On 2002-01-30 08:23, madscientist wrote:

MSM, read my post that describes the extracurricular activities of the CIA.

That was an outstanding post, Robert, and this is something which we all need to start paying much closer attention to.

On 2002-01-30 08:26, Stonewall Patton wrote:

That was an outstanding post, Robert, and this is something which we all need to start paying much closer attention to.

Thanks for the compliments. Here is some more candy for all of you. http://www.theonion.com/onion3803/wdyt_3803.html

http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?...&group=webcast

Key phrases:

<font color="blue">
"...For the most part, Americans seem satisfied with the speech. Austin, Texas mechanic, Jason Hubert, was relieved that his leaders were 'in charge of the situation' and he no longer had to 'think about political stuff' himself..."

"...In fact, most Americans didn't think very deeply about any of it and were happy that corporate media watch-dogs over the government, such as CNN, ABC and CBS, were on the job critiquing the speech for them. 'If talk-show pundits on major networks agree that all this stuff Bush is saying is good for me, then I'm happy with it,' said Houstonian real-estate salesperson Sandy Douglin. 'After all, who am I to question or think about all this stuff?' ..."

"...'I shouldn't have to pick up books, start reading, and learn about how the world works or about US foreign policy,' she said. 'I should be able to find a corporate-funded politician to do all my thinking for me. But I think Bush is letting me down somehow. I keep getting this feeling like I'm in some kind of an endless circle. Oh, well. At least that terrorism stuff is gone for good, right?'..."</font>

Somehow, I think that this is very satirical.
_________________
Robert Reed III (1982)
---------------------------------------------
"Where they have burned books, they will end in burning human beings." -- Heinrich Heine
"Not to know is bad, but to refuse to know is worse." -- A Gambian Proverb

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: madscientist on 2002-01-30 08:55 ]</font>

It better be satirical. But I'm afraid there are a lot of people out there who might think that way. :sad:

Kiff '61

Justin '77 said:

"A critical part of 'torture' or 'abuse' is that
it is involuntary."

Well, obviously, but ANOTHER critical part is that the victim must be subjected to pain (or perhaps *extreme* humiliation, fear, etc). Otherwise, everything that is done to a prisoner (merely locking him up) would be considered torture, and that's ridiculous.

The Gitmo prisoners were never in pain. If they consider what were essentially straightjackets to be humiliating, they have pretty thin skins, especially since they were all told ahead of time why the procedures were being done.

"Blindfolds alone as torture? No. Handcuffs alone as torture? No. Gloves alone as torture? No. Long, noisy plane trips alone as toture? No. Put it all together and???"

Still "NO".

Stonewall said:

"The initial request to use torture came from Justice Department officials."

*Minor* officials, and the courts said "NO". (Note that they had to make the request in the first place; this suggests that they are not in the habit of using torture.)

"The next time I am in a used car lot, will you have me prove to you that a shady salesman is being completely honest about the car of your choice? No thanks, I'll pass. If you trust the salesman with respect to this car, then you buy it. Don't criticize me for walking away from it."

This analogy only applies if the salesman invited Consumer Reports to thoroughly check out the car entirely, and Consumer Reports declares that the car is an excellent shape.

You keep pointing out that politicians are known to lie. DUHH. But why would the International Red Cross, the British media, and Amnesty International all lie about this?

The problem is not that I am believing politicians, but that you are believing even more questionable sources. There is nothing new about the government being accused of torture; these accusatiuons go back for years before the current administration. There is always a background noise of this sort about all issues. But if you believe them all, you wind up concluding that UFO's built the pyramids, the CIA assasinated Kenneddy, etc.

Again, I am only refuting the silly arguments you have posted that gave already been picked to death and found wanting. Physical restraints *do not* equal torture. You posted statements that they did.

I stipulate that the CIA may be secretly using torture, (and if this is true, I'm extremely opposed to it) but if they are, I doubt they only just started in the last year. Clinton would be as guilty as Bush.

Very interesting point you made about events speeding up since 9/11, Madscientist. Perhaps spiraling out of control, as could be expected early on in a 4T, *despite* certain groups' attempts to keep us locked into late 3T? This November should be *very* interesting, as to whether we will have reached the regeneracy phase of the Millennial Crisis by then.

