst the Afrikaners to commerate the centennial of the great trek. This was arguable an awakening event challenging the "British" system imposed in 1910. The unreveling began after the rest of Africa recieved political independence and Saouth Africa found neighboring states less hospitable. The granting of nominal independence to the homelands is a classic 3T attempt to stave off a condition that will prove critical in the upcoming crises. Indeed, the crises was climaxed with the creation of a totally different state
White South Africa fell on time based on saecular theory.
Last edited by herbal tee; 05-21-2008 at 05:22 PM.







Post#2779 at 05-24-2008 09:23 AM by John J. Xenakis [at Cambridge, MA joined May 2003 #posts 4,010]
---
05-24-2008, 09:23 AM #2779
Join Date
May 2003
Location
Cambridge, MA
Posts
4,010

Dear Matt and Rick,

I considered the possibility of Apartheid somehow being a crisis war,
but I could never find evidence of any level of violence that would
justify such a conclusion. I also considered the possibility that
the Afrikaner portion of the South African population might have been
involved in the Rhodesian civil war as a crisis war, but that was
rejected by my web site reader (see below). I also considered the
possibility that the black tribes might have a different timeline,
but I see no real evidence of that, and I'm also influenced by the
extremely gory violence being practiced by the Zulus and Xhosa today.
All in all, the evidence seems overwhelming that World War II was a
crisis war for all of South Africa, and was a genuine merging of the
different 19th century timelines of the different groups.

I was very fortunate to receive an e-mail message from a web site
reader whose great-great-great-grandfather was an important figure in
the Great Trek, and wanted to correct what I had written. It's now
apparent that the Great Trek was NOT the result of a crisis war
between the Afrikaners and the British, as I had written, but was
actually an Awakening/Unraveling event that resulted in a "first
turning reset." So the Great Trek turns out to be very interesting
from the point of view of generational theory.

I was able to pose some additional questions to my web site reader,
and he kindly provided me with a ton of very useful information. I
particularly asked him for information about the relationship between
the Zulu and the Xhosa tribes, and his messages were very helpful in
that regard. I'll post excerpts in a separate message.

Quote Originally Posted by MichaelEaston View Post
> I said that I would attempt to draw up a brief generational
> history of the countries for which I created Crisis timelines for.
> On your website, you seem to have been doing a similar thing.
> Could you give me a list of which countries you would (or
> countries you would not) like me to study, so there is no
> overlap?
You're right that I'm trying to knock these things out as standalone
"Brief Generational History" sections of my web log entries, in order
to start populating the "Country Studies" sections of my web site.
Right now, the only country where I've put in a history section is
Zimbabwe, and that's mainly an experiment to see if my software is
working properly.

Keep in mind that, as of two weeks ago, I had no idea that I would be
writing a generational history of South Africa. It was the explosive
news events that drove the issue for me, as it does for most things
that I write about on my web site.

So in answer to your question, I'd much rather that we do it in
reverse of the way you suggested -- you give me a list of the
countries you want to work on, and I'll work on different ones. The
only thing that would change that is an important news story about
one of the countries, and then we can figure out what to do in that
case -- I'll let you know I'm doing a story, or you can just send me
what you have on that country and let me use it.

I'm really excited about the Country Studies, and I appreciate the
help that you and Nathaniel and others have been giving me. The
Country Studies section of my web site will be, I believe, a major
scholarly achievement that we can all be proud of, and will provide
an information resource that is totally unique, and will also prove
the validity of generational theory for many scholars.

Thanks again for your help.

Sincerely,

John

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







Post#2780 at 05-24-2008 09:26 AM by John J. Xenakis [at Cambridge, MA joined May 2003 #posts 4,010]
---
05-24-2008, 09:26 AM #2780
Join Date
May 2003
Location
Cambridge, MA
Posts
4,010

Generational History of South Africa
Excerpts from messages from web site reader

First message

Just a comment on your South African article.

The Great Trek of the mid to late 1803's was not a result of armed
conflict with the British but disagreement with the way the Brits were
running the place, and a lack of protection on the Estern Frontier
against marauding black tribes. My great, great, great grandfather was
the minister of the Dutch Reformed Church at Cradock at the time, and
in fact knew some of the Boer (Afrikaans) leaders. The Great Trek was
mostly from the then Eastern Frontier i.e. Cradock, Grahamstown, etc.

The Afrikaans problem was this:

1. Ordanance 50 of 1828 put every free person irrespective of colour
or creed onto an equal legal footing. As such it was the most liberal
legislation in the world at the time, and infuriated the Afrikaners,
especially as it had come at the instigation of the London Missionery
Society who they regarded as the "devil incarnate"

2. In 1833 the British Empire liberated all slaves, the result of the
tireless efforts of Lord Wilberforce, but heavily backed by the London
Missionery Society.

3. The Afrikaners lost their slaves. Compension was offered but was
only paid in London and most large farmers with slaves never got
paid.

4. Worse, due to Ordanance 50, slaves were now on an equal legal
footing to their former masters which the Afrikaners couldn't
stomach.

