Originally Posted by Huey P. Newton

All welcome Iraq, the 51st state, which, whether they like it or not, will be "a democracy, not a theocracy"
Joe Lieberman

I expect the United States to rule Iraq as a colony for the next few years and if evangelical Christians or people supporting them are running Iraq, they will be encouraging Evangelical Christian groups (although not in public) to convert the Iraqi people to Evangelical Christianity.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

I don't find it hard to imagine at all.

Ms. Austen's statements do ring true about the mood and motivations of most Americans. Her mistake is in thinking Bush is motivated the same way as most of his fellow citizens. He isn't. He doesn't share their fear and insecurity. He just takes advantage of them.

Bush's attuides in some respects are inline with a large minority, if not a majority of Americians, he is very religious and base his political convinctions around his religious beliefs. John Howard and Tony Blair are deeply religious men, however their attuides is only shared by a small minority of the British and Australian public.

Originally Posted by The Pervert

My girlfriend in Canada is quite happy with her government-paid-for health care. It's enough to keep her from moving to the US, all by itself. Therefore, she wouldn't agree with 'Cram' on either count.

Australia has a health system similar to Canada's. I would rate the quality of it quite good, expect for the long waiting lists for elective surgery and lack of Medicare coverage in Dental services. I am in no position to comment about the Americian health system.

From what I have heard about the Americian health system. That the quality of health services in the USA are excellent, if you the means to pay for it. If you do not have the means, you get either a second rate HMO system of health care or no health coverage expect in dire emergencies.

Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec

What underlies the strong public support for war in Iraq is the reluctant conclusion by a majority of Americans that we may very well need to take some unpleasant steps - despite our distaste for them - to reduce the odds that we will be subjected once again to a series of horrific attacks.

That does not mean Americans crave peace any less than before. If anything, the vivid news coverage from Iraq has brought home more starkly than ever the bitter costs of war, and probably increased Americans' thirst for peace.

Americans would like nothing more, after a long stretch of anxiety about war, terrorism and the economy, to cast their worries aside and embrace a carefree summer.

Elizabeth Auster

This brings to mind a scene from Caddyshack (1980) where Judge Smails says to caddy Danny Noonan...

"I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. I didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them. How about a fresca?"

KICK THEIR ASS AND TAKE THEIR GAS


THIS ROCKS

As we approach the second anniversery of 9/11, have our two authors ever come out with their opinion on whether it was the catalyst or not? (I don't mean the article they posted a few days later on what to look for)

Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec

As we approach the second anniversery of 9/11, have our two authors ever come out with their opinion on whether it was the catalyst or not? (I don't mean the article they posted a few days later on what to look for)

I don't expect them to formally call the Turning until the Regeneracy takes hold. That could be as early as next year, as late as Twenty-Oh-Eight, or perhaps even a couple years after that.

So I wouldn't hold my breath.

I know I said we would know if 9-11 was the catalyst by Jan 1, 2005. In fact, by analogy with earlier 4Ts, I thought we would be pretty sure by Jan 1, 2004. Even if things had not hit the Regeneracy, they were usually well on their way by 2 years and a few months past the catalyst. Conversely, "sparks" usually seem to fade within a couple years. I thought by now we would be either going over the edge or pulling back...instead we seem to be riding the edge, with both 3T and 4T characteristics. The closest historical analogy I can think of is the way Slavery was a "hot" issue throughout the 1850s (maybe that bodes ill for the future), or *maybe* things before the Revolutionary War. Whichever event becomes seen in the future as the Catalyst, I think it will be related to 9-11 if not being 9-11 itself. Maybe Sunday, someone will use V-X or a "dirty" bomb to kill a couple thousand spectators at a football game, and that will become the Catalyst or the Regeneracy. Or maybe Bush will pull something off in his War Against Terrorism before the election that will snowball. Or maybe we will go another several years before Something Big happens. But 9-11 is either the Catalyst or a foreshadowing thereof.

***

Originally Posted by Tom Mazanec

I know I said we would know if 9-11 was the catalyst by Jan 1, 2005. In fact, by analogy with earlier 4Ts, I thought we would be pretty sure by Jan 1, 2004. Even if things had not hit the Regeneracy, they were usually well on their way by 2 years and a few months past the catalyst. Conversely, "sparks" usually seem to fade within a couple years. I thought by now we would be either going over the edge or pulling back...instead we seem to be riding the edge, with both 3T and 4T characteristics. The closest historical analogy I can think of is the way Slavery was a "hot" issue throughout the 1850s (maybe that bodes ill for the future), or *maybe* things before the Revolutionary War. Whichever event becomes seen in the future as the Catalyst, I think it will be related to 9-11 if not being 9-11 itself. Maybe Sunday, someone will use V-X or a "dirty" bomb to kill a couple thousand spectators at a football game, and that will become the Catalyst or the Regeneracy. Or maybe Bush will pull something off in his War Against Terrorism before the election that will snowball. Or maybe we will go another several years before Something Big happens. But 9-11 is either the Catalyst or a foreshadowing thereof.