On 2002-01-30 13:10, jds1958xg wrote:
Very interesting point you made about events speeding up since 9/11, Madscientist. Perhaps spiraling out of control, as could be expected early on in a 4T, *despite* certain groups' attempts to keep us locked into late 3T? This November should be *very* interesting, as to whether we will have reached the regeneracy phase of the Millennial Crisis by then.

I doubt that we will enter regeneracy before 2004. Most likely, things will just continue to go downhill, and disorder in public life will accelerate, and the bickering will become more severe. Besides, we will need to find a consensus first, and I don't see that happening by this November. Sure, the Crisis is a little early, but I don't think that we will see an acceleration of the 4T, for reasons posted in the Civil War Anomaly thread in the Book and Theories of History section of these forums. Instead, I think that we are likely to see more of a delay between the catalyst and the regeneracy. I think that Boomers must totally dominate congress before the nation embarks on its new trajectory.

As for speeding up, I wasn't mentioning the speeding up of the saeculum. Rather, I was mentioning the acceleration of events, which is something that always happens in Fourth Turnings. One can recall the chain of events from 1569 to 1572, from 1675 to 1678, from 1773 to 1776, from 1859 to 1861, and from 1929 to 1933. Crisis eras tend to be periods in which the historic process accelerates. For instance, in 1933 alone, the nation implemented several decades worth of reforms, and even some more in 1935. I think that we are seeing a similar rush of events. 9/11, recession, India/Pakistan, anthrax, USA Patriot Act, and now the collapse of Enron, Global Commerce, and Kmart are some of the major events to happen since 9/11. The catalyst is usually a series of events that reflect the torn civic fabric, and we are seeing just that. But however, we still likely have until 2005 until the nation regroups.

Check this out:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...liban_prison_1

Taliban Prisoners Plead To Go to Cuba

SHIBERGAN, Afghanistan (AP) - Jailed fighters of the fallen Taliban shout the name of their former foe, but no longer in anger. "We want to go to an American prison," many plead...

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: msm on 2002-01-30 15:42 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: msm on 2002-01-30 15:43 ]</font>

UFO's DIDN'T build the pyramids? Now you're probably going to tell me there's no Santa.

Where will this all end?

Madscientist, you pretty well summed up how I see it, too. One reason I believe the Civil War was a special case was that both sides were home grown, which allowed for a very rapid escalation. On the other hand, it took two years for the Great Depression/World War II Crisis to reach regeneracy, while the *catalyst* for the Glorious Revolution Crisis was drawn out over a period of two years. So, I can easily see your projections being right on the mark, which is just as well, in a way. That way, hopefully, the rest of the Millennial Crisis should be pretty much put back on schedule.

In reference to another discussion I saw on this thread not long ago, as a late wave Boomer myself, I can easily see how very old survivors from one Prophet Generation would be most upset by the developments of the next Awakening. The only exception to that rule I can imagine is if the losers of a 'Culture Wars' during the last Unraveling see what they believe is their cherished values finally getting another chance in that next Awakening.

On 2002-01-30 21:58, jds1958xg wrote:
In reference to another discussion I saw on this thread not long ago, as a late wave Boomer myself, I can easily see how very old survivors from one Prophet Generation would be most upset by the developments of the next Awakening. The only exception to that rule I can imagine is if the losers of a 'Culture Wars' during the last Unraveling see what they believe is their cherished values finally getting another chance in that next Awakening.

I remember a discussion about this coming up sometime ago. The Missionary were not particularly fond of the Boomers. One question is, how did the Transcendentals feel about the Missionary, since the Missionary had plenty of contact with them?

[quote]
On 2002-01-30 22:05, madscientist wrote:

On 2002-01-30 21:58, jds1958xg wrote:
In reference to another discussion I saw on this thread not long ago, as a late wave Boomer myself, I can easily see how very old survivors from one Prophet Generation would be most upset by the developments of the next Awakening. The only exception to that rule I can imagine is if the losers of a 'Culture Wars' during the last Unraveling see what they believe is their cherished values finally getting another chance in that next Awakening.

I said in my earlier post that I personally think that a successful 4T will make the Old Idealists much less tolerant toward rebellious New Idealists. You're probably right in that the Idealists associated with the 'winning' side are more annoyed than the others, but it's hard to judge, since the Missionaries had pretty much congealed and settled their differences before the 4T culmination even arrived. We lack first-hand information.