5. The Brits finally took over the Cape in 1806 and were meant to
provide protection to farmers, especially on the Eastern Frontier. But
they were ineffective at this and the Xhosa tribes across the Fish
river were winning hands down inh the stock theft game, plus killing
farmers and families in the middle of the night.

6. So the Boers started leaving for the interior. There is quite a
famous sermon that my ancestor preached to the Hendrik Potieter
column urging them not to go. It was a strategic blunder since what
the Afrikaners wanted most of all was their own homeland. If they had
all stayed in the Cape by sheer numbers the Cape would have become
theirs once granted independence by the Brits.

7. Interestingly, when the Boers got to the Transvaal, at their first
legislative meeeting, all London Missionary Society people were
declared prohibited immigrants!

Second message

You may want to make one or two ammendments to your site, but I was
quite impressed on the handle you had got on things, on what is a very
complicated history. Let me try to be helpful:

If you open a map of South Africa:

The Zulu and the Xhosa were part of the same people who migrated down
from Central Africa over a very long period of time during the middle
ages onwards. Those who travelled furthest settled in the area that
stretches from Kokstad (southern Natal) through to where Port
Elizabeth is now. The people that became Zulu settled further north in
what is now KwaZulu Natal and Northern Natal. The language is
reasonably similar: If you can speak Zulu you can understand Xhosa

Now switching to the whites: From the beginning of colonisation, in
April 1652, the Cape was governed by the Dutch East India Company.
This lasted until the British took over in 1806. From time to time
the northern and eastern boundaries of the Cape were extended, and in
1778 the Cape administration extended the eastern boundary to the
Great Fish River upon which Cradock was to be founded about 35 years
later.

The advances of settlers across the Cape Province started at Cape Town
and took two general directions. The first and most popular, was over
the Hottentots Holland mountains and along the coast, where water was
plentiful; the second and slower, came across the Agter
Bruintjieshoogte, across the Great and Little Karoos.

Not surprisingly, these advances of European settlers and farming met
with considerable resistance from the indigenous populations who
occupied the territory. Wars and cattle raids by both sides started in
the 17th century and were to continue for about another 200 years.

The Xhosa crises were with the advancing settlers and the British
army.

In the 18th century and early 19th there were two types of Boers in
the Eastern Cape. The Tekboers who were stock farmers, lived in their
wagons and moved with the grazing and water, and the Boers who built
homesteads and farmed. (Boer means farmer and trek means travel) From
about 1811 the British would give 2000 morgen (about 4400 acres) to
anyone who undertook to build a homestead and live on the land. Paul
Kruger, later president of the Transvaal, and baptised by my great,
great, great grandfather in 1825, was from a Trekboer family who were
grazing the unoccupied lands near Cradock at that time.

During Mfecane the Zulus did go south to attack the Xhosas but it was
hilly country side not really suited to the Zulu methods of attack and
more easily defended than the plains of the Orange Free State and
Transvaal. Here the Zulus decimated the local population; it may well
have been higher than decimation.

The reason that the Great Trek was successful is that the Boers (and
Trek boers) were treking into territory post Mfecane where few people
existed and those remaining had had enough of war (generational time
line) If Mfecane hadn't happened then the first couple of columns of
Trekkers enter the Orange Free State would have been wiped out and
that would have been that!

There is no doubt in my mind that the Great Trek was a generational
crisis for the Boers. The act of packing up and going to the unknown,
the unspeakable hardships once away from places where basics could not
be purchased, where on the move crops couldn't be grown, and to some
extent fighting peoples who hadn't been reached by the Zulus, could
only have happened as a generational crisis.

Their next generational crisis for the Afrikaners as you correctly
point out was the Anglo Boer war of 1899 to 1901. My problem is that
I can't find another Afrikaner generational crisis after that? The
start of the absorption of Akrikaners by English speakers started in
my generation, and in my children's generation there are large numbers
of them living in London, and other parts of the globe. Still the
Boer war was to create a very fervent form of nationalism (called
Apartheid) which was to bedevil South Africa in the 20th century.
Perhaps the political defense of apartheid against the world in the
60's and 70's was the next Afrikaner generational crisis? This
included the manufacture of nuclear weapons!

The Boer war was not generational for the Brits but simply greed
driven by wealthy magnates such as Rhodes. Gold had been found and the
Transvaal and the gold needed to come under British rule so that it
could be exploited by Brits like Rhodes and his friends. The same is
true of the colonisation of Rhodesia at the end of the 19th century.
Rhodes formed the British South Africa company, who employed and armed
a large number of men, then gathered together peoples who wanted to be
given a farm in the new country and off they went. Once conquered, the
new country was given his name.

Do Zulu and Xhosa have conflicts today? Yes, very much so. South
Africa is still very tribal nationalistic. The Zulus want to rule
South Africa. Nelson Mandela and Mbeki are Xhosa. Jacob Zuma, a ZULU,
is now president of the ANC and probably the next president of the
country. The current violence against foreigners is by poor people,
especially the unemployed, who feel that foreigners have taken their
jobs, houses, etc. Zulus tend to take physical action to settle
issues, and as a convenience Xhosas and others have joined in. (If the
USA falls into serious economic depression watch the Americans chase
out the Hispanics!)

