Having just finished reading Frederick Lewis Allen's two books, Only Yesterday and Since Yesterday, informal histories of, respectively, the 1920's and 1930's in America, I have gained a new perspective on how the beginning of the last Crisis *felt* to the American Everyman.

While the Crash of 1929 did resound around the country (and around the world), and a chain of discouraging events was set off, people weren't sure, immediately, that there was a definite break with the immediate past. Indeed, many people thought that all the panic about the increasing economic troubles was just more "ballyhoo" that would, when forgotten, fade away as rapidly as did the corresponding hype about various notorious murder trials of the 20's or the Lindenbergh episode. But the fact is that it didn't.

People didn't change overnight. One thing that surprised me was that they didn't collectively lose their senses of humor - plenty of sardonic takes on the Crash and its immediate aftermath were published and relished by the American people during the 30's. However, the collective sense of urgency didn't go away, seeming instead to snowball. And overwhelmingly people realized - some more quickly than others - that there were more important concerns than that which they'd been focusing on for the past decade.

The Stock Market Crash of 1929 didn't immediately rocket people into Pearl Harbor - it didn't even immediately rocket them into the Dust Bowl, or the heart of the New Deal. No, for at least three to five years, people wandered around, increasingly baffled by this unremittingly negative chain of events that defied anyone's ability to comprehend. All of the "experts" on the institutions of the past were mystified and unable to explain what had occurred or to recommend a good course of action. The primary emotions of ordinary Americans for those initial years of the Depression seemed to be a mix of bewilderment and fatalism. How had this happened? What was going to happen next? When was the other shoe going to drop?

Sound familiar? It did to me.

I guess that it will always be a temptation to make things fit your own personal "gut feeling" about 9/11. I guess I'll stick with saying that the events of the present leave me feeling bewildered and fatalistic. :smile:

On 2001-10-16 14:51, allybear '62 wrote:
I don't think the anthrax is coming from the US for this reason...only someone totally unfamiliar with the way American businesses work would think that either Tom Brokaw or Tom Daschle would open their own mail, or even personally see a strange letter!

The whole anthrax thing is definitely making me feel more and more like a 4T is coming, if it's not here already. The fear level, even among people who are not usually emotional, is extremely high.

Actually, because Turnings are predicated on the way people feel about and react to events, it may not matter who's actually behind these attacks. If it turns out to be some lone American nutcase doing this, the American reaction is going to be far different now than if they had done this during the summer. I can absolutely see the anthrax cases being lumped into the 3T "Summer of Gary Condit and Shark Attacks" of 2001 (Wow, that wasn't that long ago and it seems like a million years).

After 9/11 though, these anthrax cases just FEEL connected to the terrorist attacks and that's going to be enough for most people, regardless of who's actually doing it. When we find out who it is, if this truly is the 4T, we'll invent a rationalization for our feelings by connecting these attacks to a larger Crisis issue.

If it is an American doing this, my guess is that this summer there would have been an enormous trial that turned into a media circus - now they may be shot for treason.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Delsyn on 2001-10-16 17:20 ]</font>

On 2001-10-16 14:05, Jennifer 70 wrote:
Hello all! I don't know if any of you remember me, I was a poster here a long-long time ago then dropped off for awhile. I still came back occassionally - especially for E2K and for 9-11. I haven't posted because by the time I found something I wanted to respond to somebody else had already said what I wanted to better than I could.

Regarding whether or not we are in a 4T - I still don't know. Given that within a week of E2K I was sure we were still in a 3T I think not knowing after a month is a pretty good indication that we are heading in the direction of the crisis. Personally, I believe that we are in the twilight period between the end of one era and the beginning of another. Things have definitely changed, but how they have changed is not yet concrete.

I feel like I have one foot in a 3T and one foot in a 4T. I still watch survivor, but I also watch the news more. I am taking advantage of lower airfares for an impromptu trip to New Orleans, and I'm setting aside a couple days to disaster-proof my house. Part of me is acting "normally", and part of me is battening down the hatches. Occasionaly my behavior is almost manic - I deliberately ignore an undercurrent of fear and uncertainty and throw myself into having a good time.