I remember a discussion about this coming up sometime ago. The Missionary were not particularly fond of the Boomers. One question is, how did the Transcendentals feel about the Missionary, since the Missionary had plenty of contact with them?

That's a very good question, but it's hard to answer. There are still many people alive with good first-hand recollections of the Missionaries, but as far as I know no one is now alive who has any first-hand knowledge of the Transcendentals, and if there is he/she is smart not to admit it! :smile:

Thus, we have anecdotal evidence about the Missionaries. But I don't know if anyone gave any thought to writing down the reactions of Old Transcendentals to young Missionaries. I don't know that it would have occurred to anyone to record reactions by Generation at that time.

On 2002-01-30 21:43, jds1958xg wrote:
Madscientist, you pretty well summed up how I see it, too. One reason I believe the Civil War was a special case was that both sides were home grown, which allowed for a very rapid escalation. On the other hand, it took two years for the Great Depression/World War II Crisis to reach regeneracy, while the *catalyst* for the Glorious Revolution Crisis was drawn out over a period of two years. So, I can easily see your projections being right on the mark, which is just as well, in a way. That way, hopefully, the rest of the Millennial Crisis should be pretty much put back on schedule.

One worrying (sort of) element: we appear to lack any sort of strong foreign power to oppose us, or any obvious major natural disaster, though either could clearly change.

Why is this worrying? Well, I'm certainly glad we don't have such at the moment, but I do not that without a reason to rally together, the odds that the Boomers will break down along one or more Culture War lines rise.

I think we are still in 3T, but look right now at the reactions as it begins to appear that America is winning the Terrorism War (it isn't exactly a war, and we may not really be winning it, but it looks that way by appearances). Already, the same factions and groupings are recrystalizing out of the apparent common will of a few months ago.

It's interesting to note a very old parallel that might apply: when Rome was a small city-state with many equal or superior foes, they were able to come together fairly reliably in the crunch. In the last century of the Republic, as Rome had already become the dominant Mediterranean power, this situation changed, and instead foreign powers became 'clients' of internal factions of Rome, compete with some nasty civil wars.

{snip earlier HC quote)

Good points. I'm wondering if those Prophets who have read and "bought off on" 4T, Generations, and the whole theory will have a more benign attitude about the Awakening than non-4T Prophets. For us (Eric Meese, Marc Lamb, Brian Rush, Susan Brombacher, S&H themselves, and all the other Boomers), should we live that long, we'll be posting each other and asking if 2T has begun yet and starting threads on those crazy New Prophets. :lol:

[/quote]

I think it may depend on which factions 'win' the Culture Wars, and how those factions manage to incorporate their ideals into the society. That will determine, in turn, what the New Idealists will be rebelling against and what form their rebellions will take.

Ask yourself this: what would the New Idealists have to stand for in order to make you loathe the next Awakening? Because it may happen.

Historically, if S&H are right, Old Prophets show a tendency to get more and more driven and idealistic as time passes. The same Missionaries and Trancendentals who seemed moderate and reasonable at 50 were often talking about extermination and mass imprisonments and ultimate wars at 70.

The oldest Boomers are now around 60. The youngest are barely into middle age. As Marc would point out, right now is Generationally the time for the height of 3T, so it's hard to judge where the Generations are going by what they are right this minute.

By the way, not too long ago I ran across an unnerving suggestion, dating to the 40's, that Germany should be eradicated by mass sterilization of German nationals, since the events of WW II had proven them inherently uncivilizable. I'm pretty sure a Prophet suggested it, and fortunately the rest of his fellows (and the Lost!) were not so inclined. But it's an example of how extreme Old Prophets can sometimes get.

You raised several good points, Hopeful Cynic. Concerning anecdotal evidence of how Transcendentals and Missionaries got along, S&H mention that on pages 204 and 205 of their book 'Generations'. It would appear that, thanks to the Civil War anomaly, the Transcendentals still retained enough cultural influence during the early part of the Missionary Awakening to help shape and guide it. S&H mention Wendell Phillips and Susan B. Anthony in this regard. They also mention that it was the Missionaries who built the Lincoln Memorial.