Tom,

I have responded to your post in the "Phony Fourth" thread.

The article is about the efforts of five women, whose husbands died on 9/11, to learn more about what happened. The questions are pasted below, with the link to the article after that.

Why were 29 pages of the 9/11 committee report personally censored at your request?
Where are the "black boxes" from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

Where are the "voice recorders" from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

Why can?t we gain access to the complete air traffic control records for Flight 11 and Flight 175?

Where are the airport surveillance tapes that show the passengers boarding the doomed flights?

When will complete passenger lists for all of the flights be released?

Why did your brother, Jeb Bush, the governor of Florida, personally go to the offices of the Hoffman Aviation School and order that flight records and files be removed? These files were then put on a C130 government cargo plane and flown out of the country. Where were they taken and who ordered it done?

http://www.nypress.com/16/53/news&columns/feature.cfm

I have a couple of sentences of this in my new sig (as much as there's room for). I'm going to post two full paragraphs here, from page 410 of Bob Schieffer's new book This Just In: What I couldn't tell you on TV

We had been through one of the worst days in all of American history, but it had brought out our best. In Congress, at Ground Zero - where rescue workers continued to search for the missing - and all across the country, people were telling each other, we will not allow this to stand. I was seeing the kind of America that I had remembered in the days before Kennedy's assassination, before the lies of Vietnam and Watergate had sapped our innocence and idealism and left us a cynical people, a people that had grown rude and often uncaring. We had been told in those years that the government was the enemy, but in the days after 9-11, we came to understand that the government was not the enemy - the government was just us, doing together what we could not do alone.

Some would say we are a different country since 9-11. But I am not so sure. I have been around along enough [sic] to believe we are again the country we used to be. The heroes of my youth - the soldiers, the firemen and policement - are heroes again. In those days after 9-11, I think we came to realize that we had somehow forgotten. We realized once more what real heroes are, and that we need them, and that we need each other as well. The real heroes are those who are able to muster the know-how and courage in the face of danger to do what they would do in normal circumstances. We saw that over and over on September 11, and in the days that followed. People pulled together as they had not pulled together since World War II. Everyone wanted to help.

In some ways, I think it can feel like 3T because we've blocked that day out of our consciousness. It can feel like 3T because some things are still unraveling, even faster than before. But the tea is definitely in the harbor.

Gosh, I hate to open an old thread, wherein all those old wounds might come crashing down upon these many 4Ter wannabes... but, let's go with a blast fom the past:

• 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. -- William Strauss and Neil Howe

With their penetrating, albeit rapid, insight on possible societal ramifications of 9/11, these guys may have hit the nail on the cyclical head: ergo...

• BOSTON WINS WORLD SERIES AFTER 86 YEARS!...
  
  The last time they won the World Series... the first World War was about to end... Lucky Lindy was a teenager dreaming of flying across the ocean... John Kennedy was an infant... penicillin didn't exist...TV didn't exist... radio was just starting...

Hmm, do the math... who really knows, eh? :wink:

Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate

Gosh, I hate to open an old thread, wherein all those old wounds might come crashing down upon these many 4Ter wannabes... but, let's go with a blast fom the past:

• 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. -- William Strauss and Neil Howe

With their penetrating, albeit rapid, insight on possible societal ramifications of 9/11, these guys may have hit the nail on the cyclical head: ergo...

• BOSTON WINS WORLD SERIES AFTER 86 YEARS!...
  
  The last time they won the World Series... the first World War was about to end... Lucky Lindy was a teenager dreaming of flying across the ocean... John Kennedy was an infant... penicillin didn't exist...TV didn't exist... radio was just starting...

Hmm, do the math... who really knows, eh? :wink:

So you're basing your historical analysis on a baseball game? And you criticize Meece for using planets?

Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate

Gosh, I hate to open an old thread, wherein all those old wounds might come crashing down upon these many 4Ter wannabes... but, let's go with a blast fom the past:

With deepest condolences to those who lost friends and loved ones in 9/11, we are supposed to go back from time to time and check progress via the authors' list. Plus, it's quite moving to read the other first responses, also.

I was blown away by Bob Butler's amazing post, and just had to quote it here also for us to read again:

My crystal ball is coming up, ?Answer hazy, try again later.? The 1929 stock market crash changed the mood of the country, but no consensus on broad action was ready at the time. There is a difference between being wakened to an urgency that something has got to be done, and having a firm handle on what has to be done. By Pearl Harbor, the Essex class carriers and Iowa class battleships already well under construction. We had already made up our minds to go big government world power. Time wise, we are much closer to the crash than to Pearl. I believe we will start looking at problems and debating them, but we will not have answers for quite some time. Without answers we can?t march to transform society. Much of the energy expended early will be wasted. By the time we have answers, the Silent will be aged out of power, the Boomers will have their parking breaks removed, the Millenials will be aged into maturity.