Even if 9-11 is not the catalyst for the crisis, it is clearly the catalyst for the transformation of the national mood. I believe the mood of the country must start changing 4-5 years before the catalyst for that to have as great an effect as it does. If I'm right about the mood change, look for the 2002 elections for a major revolution. Not from Democrat to Republican or vice-versa, but from Silent to Boomer leaders.

Final comment - about the Anthrax scare. I agree with Jenny Genser that something doesn't feel right about it. It feels more like one of our home-grown loonys targeting the democrats and the media - those "damn liberals".

Jen

It does sort of have that look to it, and I say that as one of the people who are usually annoyed at the 'damn liberals'. I sincerely hope this isn't an American or a Westerner behind this.

On 2001-10-16 17:19, Delsyn wrote:

If it is an American doing this, my guess is that this summer there would have been an enormous trial that turned into a media circus - now they may be shot for treason.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Delsyn on 2001-10-16 17:20 ]</font>

That raises another interesting point: if this is a 4T, how long do you think it'll be before somebody does somethat really stupid, expecting to be treated as he/she/they would have been six months ago?


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: HopefulCynic68 on 2001-10-16 19:49 ]</font>

Hopefulcynic68 said:

That raises another interesting point: if this is a 4T, how long do you think it'll be before somebody does somethat really stupid, expecting to be treated as he/she/they would have been six months ago?

Answer: right about now.

Thank you, Mr. Butler, for responding very reasonably to my post. I will attempt to do so likewise to yours. (Forgive my reference to to as 'Mr. Butler' as I use it not as a address of 'disrespect,' but rather the opposite.)

[Mr. Butler] For some reason, you seem to be getting emotional and personal.

[Mr. Lamb] Yes. While I took your comment, 'Why stick with integer arithmetic? Why Third Turning or Fourth Turning? Let?s get real!', a little too personal given the notion that with a 1) 37% (love those 'numbers'!) leadership share to a generation 'born in the previous fourth turn' and 2) given such traits as theorized to such a 'generation' by Strauss and Howe, who designed the very website we are posting on...

yes, while these 'numbers' lead me to think that--while no one posting here believes in 'said theory,' that no one here cares about 'numbers' or the determinate factor of 'said numbers,' and would rather just pretend this 'generation' doesn't even exist!--these 'numbers still suggest, according to 'theory', we are 3T?

I dunno why I take it so damn personal, Mr. Butler! I am tremendously flawed, needless to say, unlike the rest of America. :smile:

[Mr. Butler] My intent was neither.

[Mr. Lamb] Aw gee. I got to ramblin' so... I forgot what that 'intent' was, Mr. Butler.

[Mr. Butler] I can respect an opinion that we aren?t yet in a Fourth Turning, or that we might back out of whatever state we are in, or especially that we will encounter far more intense states further on.

[Mr. Lamb] Thanks. I think is a generational thing, this 'more intense states' notion that is. I mean, who woulda thunk we'd a done in WWII what we couldn't do in WWI? Or that the 'Red Scare' in 19 and a '20 wasa the 'Red' welcome mat in a 19 and a '32? Go figua, huh?

[Mr. Butler] I am not intending to be spokesman for a ?conventional wisdom.? I certainly am not intending to enforce belief in any majority opinion I am not yet aware of. I?ll leave it to the Religious Police to enforce orthodoxy.

[Mr. Lamb] 'Religious Police to enforce orthodoxy'? Here at T4T.com? In America, the land of the 'free'? The home of the 'brave'?

"Give me liberty, Or give me Death!"

[Mr. Butler] Frankly, I believe those on this forum are by their perspective distinctly unorthodox. To buck the common wisdom in a place of uncommon wisdom might or might not be wise. Take your choice.

[Mr. Lamb] Or 'Give me' ummm...


'choice'?





<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2001-10-16 22:06 ]</font>

More evidence of 3T?

I can think of no sensible way of testing this against comparisons with previous 4Ts, since none of the catalysts involved attacks on the United States or its individual citizens by diffuse enemies, but I wonder if the prevalence of anthrax hoaxes indicates 3T mentality. I mean, did anyone ride through the streets of colonial America shouting "The British are coming!" knowing they were not? I am sure there were U-boat scares along our coasts during World War II, but were any of them intentional hoaxes? Did slave masters report hoax runaways in 1861? Or at any time?