English speaking South Africans, until the 1960's, saw themselves as
British, in some ways more British than the British. Yes, WWII was a
generational crisis for the South African English speakers. For
instance, within 3 days of Britain declaring war against Germany on 3
Sep 1939, my father had volunterred for active service. Yes, many
Afrikaaans people either sided with Germany or wanted to be neutral,
and South Africa went to war on a very small parliamentry majority.
Because of this there was no draft, volunteers only.

A number of Blacks and Afrikaners went to war because of serious
unemployment at the time. Blacks in the South African army were
non-combatants, but the rest of British Africa raised armies of black
troops, white officers. The Kings African Rifles regiments from
Rhodesia, Kenya, Gold Coast (Ghana) and Nigeria, were really fine
fighting forces, all voluntary in exchange for a salary.

Afrikaners, many of them desperately poor, signed up with the South
African Army in exchange of getting their teeth fixed, clothing, good
food and accomodation, a good salary to send home to impoverished
parents, and in many instances learning a trade e.g. with the sappers.
Once the Western Desert was won, and the war moved across to Italy,
most Afrikaans South Africans elected to go home, as did the Black
South Africans.

Very few Afrikaners left South Africa to take part in the Rhodesian
civil war, so I wouldn't see that as part of an Afrikaans generational
crisis (see above) I grew up in Rhodesia and most of the well educated
of my generation emigrated. I finished school at end 1964 and went to
university thus avoiding the draft until after university, and then
never went back to Rhodesia. In my final year at school, 39 boys in
total, not one was still in the country by 1972!

Your last question relates to the current violence against foreigners.
This has received a lot of international publicity and is very tragic
but as a percentage of the total amount of violence being committed
including crime is quite a small percentage. We have very high violent
crime levels here in South Africa and as a result there has been high
levels of white emigration over the last 10 years. Half a million
South Africans live in London alone! So I tend to see the current
violence against foreigners as part of the overall ongoing violence.

There was a lot of criminal violence after the American civil war
which might suggest that for Blacks the 70's to 90's freedom struggle
in South Africa was a generational crisis. If so the risk of South
Africa breaking up along tribal lines and perhaps civil war falls
away. But I am having some difficulty reading generational time lines
for this part of the world.

Hope that this was helpful.

** End of messages from web site reader

Sincerely,

John

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







Post#2781 at 05-25-2008 12:52 AM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
05-25-2008, 12:52 AM #2781
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Since Mexico is 2 decades ahead of the U.S. in the generational cycle, their 'emo kids' are a generation later than our Millennial emo kids. Emo is viewed as a total joke here and is only "practiced" by a small, small minority. It doesn't last past high school.

It seems more like the real deal in Mexico. The sense I'm getting is that these would-be Artists take the alienation found in Nomads and channel it into highly active feeling-based decision making. This has resulted in a massive emo culture, a war on that culture, suicide bombings, and more.







Post#2782 at 05-25-2008 01:27 PM by John J. Xenakis [at Cambridge, MA joined May 2003 #posts 4,010]
---
05-25-2008, 01:27 PM #2782
Join Date
May 2003
Location
Cambridge, MA
Posts
4,010

Dear Matt,

Quote Originally Posted by MichaelEaston View Post
> Since Mexico is 2 decades ahead of the U.S. in the generational
> cycle, their 'emo kids' are a generation later than our Millennial
> emo kids. Emo is viewed as a total joke here and is only
> "practiced" by a small, small minority. It doesn't last past high
> school.

> It seems more like the real deal in Mexico. The sense I'm getting
> is that these would-be Artists take the alienation found in Nomads
> and channel it into highly active feeling-based decision making.
> This has resulted in a massive emo culture, a war on that culture,
> suicide bombings, and more.
This comment about "would-be Artists" in relation to the emo
subculture is an interesting insight. We've inferred from things
like the London subway bombings that college-age kids in a 5th
turning population (the would-be Artists) commit "altruistic suicide
bombings" without the approval of their parents. This is in contrast
to fourth turning college-age kids who go to war WITH the approval of
their parents.

If indigenous-descendant college-age kids form "urban tribes" and
bash European-descendant emos, that would appear to be a different
kind of example of "altruistic violence" done without the approval of
their parents.

Sincerely,

John

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







Post#2783 at 05-31-2008 04:54 PM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
05-31-2008, 04:54 PM #2783
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Quote Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis View Post

You're right that I'm trying to knock these things out as standalone
"Brief Generational History" sections of my web log entries, in order
to start populating the "Country Studies" sections of my web site.
Right now, the only country where I've put in a history section is
Zimbabwe, and that's mainly an experiment to see if my software is
working properly.

Keep in mind that, as of two weeks ago, I had no idea that I would be
writing a generational history of South Africa. It was the explosive
news events that drove the issue for me, as it does for most things
that I write about on my web site.

So in answer to your question, I'd much rather that we do it in
reverse of the way you suggested -- you give me a list of the
countries you want to work on, and I'll work on different ones. The
only thing that would change that is an important news story about
one of the countries, and then we can figure out what to do in that
case -- I'll let you know I'm doing a story, or you can just send me
what you have on that country and let me use it.