Hopeful Cynic, you mentioned the lack of a really dangerous foreign enemy this time around. Unless China becomes that enemy, or else an Islamic Fundamentalist superstate does form in the next few years, that is a real concern. It reminds me of how, by the late 1850's, we had crushed one potential enemy (Mexico), and settled all of our real differences with the other serious potential enemy (The British Empire). At the time, any other would be enemies would have needed British permission to pursue the quarrel to our shores. On the other hand, not only were Germany and Japan real concerns in the early 20th, but their characteristics were such that each Missionary faction could see in them a far *worse* version of their 'Culture Wars' opponents stateside. Worse enough to make a congealment more palatable. As for the comparison to Rome in the 1st Century BCE, read Alfredo G.A. Valladao's book 'The Twenty-First Century Will Be American'. He also compares where we are today with the late Roman Republic or early Roman Empire. Also, in reference to extreme suggestions at the end of World War II, the suggestion was also bandied about of forcibly converting the Japanese people to Christianity, no doubt in similar circles, and shot down just as fast.

The Transcendentals may have mentored the Missionaries, but they were not entirely compatible. Apparently the younger but more conservative Missionaries viewed the Transcendentals as a bit too radical. But the generation that the young'uns were rebelling against-the Gilded-had repudiated the Transcendentals' values. So the two Prophet generations were in opposition to the same Establishment.

Interesting - and valid - point. Here I am also reminded of a little reading project I undertook years ago, when I first encountered Generational Theory - that of reading works specifically by Transcendental and Missionary authors. I soon had a gut reaction that was much more positive towards Transcendental authors like Nathaniel Hawthorne or Edgar Allen Poe, than towards the likes of Jack London or Upton Sinclair. I also remembered reading in the S&H book 'Generations' that the Transcendentals, like modern day Boomers, had a 'New Age' movement (they called it Spiritualism) that was at least partially non-Christian in nature. No such thing developed very far among the Missionaries, who's 'modernist' faction claimed to be as thoroughly based on Christian values as the traditionalists. Could it be that Boomers do indeed have more in common with the Transcendental Generation than with the Missionaries, and if so, what might that portend for the current 4T?

On 2002-01-31 21:57, jds1958xg wrote:
Interesting - and valid - point. Here I am also reminded of a little reading project I undertook years ago, when I first encountered Generational Theory - that of reading works specifically by Transcendental and Missionary authors. I soon had a gut reaction that was much more positive towards Transcendental authors like Nathaniel Hawthorne or Edgar Allen Poe, than towards the likes of Jack London or Upton Sinclair. I also remembered reading in the S&H book 'Generations' that the Transcendentals, like modern day Boomers, had a 'New Age' movement (they called it Spiritualism) that was at least partially non-Christian in nature. No such thing developed very far among the Missionaries, who's 'modernist' faction claimed to be as thoroughly based on Christian values as the traditionalists. Could it be that Boomers do indeed have more in common with the Transcendental Generation than with the Missionaries, and if so, what might that portend for the current 4T?

I think that Boomers definitely resemble the Transies. Basically, the leftist persona of Boomers is dominated by the New Age and Ecology movements.

Deep ecology has evolved into a fundamentalist spiritual movement. In this new era, we shall see the influence of deep ecology and many New Age religions rise, along-side with Christian influence.

What we can expect, then is for the economy and become much more ecologically friendly for starters. I'll add more later.

On 2001-09-13 16:27, Neil Howe and William Strauss wrote:
"Is this it?" our readers are asking. Is September 11, 2001, the beginning of the Fourth Turning? Was this attack the catalyst?

Yes. This is IT. We have crossed the threshold.

Recall what we wrote, in The Fourth Turning (pp373-4), about the catalyst: "A spark will ignite a new mood?. An intial spark will trigger a chain reaction of unyielding responses and further emergencies?. At home and abroad, these events will reflect the tearing of the civic fabric at points of extreme vulnerability-problem areas where, during the Unraveling, America will hav eneglected, denied, or delayed needed action. Anger at 'mistakes we made' will translate into calls for action, regardless of the heightened public risk. It is unlikely the catalyst will worsen into a full-fledged catastrophe, since the nation will probably find a way to avert the initial danger and stabilize the situation for a while. The local rebellion will probably be quelled, terrorists foiled, fiscal crisis averted, disaster halted, or war fever cooled. Yet even if dire consequences are temporarily averted, America will have entered the Fourth Turning."