Of course, WWII is not comparable, being a dozen years into its Turning, in the S&H scheme of things.

The mental outlook of Americans determines the turning. Remember the Unabomber? If Theodore Kaczynski was mailing his bombs after September 11, there would have been no doubt in our minds that the Unabomber was tied to bin Laden or someone like him. Before September 11, anthrax envelopes probably would have been called Unabomber II. But remember that, after the Oklahoma City bombing, law enforcement authorities were detaining Arabs until McVeigh was identified and captured. I guess the only thing I can conclude is that our current situation allows any number of baddies to toy with our minds. (I am certainly confusing myself. :smile: )

A lot of us are, mentally, in the 4T already. Perhaps a lot of people, idiots mailing flour and talcum powder to scare people and costing outrageous amounts of testing and antidote money, are not. When enough of us have mentally turned, the hoaxes should stop, our purpose in life having turned more serious.

It is worth noting again what Mr. Butler notes of Marc Lamb, "For some reason, you seem to be getting emotional and personal."

While it is now conventional wisdom, at this website, that we have entered the fourth turn (despite the fact that a certain 'elder' generation retains immense power in order to 'create History'), my 'personal' fear is that this is the ultimate setup for the BIG DISAPPOINTMENT.



For 26 years (beginning around 1974, the year S&H called a 'climax') 'trust in Washington' has never risen above 50 % (while hitting a new low of 20% just a few years ago).

With the events of 911 this 'trust' factor has spiked upward in a manner not seen since polling began back in the '30s.

While one might be tempted to think, 'Wow, this is it. See!' I would caution that most certainly not in 1929, 1930, 1931, and only maybe in 1932, would one have seen, or sensed such a dramatic 'spike' in this 'trust' factor.

The 'public trust' in Washington was left in ruins in the post-Vietnam/Watergate years. In my opinion, it will be roughly 40 years (two generations) before it is restored again. Not 26.

Hence this 'spike' could very well turn out to be a big disappointment for many.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2001-10-17 07:31 ]</font>

On 2001-10-16 20:40, alan wrote:




Hopefulcynic68 said:





That raises another interesting point: if this is a 4T, how long do you think it'll be before somebody does somethat really stupid, expecting to be treated as he/she/they would have been six months ago?





Answer: right about now.

There was something on the news about a call somebody made to 911 (the phone number, not the date) threatening the use of anthrax because "they" (acting as an Arabimmigrant of some kind) were fed up with US behavior. Of course when you call 911 from a wired phone, they know exactly where you are. This guy was calling from a phone booth in a shopping mall, where a policeman just happened to be on duty. The 911 operator tipped off the policeman by radio, who looked over and witnessed the guy hanging up the phone. Walked over and arrested him. He is being held on a federal charge against "threatening the use of a weapon of mass destruction" for which the max penalty is life in prison.

Something really stupid? How about CBS announcing a sitcom about a romance between two people who lost their spouses when the World Trade Center was destroyed? The operative word being 'sitcom'.

I don't know if it's true or not - I read about it elsewhere on the 'net - but if it is it's sure stupid.

I read about it too. I also think it is stupid. But then again, maybe they don't grasp that we are in a 4T. But they'll find out when a mob burns down CBS.

On 2001-10-17 11:48, Matthew Elmslie wrote:
Something really stupid? How about CBS announcing a sitcom about a romance between two people who lost their spouses when the World Trade Center was destroyed? The operative word being 'sitcom'.

I don't know if it's true or not - I read about it elsewhere on the 'net - but if it is it's sure stupid.

I'd love to get a URL for that reference. I'm not saying that somebody in Hollywood wouldn't be that stupid, but I'd like to see some confirmation before I go spreading that little tidbit around.

On 2001-10-17 12:12, Delsyn wrote:
I'd love to get a URL for that reference.

ask, and ye shall be linked.....

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...342oct12.story


TK

Your wish for an URL is my command. And yeah, the people at CBS must be nuts floating such a thing.

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/eo/2001..._comedy_1.html

On 2001-10-17 12:39, Lis '54 wrote:
Your wish for an URL is my command. And yeah, the people at CBS must be nuts floating such a thing.