I'm really excited about the Country Studies, and I appreciate the
help that you and Nathaniel and others have been giving me. The
Country Studies section of my web site will be, I believe, a major
scholarly achievement that we can all be proud of, and will provide
an information resource that is totally unique, and will also prove
the validity of generational theory for many scholars.

Thanks again for your help.

Sincerely,

John

John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
I'll try to tackle:

Afghanistan
Angola
Benin
Bolivia
Bosnia
Burundi
Cameroon
Chile
Congo
DRC
Egypt
El Salvador
Ethiopia
Eritrea
Georgia
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Honduras
Indonesia
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Kazakhstan
Kyrgyzstan
Latvia
Liberia
Libya
Madagascar
Malaysia
Mali
Mauritania
Mongolia
Montenegro
Mozambique
Nepal
Niger
Nigeria
Pakistan
Peru
Rwanda
Saudi Arabia
Serbia
Sierra Leone
Somalia
Slovenia
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Turkmenistan
Last edited by Matt1989; 06-13-2008 at 11:59 PM.







Post#2784 at 05-31-2008 05:21 PM by John J. Xenakis [at Cambridge, MA joined May 2003 #posts 4,010]
---
05-31-2008, 05:21 PM #2784
Join Date
May 2003
Location
Cambridge, MA
Posts
4,010

Dear Matt,

Quote Originally Posted by MichaelEaston View Post
> I'll try to tackle:

> Afghanistan Angola Argentina Bangladesh Belarus Benin Bolivia
> Bosnia Burundi Cameroon Chile Congo Cuba DRC Egypt El Salvador
> Ethiopia Eritrea Georgia Guinea Guinea-Bissau Honduras India
> Indonesia Ireland Italy Japan Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Latvia
> Liberia Libya Madagascar Malaysia Mali Mauritania Mongolia
> Montenegro Mozambique Nepal Niger Nigeria Pakistan Peru Rwanda
> Saudi Arabia Serbia Sierra Leone Somalia Slovenia Tajikistan
> Tanzania Turkmenistan
That's great! Thanks!

Let me take Bangladesh, Pakistan and India, since I did a fair amount
of work on them last year around the commemoration of the 50th
anniversary of Partition and the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.

When you work at Japan, take a look at the material on Japan in my
first book. There's a lot of material there you can just copy,
especially the logic by which Japan's Awakening era took the form of
becoming militaristic and imperialistic (almost the opposite of
"antiwar"), and how that unraveled into the utter craziness that led
to the Rape of Nanjing and the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

** Chapter 10 -- History of Asia
http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi-bin/D.PL?d=ww2010.book.asia#


Thanks again.

Sincerely,

John

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







Post#2785 at 06-04-2008 12:20 AM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
06-04-2008, 12:20 AM #2785
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Afghanistan Country Study

Afghanistan

We'll pick up Afghanistan's generational history in 1839. Afghanistan has several distinct saeculums stretching further into the past, but these have yet to be studied in detail from a generational standpoint.

-- Afghanistan: First Anglo-Afghan War – 1839-1842 (Crisis)
-- Afghanistan: Dost Mohammed – 1843-1863 (Recovery)
-- Afghanistan: Second Anglo-Afghan War – 1864-1884 (Awakening)
-- Afghanistan: The Iron Amir, Divisions, and Reforms – 1885-1919 (Unraveling)
-- Afghanistan: Various Conflicts and Reforms – 1919-1929 (Crisis)
-- Afghanistan: Rebuilding Period – 1930-1946 (Recovery)
-- Afghanistan: Women's Rights and Pashtunistan – 1947-1965 (Awakening)
-- Afghanistan: Division and the Republics – 1966-1977 (Unraveling)
-- Afghanistan: Soviet Invasion + Civil War – 1978-1992 (Crisis)
-- Afghanistan: The Taliban and Beyond – 1993-Present (Recovery)

By 1839, the British Empire had invaded Afghanistan (beginning the First Anglo-Afghan War) in the hope of gaining territory in the broader conflict known as “the Great Game,” where Russia and Britain competed for dominance in Central Asia. After installing a pro-British Shah, dissent among Afghanis grew into full-blown rebellion. The Crisis climaxed with the murder of the Shah, the reinstatement of Dost Mohammed and the destruction of the British army in 1842. By 1855, Britain and Afghanistan resumed relations, and in the intervening period between the first two Anglo-Afghan wars, Dost Mohammed attempted to secure control over his country, but was only met with mixed success.

In 1878 the British invaded Afghanistan again following a disagreement, thus launching the Second Anglo-Afghan War, but any Afghani rebellion fizzled and the British were able to control the foreign policy of Afghanistan for decades. Following the conflict, Abdur Rahman Khan rose to power, and he successfully resisted the attempts to divide Afghanistan by dissenting tribes, thus halting the societal decay in his country while helping to draw the boundaries of modern Afghanistan.

His son, Habibullah, instituted a series of reforms in the early 20th century, leaving Afghanistan a relatively secular and modernized country. He was assassinated in 1919, which began the rule of Amanullah Khan, who, upon taking power, attacked British-controlled India in 1919. This conflict is known as the Third Anglo-Afghan War. A stalemate soon followed, and the war-weary British returned control of foreign affairs to Afghanistan.