Thus far, all of this has happened. On September 11, 2001, we were attacked. This attack has reflected the tearing of the civic fabric here, and abroad. America was sent into a spiral. Soon after Towerfall, America was hit with anthrax attacks. The economy went into a spiral, and several industries came near collapse. The government stabilized this quickly, however. Then in January, we saw the collapse of Enron, KMart, and Global Commerce. Towerfall, and the collapse of Enron is raising many concerns, and calls for heightened action, regardless of the risk. The nation refuses to let this die. The citizens and the government are not keen on delayed needed action. In fact, we are now yelling for some action. So the situation was largely stabilized, but the mood is definitely different. Sure, one might say that "nothing has chaned", but the psyche of Americans has changed, drastically.

Was this terrorist attack a jarring "spark" in history, of the sort we described, substantial enough to catalyze a crisis mood. Of course. Will it? That still is open to question--but it could.

Has it catalyzed a Crisis mood? Yes.

Changes in how we think about events can determine the direction and outcome of the events themselves. Right now, people are beginning to talk the rhetoric of a Fourth Turning. Does that mean we're entering one? The link between the recent 911 attack and our overall location in history certainly seems suggestive.

The situation of September 11th has been stabilized. But even so, the rhetoric of a 4T is not decreasing. It is RISING. The politicians are demanding action. The President is calling for action. Ralph Nader is calling for action. The civilians are calling for action. The situation today is MUCH better than in September or October, but the rhetoric is stronger than ever.

Recall how, in every prior Fourth Turning, the combatant-enemies have used images of the injustice, decadence, or civic weakness of an opponent's recent Third Turning as motivators. Japanese leaders used images of 1920s-era America to convince themselves and their followers that Japan could defeat a much larger nation. Picture this playing out among Islamic fundamentalists, if they are indeed our enemy (or among our enemies) in the next Fourth Turning. Magnify an image of 1990s-era America--with all of its casual pleasures, sex scandals, globalism, legalism, individualism, careless follies, celebrity carnivals--and you've got a picture of everything these militants despise about America.

Even Bush is calling on Americans to shed their materialism. Bush is telling Americans to move away from all of this. Now, we need to tell Bush to get away from those corporations.

Recall, also, how in every Fourth Turning, people looked back, after the fact, and wondered why so many had been so blind and never saw it coming. Now, in light of recent events, we can glimpse why. People do see it coming-but never take it seriously. It's amazing how many threats we "sort of" know are out there, but we just never get around to focusing on. A lot of people "sort of" saw a war over slavery coming, but were utterly surprised when it erupted. Ditto with fascism--or, now, terrorism. We all "knew" it was coming. Or did we?

Yes, we all "knew" that this was going to happen. We all "knew" that there was "rot in the system" before the Enron scandal. Both of these are raising fundamental questions. One can say that Towerfall of a victory for the Right, while Enronfall was a victory for the Left.

But let's get back to the central question. Is this the Fourth Turning trigger? As we all know, the answer will lie mainly in how we react to this--and to how our adversaries react to our reactions, and (let's confess) to any number of purely accidental circumstances.

As Marc Lamb points out, the last time we had a big bomb go off on Wall Street was near the end of the post-WWI "Red Scare." The scare was a reaction to an anarchist / Bolshevist bombing campaign, including mail bombs and coordinated multi-city blasts (on July 2, 1919) that succeeded in partially destroying the residence of Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer. It spawned the notorioius Palmer raids, which in turn may have led to the famous Wall Street bombing of 1920 that killed 20 people. But what did the Red Scare itself trigger? An isolationist reaction, a fervor to shut out the world, a demand to punish as many perpetrators as we could catch and to round up and send the rest "back where they came from." Above all, it triggered a desire to avoid the larger problem--social, economic, political--underlying the violence. We wanted "normalcy." In short, America moved more deeply into a Third Turning, not yet into a Fourth.

However, Americans do NOT want "normalcy". Americans do not want to avoid the problems anymore. We want to fix this, NOW!

In the days, weeks, and months ahead, how can we tell whether this terrorist attack will become a Fourth Turning catalyst? Here are some hallmarks of a reaction that would indicate this:

1. <LI> A desire to describe the problem in maximalist rather than minimalist terms--in ways that would sweep other problems (fiscal, economic, cultural, moral) into this one big problem.

1. The problem is being described in Maximalist terms on both sides of the political spectrum. The war against terrorism is an example of this. The leftist's probe of Enron is another example.
   