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/eo/2001..._comedy_1.html

Morons - my industry is staffed with morons!

And this just in in the "Jackasses in the news" Department:

Daytona Beach: Student arrested for anthrax hoax

http://www.msnbc.com/local/DAYTONA/M104425.asp

As related to several previous posts - I think this kid's in SERIOUS trouble.

Sigh. Turnings come and go but human stupidity is eternal.

On 2001-09-15 11:32, sv81 wrote:
Each of us can do our part. Once the segment that attempts to profit from the hysteria and rage now approaches you, shun them. Don't encourage such marketing. Don't buy 9-11-01 on video. Don't replay the violence over and over. Don't romanticize the loss. Part of moving on, history wise, is to look forward. Remember the dead but don't dwell on the consumerism of terrorism.

On 2001-10-16 19:45, HopefulCynic68 wrote:

On 2001-10-16 14:05, Jennifer 70 wrote:


Final comment - about the Anthrax scare. I agree with Jenny Genser that something doesn't feel right about it. It feels more like one of our home-grown loonys targeting the democrats and the media - those "damn liberals".

Jen

It does sort of have that look to it, and I say that as one of the people who are usually annoyed at the 'damn liberals'. I sincerely hope this isn't an American or a Westerner behind this.

Must have me confused with another poster. The only thing I remember posting about anthrax was an article about a punk rock group called "Anthrax" on the bioterrorism thread.

On 2001-10-17 11:48, Matthew Elmslie wrote:
Something really stupid? How about CBS announcing a sitcom about a romance between two people who lost their spouses when the World Trade Center was destroyed? The operative word being 'sitcom'.

I don't know if it's true or not - I read about it elsewhere on the 'net - but if it is it's sure stupid.

A sitcom??? I agree, not a sitcom, Matt--that would be stupid and insensitive beyond belief. It would probably take at least a full saeculum for even the most hardened Nomad cynic to dare poke fun at the 911 attack on TV. Perhaps during the circa Twenty-Seventy Unravelling??? More likely not even then-- for example, we have yet to see a sitcom set against the backdrop of Pearl Harbor or Gettysburg. Gallows humor doesn't seem to play very well on television in any Turning.

However, a Fourth Turning romantic DRAMA set in the aftermath of WTC might not be so far-fetched. A few (more?) years into the 4T, such a story might give comfort and hope to tens of thousands -- perhaps even millions -- of people who by then may have lost spouses to the war effort, and search for an elusive bit of happiness. Recall the popularity in the last 4T of wartime romance movies like 'Casablanca', that were filmed while WW2 was still going on.

Around the year Twenty-Ten, perhaps even as early as Twenty-Oh-Five, I can actually see a post-911 romantic drama becoming a runaway hit.

just a bit of a trivia since the subject of how the entertainment biz is relating to the possibility of a 4rth turning having begun sprang up.

did anyone ever notice that james cameron set the apocalyptic war in the terminator movies in the year 2027?! i wonder if mr. cameron really knows anything about cyclical patterns of history or if this was just a lucky guess?



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: enjolras on 2001-10-17 18:16 ]</font>

There are always idiots like that. A toy company once wanted to market a toy atom bomb that makes "real atomic smoke"...in Japan.

On 2001-10-17 17:36, Jenny Genser wrote:

On 2001-10-16 19:45, HopefulCynic68 wrote:

On 2001-10-16 14:05, Jennifer 70 wrote:


Final comment - about the Anthrax scare. I agree with Jenny Genser that something doesn't feel right about it. It feels more like one of our home-grown loonys targeting the democrats and the media - those "damn liberals".

Jen

It does sort of have that look to it, and I say that as one of the people who are usually annoyed at the 'damn liberals'. I sincerely hope this isn't an American or a Westerner behind this.

Must have me confused with another poster. The only thing I remember posting about anthrax was an article about a punk rock group called "Anthrax" on the bioterrorism thread.

I think I was the original poster, actually, now that I look at the thread.

ok, since hollywood seems to want some potential tv show ideas based on the 911 tragedy and terrorism, here are some ideas that were recently submitted to me from my girlfriend via the Taliban Entertainment Network.