During his rule, King Amanullah enacted a series of reforms, including establishing diplomatic relations with other countries in an attempt to modernize Afghanistan. His reforms provoked a civil war with conservative tribal leaders, and in 1929, resistance forced him to abdicate the throne. Despite this, Amanullah's cousin Nadir defeated the resistance that same year.

In the recovery period, Nadir halted many of his predecessor's reforms (while subtly modernizing national infrastructure) and put down small uprisings that occurred during his reign while building a large military. In 1933, following an assassination, Zahir Shah was named King, and much like Amanullah, he worked with European nations with the goal of strengthening his country.

By the 1950s rifts were apparent in Afghani culture, demonstrated by the objection to the reforms of Prime Minister Daoud Khan from religious leaders. Discussion of women's rights was prevalent, as was the Pashtunistan issue, a conflict between Afghanistan and Pakistan over control of the land where the Pashtun ethnic group resides. Relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan came to a complete halt, and an economic crisis ensued.

Disillusion, class and ethnic divisions culminated in a coup led by Daoud in 1973, which established Afghanistan as a republic. However, the government was deadlocked and the instability continued. Another coup occurred in 1978 by those with a socialist agenda, and the new government appealed to the Soviet Union to help build its infrastructure, drawing the ire of traditionalist Afghanis. Covert support from the United States fueled attacks against the government, forcing the Soviet Union to intervene to help quell the violence.

The war dragged on until the Soviet Union withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, leaving a total of 1 million Afghanis dead and nearly 6 million displaced from their homes (many wound up in Pakistan). A period of anarchy soon followed before being replaced through rule by the Taliban in the late 1990s. In 2001, the United States invaded Afghanistan in response to the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The Taliban was deposed, and a republican government was installed. Resistance to the current government continues today.
Last edited by Matt1989; 06-04-2008 at 05:20 PM.







Post#2786 at 06-04-2008 10:28 AM by John J. Xenakis [at Cambridge, MA joined May 2003 #posts 4,010]
---
06-04-2008, 10:28 AM #2786
Join Date
May 2003
Location
Cambridge, MA
Posts
4,010

Dear Matt,

Quote Originally Posted by MichaelEaston View Post
> We'll pick up Afghanistan's generational history in 1839.
> Afghanistan has several distinct saeculums stretching further into
> the past, but these have yet to be studied in detail from a
> generational standpoint.

> By 1839, the British Empire had invaded Afghanistan (first
> Anglo-Afghan war) in the hope of gaining territory in the broader
> conflict known as “the Great Game,” where Russia and Britain
> competed for dominance in Central Asia. After installing a
> pro-British Shah, dissent among Afghanis grew into full-blown
> rebellion. The Shah was killed and the British army was destroyed
> in their retreat.

> In 1878 the British invaded again, but any Afghani rebellion
> fizzled; and the British were able to control Afghani foreign
> policy for decades. Following the conflict, Abdur Ramir rose to
> power, and he helped draw the boundaries of modern Afghanistan.
> His son, Amanullah, attacked India in 1919, beginning the Third
> Anglo-Afghan War, which resulted in the return of foreign affairs
> to Afghanistan. Afghanistan.

> King Amanullah enacted a series of reforms, including
> establishing diplomatic relations with other countries in an
> attempt to modernize Afghanistan. His reforms provoked a civil war
> with tribal leaders, and in 1929, resistance forced him to
> abdicate. Despite this, Amanullah's cousin Nadir defeated the
> resistance that same year and consolidated his rule while bringing
> about gradual modernization.

> This path continued for the next few decades, despite occasional
> setbacks such as the economic crisis that occurred in the 1960s.
> This culminated in a coup in 1973, which established Afghanistan
> as a Republic. Following disillusionment, another coup occurred in
> 1978, and the new government appealed to the Soviet Union to help
> build its infrastructure, infuriating traditionalists in the
> countries. Support from the United States fueled attacks, forcing
> the Soviet Union to intervene to help quell the violence.

> The war dragged on until 1989, when the Soviet Union withdrew
> from Afghanistan, leaving a total of 1 million Afghanis dead and
> nearly 6 million displaced from their homes (many of whom wound up
> in Pakistan). A period of anarchy soon followed before being
> replaced through rule by the Taliban. In 2001, the United States
> invaded Afghanistan in response to the attacks on the World Trade
> Center and the Pentagon, deposed the Taliban, and installed a
> Republic. Resistance to the current government continues
> today.
I've updated the Afghanistan Country Study:

** Afghanistan Country Study
http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi-bin/D.PL?d=ww2010.cs.af


This is a good general brief history of Afghanistan, but it does need
some sharpening up to be a generational history. It needs to use
words like "Awakening era," "Crisis era" and "Crisis war" to indicate
specific generational timeline markers.