   <LI> A movement toward grand solutions that would permanently solve the problem rather than solutions that could be interpreted as delay or diversion.
   The call by Bush to form several civilian groups is very indicative of this.
   
   <LI> An impulse toward total reaction (total war, destruction of enemies) as opposed to calibrated action (legalistic enforcement of rules, "justice" for enemies).
   Definitely.
   
   <LI> A distinct shift, in public life, away from individualism (civil liberties) and toward community purpose (survival).
   Again, only only needs to look at the forming of several "corps".
   
   <LI> The end of the petty arguments of the Third Turning-the blue-zone / red-zone "culture wars," rooted in old Second Turning debates--that may begin to feel ridiculous, even dangerous.
   We have moved away from the petty arguments. Now, the arguments actually matter. The arguments are now about national issues.
   
   <LI> The increasing irrelevance of the celebrity culture. Will anyone care about Michael Jackson, or Michael Jordan, in the familiar Third Turning way? Recall how, once the last Fourth Turning started, the flagpole sitters came down, less because they themselves felt any great new purpose than because the public just stopped paying attention.
   The celebrity culture is not yet dead, but we are definitely making progress in this direction.
   
   <LI> A sharp negative turn in America's perception of immigration (and, in time, of potential immigrants' perceptions of America)--and of "globalism" more generally. Recall the old Wired magazine forecast that "open:good; closed:bad" was a permanent attitude. Will our society now move toward "closed:good; open:bad"? Will we see a move toward nativism in our culture and treatment of foreign-born Americans, and toward a sort of do-it-elsewhere-but-not-here isolationism in foreign policy? What will "Globalism"mean now? Will people begin fearing it, not merely as a possible threat to jobs, but for how it might make fanatics out of people halfway around the world? The nativist right could easily join the anachist (anti-IMF) left on this one.
   Basically, Americans are much more against immigration. Bush has not become an isolationist. However, the sentiment against corporations is currently very high. Both the leftist and rightists in society is becoming against corporate globalization. Here in STL, A "Walk for Capitalism" was overwhelmed by anti-capitalist. Anti-capitalist sentiment, among both the right and left, is rapidly increasing.
   
   <LI> A movement by each generation toward a new archetypal role, in keeping with the phase of life it is about to enter. Are Boomers overcoming narcissism? Gen Xers circling the wagons around family? Are Millennials emerging as young heroes. (Keep an eye on media treatment of Millennials. Will the criticism give way? Will the pop culture change? Will youth fare be less gross, less violent?)
   The recent actions by Bush seem to suggest so. But then again, I am still taking a "wait and see" attitude on him. Xers have circled the wagons in March 2000. Treatment of Millies? I would have to say that the treatment of Millies is well. The pop culture is still morphing, but we can see the direction it is taking. Besides, when was the last time anyone has really heard anyone criticize the teenagers?
   
   <LI> A new willingness to pay a human price to achieve national purpose. Will military plans resemble Kosovo-or Iwo Jima? Will we try to rely on exquisite technologies to reduce the risk of military deaths, or will we rely on human courage to reduce the risk of technological failure?
   Thus far, we are still relying on exquisite technologies.
   
   <LI> A shattering of consumer confidence. Is the economy still expected to veer up and avoid a recession, or will we soon see newly dark forecasts about a likely recession-or worse. What will happen to the Dow and Nasdaq? With every major global economy sinking even before Tuesday, will there be talk of a "perfect storm." As for the direct impact of the event itself, how should we assess the damage to the WTC towers, to the travel and entertainment industries, to America's global reputation for inviolability, and to the immediate household lurch toward consumer caution and liquidity? The longer the up-cycle-and it's been a long one-the graver the risk that the trip down could be vertiginous.

Thus far, the economy has improved since November. US Spending levels have decreased in December. http://www.msnbc.com/news/697130.asp
Jobless claims are rising again. So the verdict is still out on this.

Depending on what happens in all these areas, the result of the terrorist attack may be either a Fourth Turning or a shift toward the nastier edge of a Third Turning mood--followed, in short while, by a shift into the first isolationist phase of a Fourth Turning, perhaps keyed more by domestic than global arguments.