MONDAYS:
8:00 - "Husseinfeld"
8:30 - "Mad About Everything"
9:00 - "Suddenly Sanctions"
9:30 - "3rd Rock From the Sand"
10:00 - "Allah McBeal"

TUESDAYS:
8:00 - "Wheel of Terror and Fortune"
8:30 - "The Price is Right If Usama Says Its Right"
9:00 - "Children Are Forbidden From Saying The Darndest Things"
9:30 - "Afganistan's Wackiest Public Execution Bloopers"
10:00 - "Buffy The Yankee Imperialist Dog Slayer"

WEDNESDAYS:
8:00 - "Mullah's Place"
8:30 - "When Northern Alliance Attack"
9:00 - "Two Guys, a Girl, and a Pita Bread"
9:30 - "Just Shoot Everyone"
10:00 - "Veilwatch"

THURSDAYS:
8:00 - "Fatima Loves Chachi"
8:30 - "M*U*S*T*A*S*H"
9:00 - "Veronica's Closet Full of Long, Black, Shapeless Dresses
and Veils"
9:30 - "Sand Trek: The Next Generation"
10:00 - "Diagnosis: Heresy"

FRIDAYS:
8:00 - "Judge Bin Laden"
8:30 - "My Two Baghdads"
9:00 - "Survivor...I Hope"
9:30 - "Achmeds Creek"
10:00 - "No-witness News"

SATURDAYS:
8:00 - "Let's Mecca Deal"
8:30 - "Allahwood Squares"
9:00 - "This Old Tent"
9:30 - "No Sex in the City"
10:00 - "Mullah's Place"

SUNDAYS:
8:00 - "Who's Goat Is it Anyway?"
8:30 - "The Bedouin Bunch"
9:00 - "My Three Huns"
9:30 - "The Sultan of Queens"
10:00 - "I Dream of Jihad"

Hey Enjolras, the new T.V. schedule is really funny. Here and I thought you were another of the humorless, government employee/media people. I got a good laugh.

Seriously, do you agree that how the 911 event is marketed says alot about if we continue in a 3T mentality, or recognize the crisis for what it is? Those who want to cash in on trouble, such as hoarding WTC postcards the day of the event (how stupid), or weave the circumstances of the loss into a sitcom, (yeck), degrade themselves and trivilize what has happened. Some disasters can be woven into tasteful entertainment. The movie Titanic comes to mind. However, the WTC event is being raised for its shock value. I think I'll voice my concerns to CBS.

Peter Travers has an interesting article in the most recent Rolling Stone (the one with a flag instead of a pop star on the cover). In it, he discusses his experience watching the movie "Glitter" a few days after WTC. After squirming through this film, the audience suddenly erupted in applause. Why? the studio didn't have time to airbrush out the WTC. People reacted to the image of the **WTC buildings themselves** as if they were heroes.

I saw a somewhat similar post whose location I have lost. In it, a father discussed his 5-year son's reaction to a small statue of the WTC (he also had the Statue of Liberty & the Empire State Building). Again, the buildings seemed to symbolize a lot of things besides painful memories.

Looks like Hollywood may have gotten it wrong again -- seeing the towers might make us proud rather than upset...

On 2001-10-17 23:34, pindiespace wrote:
Peter Travers has an interesting article in the most recent Rolling Stone (the one with a flag instead of a pop star on the cover). In it, he discusses his experience watching the movie "Glitter" a few days after WTC. After squirming through this film, the audience suddenly erupted in applause. Why? the studio didn't have time to airbrush out the WTC. People reacted to the image of the **WTC buildings themselves** as if they were heroes.

I saw a somewhat similar post whose location I have lost. In it, a father discussed his 5-year son's reaction to a small statue of the WTC (he also had the Statue of Liberty & the Empire State Building). Again, the buildings seemed to symbolize a lot of things besides painful memories.

Looks like Hollywood may have gotten it wrong again -- seeing the towers might make us proud rather than upset...

A good friend of mine who's a film critic described the exact same experience when she suffered through "Glitter". She pointed out in her review that when someone we love dies we don't destroy all of their photographs, we remember the good things that their photos bring up.

No 4T stuff here, just a little ticked off at how stupid my industry can be sometimes.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Delsyn on 2001-10-18 00:16 ]</font>