For example:

> King Amanullah enacted a series of reforms, including
> establishing diplomatic relations with other countries in an
> attempt to modernize Afghanistan. His reforms provoked a civil war
> with tribal leaders, and in 1929, resistance forced him to
> abdicate. Despite this, Amanullah's cousin Nadir defeated the
> resistance that same year and consolidated his rule while bringing
> about gradual modernization.
This is a political history. To make it a generational history, what
were the fault lines among the tribal leaders? If it was tribe X
versus tribe Y, then when was the previous crisis war between X and Y,
and what happened to X and Y during the 1980s war? If possible, how
did the previous Awakening era values evolve into the reforms that
triggered the civil war?

Also, it doesn't hurt to put in a little boilerplate on how it all
works. Most of the people coming to this page will be coming
directly from google on a search for "history of Afghanistan," and it
doesn't hurt to give a newbie a few hints. For example, "by 1929,
the generations of survivors of the previous war between X and Y
disappeared, and the restraint that the war survivors showed
disappeared along with them." Or, one sentence I like to use when
it's appropriate is that "great ideas are born and developed during
Awakening eras, and are either implemented or exterminated during the
following Crisis era." Stuff like that can help somebody for whom
this page is the first exposure to the concepts of generational
theory.

This is a very good start, and it can be improved by a laser-like
focus on specific generational timeline events.

Sincerely,

John

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







Post#2787 at 06-04-2008 12:48 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
06-04-2008, 12:48 PM #2787
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

It's possible to see the entire period from 1979 to the present as a Crisis Era. A Communist takeover is itself a Crisis event, and whether it brings about massive resistance (Russia, 1917 or Afghanistan 1979) or quickly leads to the quelling of all opposition (most of central and southeastern Europe in the middle-to-late 1940s, China in 1950) determines whether Communist rule is the beginning (3T/4T cusp) or the end of a Crisis Era (4T/1T cusp). Communist rule implies a massive restructuring of nearly all social relationships -- one possible interpretation of totalitarianism, whether the totalitarianism is militarist, racist, or theocratic. People in positions of responsibility from an older order either become stooges, emigrate, go into the underground, or die.

It's hard to imagine Communists taking over any country except during a 4T -- not deep into a 1T, when the system succeeds in enforcing conformity in everything but perhaps mass culture, not in a 2T even if youth are prone to fall for crazy ideas but bona fide adults can still co-opt or even suppress radicalism, and definitely not in a the early or middle parts of a 3T when people are atomized -- except through an invasion. 3T rot at its worst destabilizes a country and compromises its institutions so that the society has no possibility of peaceful change when the social order implodes.

But much that applies to Communist rule applies to other forms of totalitarianism. Nazism and fascism had more tolerance for tradition and sentimentality (neither of which fit Marxist-Leninist culture), indeed fostering them as evidence of continuity from better times or as revivals of the 'virility' of some mythologized past. But as a rule, people who had the potential to run afoul of the system complied, fled, or died. In general, the more massive violence, such as the Night of the Long Knives, or the formal dissolution of any trace of democracy, such as the vote of the Italian Chamber of Deputies to disband in 1938, indicate a 4T.

The Taliban is itself a totalitarian movement, a theocratic ideology intent upon imposing severe limitations upon human existence in the name of something "greater". Afghanistan went from one totalitarian system, an alien Marxism-Leninism, to another, the Taliban.

Can 4T violence sustain itself for more than 20 years? That seems a possibility. Can one wave of 4T-like violence follow another after some short respite that solves little? In the case of Afghanistan, such is a possible interpretation. Nothing says that one wave of violence solves anything, or that the appearance of some peaceful respite leads invariably to a 1T. The immediate post-Communist government in Afghanistan in 1992 was unable to solve anything, let alone create any stability. Armed factions with their own scores to settle were unready for peace in the mid-1990s. Afghanistan seems to have gone from one Civil War to another from the Taraki coup through the current time.

The generational cycle does not preclude catastrophic incompetence (such as the Taliban giving sanctuary to al-Qaeda) and its consequences, one of which is the revival or renewal of a 4T Crisis through foreign intervention (this time the US). Although it would be an oversimplification to compare the US even under Dubya to the Soviet Union at any time, it's worth noticing the similarities that most Afghan citizens would recognize. Both Soviet Marxism and American capitalism are materialist and secular ideologies incompatible with Islam, and Russian and American culture must seem very similar to each other and exotic to Islamic sensibilities. Both rely heavily upon force to get their way; the military-industrial complexes of both the old USSR and the USA operate similarly both at home and abroad as societies within societies.

How well a 4T goes depends in part upon the competence and moral compass of leaders of individual nations. 4T Crisis Eras extending over 20 years are extreme but not impossible, and they might be described as waves of Crisis resulting from failure to create a lasting peace and domestic tranquility.







Post#2788 at 06-04-2008 03:08 PM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
06-04-2008, 03:08 PM #2788
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Quote Originally Posted by pbrower2a View Post
It's possible to see the entire period from 1979 to the present as a Crisis Era.
Disagree. It's hard to pin an end date on the Afghanistan crisis. 1992 seems like a good marker, but I wouldn't argue moving the date a few years in either direction. However, to seems that by the mid-1990s, the Crisis was over as most resistance and infighting had ended.

The Taliban grew as a movement right on the 4T/1T cusp, and I'd agree that such a movement could have only gained the territory it did in a 4T or early in a 1T. I'm willing to bet on the latter. Afghanis had grown tired of war, corruption, and crime, and were willing to turn to an austere group to put an end to such things.