It is worth pointing out that, typically, Fourth Turnings begin with an isolationist, nativist, anti-market-and-anti-global-power phase, filled with huge emphasis on the rebirth of national community--before entering a more optimistic, secular, and global phase. The Revolutionary War and Great Depression-WWII Fourth Turnings were both like that. (The Civil War never did have a "global" phase.) Don't assume that, if we do in fact enter a Fourth Turning, that the U.S. is suddenly going to go all over the world with a sword of terrible swift justice. History suggests a road that loops around a bit more.

American citizens are more isolationist, except to "exterminate terrorism". As for anti-market, and anti-global-power, this is rising rapidly.

Right now, it's too early to tell. One can see evidence both pro- and con- for each of the indicators (1) through (10) described above. Consider President George W. Bush. In some ways, yes, he fits the aging prophet archetype-fixated on values ("good versus evil," he says) and broadly defining the target ("sponsors" as well as perpetrators). But in other ways, both in his uncertain demeanor on the day of the event and his easy deference to a Silent-dominated board of advisors (who, as they did in the China spy plane incident, are already defining the U.S. reaction in terms of procedure, timetables, evidence, custody, multilateral alliances, and so on), he has a ways to go before he fills his archetype.

True. We are still seeing 3T era behavior, but then again, High-era behavior didn't culminate until 1967.

Or consider the public as a whole. Are the Silent, as yet, sufficiently diminished in institutional influence? And are most Boomers any more ready than the President to leave the shadow of their Silent mentors and assume the Gray Champion mantle? Boomer columnist Charles Krauthammer stated the terms of this generational difference very succinctly: "Secretary of State Colin Powell's first reaction to the day of infamy was to pledge to 'bring those responsible to justice.' This is exactly wrong. Franklin Roosevelt did not respond to Pearl Harbor by pledging to bring the commander of Japanese naval aviation to justice. He pledged to bring Japan to its knees. You bring criminals to justice; you rain destruction on combatants. This is a fundamental distinction that can no longer be avoided."

Compare the Prophet and Artist endowments in society at this point. The Artist endowments have nearly been rendered null. The Prophet endowments are clearly dominant. The Nomad endowments are large and growing in society, and the Hero endowments are returning to society.

And what about younger generations? Are Gen Xers truly ready to assume a new midlife role as social anchors, family protectors, and buck-stopping managers. And can Millennials--the oldest of whom are just now celebrating their 19th birthday--yet be expected to participate in a collective rite of passage and become fully aware of their new generational role? (Recall: At the time of the Boston Tea Party, the oldest Republicans were age 31; at the time of the Great Crash, the oldest G.I.s were age 28).

Millies are ready. They are already assuming this role. Now, they only need someone to lead them. Millies are definitely set to receive a trial.

This leads, finally, to the issue of timing. It is still early for a Fourth Turning. In terms of the age of the next civic generation, we are only at 1920 (the House of Morgan bombing, again!) on the G.I. Generation calendar or at 1761 (when colonists were still celebrating Britain's triumph over French Canada) on the Republican Generation calendar. We're only two years beyond the Progressive calendar with the Civil War. Yet, as we wrote, the Civil War crisis began ahead of schedule, leaving the Transcendentals--a very Boomerlike generation--unchecked by younger generations.

This is only one example, of course, but its record suggests a very real danger if this 911 terrorist incident does indeed trigger a new turning. That danger could be averted, to some degree, if the aging Silent and rising Gen Xers each assert themselves more than the Compromisers and Gilded did in that other saeculum. This may be possible, given that the Boomers are a smaller-cohort generation than Transcendentals (18 years, vs. 30 years).

This has largely been answered in the Civil War Anomaly thread.

To answer the core question--"Is this the start of a Fourth Turning?"--and to answer the perhaps more important question--will the next Fourth Turning end in triumph or tragedy?--we will simply have see how events unfold, and how each of today's generations play their scripts. It won't be long before we find out.

This is the 4T, and this can likely be verified. We are not going to experience another Anomaly. Everything is going the way things should be.

Stay with it, Mr. Reed, and never, never, never... give up the fight. :smile:

Incidently, another clue to whether this is a 4T or not would be if there was a clamp down of immigration into the U.S. S & H theory says that immigration tends to be high in a 3T and low in a 4T, indicating that a big change in this area is to be expected at the start of a 4T.

Immigration does seem to be more controversial lately, but it is not clear to me yet that real change is going to occur.