This weariness, IMO, is more indicative of an early 1T than a 4T.







Post#2789 at 06-04-2008 03:18 PM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
06-04-2008, 03:18 PM #2789
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Quote Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis View Post
This is a very good start, and it can be improved by a laser-like
focus on specific generational timeline events.
OK, I'll try to get a re-write out soon.

*EDIT:* Here's an idea: I wanted to incorporate generational terms into the study, but I found it to be awkward when placed in the narrative as the Crisis dates were already listed. What I could try is to have a complete list of all the turnings (not just the Crises) and have the narrative support that list.
Last edited by Matt1989; 06-04-2008 at 03:25 PM.







Post#2790 at 06-04-2008 03:29 PM by Arkarch [at joined Nov 2004 #posts 209]
---
06-04-2008, 03:29 PM #2790
Join Date
Nov 2004
Posts
209

Quote Originally Posted by Mikebert View Post
This seems an arbitrary list. Why is the Panic of 1857 listed, but the more devastating Panics of 1837, 1873 and 1893 ignored?

I don't recall the financial difficulties of the French crown being a global financial crisis. Rather, it was a fatal political crisis for the French monarchy. In that time it was the Dutch who were at the center of the financial world and their crises in 1762, 1772 and 1782 would qualify as global financial crises.


As I noted above, I cannot see all the crises you listed as the major global financial crises. What criteria did you employ that let you select 1857 (and not 1837, 1873 or 1893) or 1789 (and not 1762, 1772 or 1782). It looks like you picked crises that happened to fall at the appropriate time, but this would be tautological.
The distinction I make regarding financial collapses is - does it affect a large portion of the population? Stock 1929 created massive unemployment. Tech Bubble 2000, while serious impact on many retirement plans, did not seriously affect society. The Black Tuesday of 1987 was also limited in scope. Whereas the housing crash starting in late 2005/2006 has far wider implications. My read of 1857 was that it also had far reaching impacts.

Its the impact on society that helps rank importance of a financial crash.
Actually the same for wars.







Post#2791 at 06-04-2008 05:19 PM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
06-04-2008, 05:19 PM #2791
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Quote Originally Posted by Arkarch View Post
The distinction I make regarding financial collapses is - does it affect a large portion of the population? Stock 1929 created massive unemployment. Tech Bubble 2000, while serious impact on many retirement plans, did not seriously affect society. The Black Tuesday of 1987 was also limited in scope. Whereas the housing crash starting in late 2005/2006 has far wider implications. My read of 1857 was that it also had far reaching impacts.

Its the impact on society that helps rank importance of a financial crash.
Actually the same for wars.
The panics of 1837, 1873, and 1893 affected all of society.







Post#2792 at 06-04-2008 05:26 PM by Cynic Hero '86 [at Upstate New York joined Jul 2006 #posts 1,285]
---
06-04-2008, 05:26 PM #2792
Join Date
Jul 2006
Location
Upstate New York
Posts
1,285

Tech bubble 2000 was the equivalent to the panic of 1921, the current housing bubble collapse is equivalent to the crash of 1929.







Post#2793 at 06-04-2008 05:31 PM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
06-04-2008, 05:31 PM #2793
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Quote Originally Posted by MichaelEaston View Post
OK, I'll try to get a re-write out soon.

*EDIT:* Here's an idea: I wanted to incorporate generational terms into the study, but I found it to be awkward when placed in the narrative as the Crisis dates were already listed. What I could try is to have a complete list of all the turnings (not just the Crises) and have the narrative support that list.
I updated the narrative.

There have been so many tribal issues over the last few centuries that it's difficult to keep track. The sources I worked with are insufficient in determining which groups had disagreements with their governments. Securing this information would take more time than I'm willing to give at this point.

Information was also lacking in the development of ideas from Awakening to Crisis. Instead of creating my own story of how it might have happened, I decided to leave it open.

------

As an aside, I have a complete study of modern Egypt:

http://fourthturning.com/forum/showp...&postcount=450

I also did the early history of the Ottoman Empire:

http://fourthturning.com/forum/showp...&postcount=604

I meant to finish it, but never did.







Post#2794 at 06-05-2008 02:00 PM by John J. Xenakis [at Cambridge, MA joined May 2003 #posts 4,010]
---
06-05-2008, 02:00 PM #2794
Join Date
May 2003
Location
Cambridge, MA
Posts
4,010

Dear Matt,

Quote Originally Posted by MichaelEaston View Post
> I updated the narrative.

> There have been so many tribal issues over the last few centuries
> that it's difficult to keep track. The sources I worked with are
> insufficient in determining which groups had disagreements with
> their governments. Securing this information would take more time
> than I'm willing to give at this point.

> Information was also lacking in the development of ideas from
> Awakening to Crisis. Instead of creating my own story of how it
> might have happened, I decided to leave it open.
I inserted your new narrative, but I made a bunch of editing changes
to emphasize the generational turnings. The content is exactly the
same (I think), but the wordly more strongly identifies the
generational issues.

Quote Originally Posted by MichaelEaston View Post
> As an aside, I have a complete study of modern Egypt:

> http://fourthturning.com/forum/showpost.php?p=205035&postcount=450

> I also did the early history of the Ottoman Empire:

> http://fourthturning.com/forum/showpost.php?p=214731&postcount=604

> I meant to finish it, but never did.
I inserted both of these, with only minor editing.

All three country studies are now updated on the web site:

** Afghanistan Country Study
http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi-bin/D.PL?d=ww2010.cs.af


** Egypt Country Study
http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi-bin/D.PL?d=ww2010.cs.eg


** Turkey Country Study
http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi-bin/D.PL?d=ww2010.cs.tu


Thanks! This is a big help!

Sincerely,

John

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







Post#2795 at 06-05-2008 04:14 PM by Cynic Hero '86 [at Upstate New York joined Jul 2006 #posts 1,285]
---
06-05-2008, 04:14 PM #2795
Join Date
Jul 2006
Location
Upstate New York
Posts
1,285

The afghan crisis era ended in 1997 at the earliest when the taliban consolidated power. The years between 1992 and 1997 included vicious street combat between rival warlords which devastated afghanistan's urban centers.







Post#2796 at 06-05-2008 07:31 PM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
06-05-2008, 07:31 PM #2796
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Quote Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86 View Post
The afghan crisis era ended in 1997 at the earliest when the taliban consolidated power. The years between 1992 and 1997 included vicious street combat between rival warlords which devastated afghanistan's urban centers.
It's a tough call, no doubt about it.

I think the Taliban's rise to power was in part due to repudiation of the events of the late 80s and early 90s.







Post#2797 at 06-05-2008 11:25 PM by 1990 [at Savannah, GA joined Sep 2006 #posts 1,450]
---
06-05-2008, 11:25 PM #2797
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Savannah, GA
Posts
1,450

Matt and John X,

I'm impressed by the country studies done for Afghanistan, Egypt, and Turkey. These are excellent! I really miss being part of the country studies project, but have quite a laundry list of excuses for disappearing for several months. I'm actually recovering right now from having been hit by a car a month ago on my campus (my lumbar 1 vertebra was broken and will be healing for some time). This is the cue for everyone to say "OMG! Are you okay?"

Anyway, my school year ends in one week exactly, and I'd like to spend some free time this summer doing more country studies as I once did for the U.S. and Mexico (and started but never finished for Cuba). Admittedly I am better at starting things than finishing them, but this project is a valuable contribution to generational theory and to social studies, even from lay people such as ourselves. If either of you have an assignment for me, I am eager to oblige.

-- Nathaniel
My Turning-based Map of the World

Thanks, John Xenakis, for hosting my map

Myers-Briggs Type: INFJ







Post#2798 at 06-05-2008 11:45 PM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
06-05-2008, 11:45 PM #2798
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by 1990 View Post
Matt and John X,

I'm impressed by the country studies done for Afghanistan, Egypt, and Turkey. These are excellent! I really miss being part of the country studies project, but have quite a laundry list of excuses for disappearing for several months. I'm actually recovering right now from having been hit by a car a month ago on my campus (my lumbar 1 vertebra was broken and will be healing for some time). This is the cue for everyone to say "OMG! Are you okay?"
-- Nathaniel
Yikes!!!

I am glad you're at least OK to post, Nathaniel. Hope your healing continues to go well.







Post#2799 at 06-06-2008 12:25 AM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
06-06-2008, 12:25 AM #2799
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Quote Originally Posted by 1990 View Post
Matt and John X,

I'm impressed by the country studies done for Afghanistan, Egypt, and Turkey. These are excellent! I really miss being part of the country studies project, but have quite a laundry list of excuses for disappearing for several months. I'm actually recovering right now from having been hit by a car a month ago on my campus (my lumbar 1 vertebra was broken and will be healing for some time). This is the cue for everyone to say "OMG! Are you okay?"

Anyway, my school year ends in one week exactly, and I'd like to spend some free time this summer doing more country studies as I once did for the U.S. and Mexico (and started but never finished for Cuba). Admittedly I am better at starting things than finishing them, but this project is a valuable contribution to generational theory and to social studies, even from lay people such as ourselves. If either of you have an assignment for me, I am eager to oblige.

-- Nathaniel
...the kind of stuff you just can't make up! Feel better.

There are some countries that we'll miss, so stay tuned.







Post#2800 at 06-06-2008 09:23 AM by John J. Xenakis [at Cambridge, MA joined May 2003 #posts 4,010]
---
06-06-2008, 09:23 AM #2800
Join Date
May 2003
Location
Cambridge, MA
Posts
4,010

Dear Nathaniel,

I'm so sorry to hear what happened. Are you in pain? Are you going
to recover completely?

Work with Matt to divvy up the countries. I generally only work on
countries that are making international news, so with 260 countries
we ought to be able to avoid running in to each other.

Another fertile area we've been overlooking is differentiating among
the various European countries. Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Italy,
Monaco, Poland, Czech Republic/Slovakia, Poland, etc., may all have
fought in WW II, but they still have individual stories.

Get well, Nathaniel. A lot of people are rooting for you.

Sincerely,

John

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