I will quibble with one oft repeated complaint of Dubya?s people, especially Powell. I suspect this will be an international crisis. I suspect a new definition of human rights and an international enforcement of human rights is a likely outcome. I count the Balkans, Somalia, Middle East, East Timor, the embassy bombing and the USS Cole as earlier minor catalyst events, not enough to trigger the mood change, but part of the issues that must eventually be systematically addressed. Thus, I don?t see the pause to build an international coalition as weakness, but a portent of the main thrust of the crisis. The world uniting to solve common problems is a good thing. An idea that we can remake the world all by ourselves would have been a bad thing.

Some crises feature an ?On to Richmond? early phases where people believe a quick easy military solution will allow us to return to the old status quo. As Lincoln put it in his second inaugural, ?All knew that this (slave) interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding.? I am seeing a shadow of this. While some see the need to flex muscles, no one off this web site is yet foreseeing fundamental and astounding changes.

My wild guess is that Dubya is heir to Hoover, not FDR. He will attempt a brute force military effort to maintain the status quo. He might find that superpowers swatting terrorists is much like hunting house flies with a rifle. The 2004 elections might be interesting. Will anyone run on the platform, ?If you want peace, work for justice??

The other little gritch that has me scratching my head is the common idea that 911 will bring on recession or depression as consumer confidence fails. The fix for the last depression was a vast increase in military spending. Thus far, I have heard little about increasing taxes to rebuild the military. All I?ve heard is that we might have to shelve the missile defense system in order to keep fighters on runway alert near all our major cities. OK, we?re only a few days in, but we clearly are no where near ?fundamental and astounding.? So far as I can tell, Dubya is going to try to fight his all out war on a peacetime economic footing.

Bob, I cannot believe you wrote this on 9/14 and have nailed so many details 3 years later! Wow!

Originally Posted by Barbara

Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate

Gosh, I hate to open an old thread, wherein all those old wounds might come crashing down upon these many 4Ter wannabes... but, let's go with a blast fom the past:

With deepest condolences to those who lost friends and loved ones in 9/11, we are supposed to go back from time to time and check progress via the authors' list. Plus, it's quite moving to read the other first responses, also.

I was blown away by Bob Butler's amazing post, and just had to quote it here also for us to read again:

My crystal ball is coming up, ?Answer hazy, try again later.? The 1929 stock market crash changed the mood of the country, but no consensus on broad action was ready at the time. There is a difference between being wakened to an urgency that something has got to be done, and having a firm handle on what has to be done. By Pearl Harbor, the Essex class carriers and Iowa class battleships already well under construction. We had already made up our minds to go big government world power. Time wise, we are much closer to the crash than to Pearl. I believe we will start looking at problems and debating them, but we will not have answers for quite some time. Without answers we can?t march to transform society. Much of the energy expended early will be wasted. By the time we have answers, the Silent will be aged out of power, the Boomers will have their parking breaks removed, the Millenials will be aged into maturity.

I will quibble with one oft repeated complaint of Dubya?s people, especially Powell. I suspect this will be an international crisis. I suspect a new definition of human rights and an international enforcement of human rights is a likely outcome. I count the Balkans, Somalia, Middle East, East Timor, the embassy bombing and the USS Cole as earlier minor catalyst events, not enough to trigger the mood change, but part of the issues that must eventually be systematically addressed. Thus, I don?t see the pause to build an international coalition as weakness, but a portent of the main thrust of the crisis. The world uniting to solve common problems is a good thing. An idea that we can remake the world all by ourselves would have been a bad thing.

Some crises feature an ?On to Richmond? early phases where people believe a quick easy military solution will allow us to return to the old status quo. As Lincoln put it in his second inaugural, ?All knew that this (slave) interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding.? I am seeing a shadow of this. While some see the need to flex muscles, no one off this web site is yet foreseeing fundamental and astounding changes.

My wild guess is that Dubya is heir to Hoover, not FDR. He will attempt a brute force military effort to maintain the status quo. He might find that superpowers swatting terrorists is much like hunting house flies with a rifle. The 2004 elections might be interesting. Will anyone run on the platform, ?If you want peace, work for justice??

The other little gritch that has me scratching my head is the common idea that 911 will bring on recession or depression as consumer confidence fails. The fix for the last depression was a vast increase in military spending. Thus far, I have heard little about increasing taxes to rebuild the military. All I?ve heard is that we might have to shelve the missile defense system in order to keep fighters on runway alert near all our major cities. OK, we?re only a few days in, but we clearly are no where near ?fundamental and astounding.? So far as I can tell, Dubya is going to try to fight his all out war on a peacetime economic footing.

Bob, I cannot believe you wrote this on 9/14 and have nailed so many details 3 years later! Wow!

Bravo, Mr. Butler.

Originally Posted by cbailey

Originally Posted by Barbara

Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate

Gosh, I hate to open an old thread, wherein all those old wounds might come crashing down upon these many 4Ter wannabes... but, let's go with a blast fom the past:

With deepest condolences to those who lost friends and loved ones in 9/11, we are supposed to go back from time to time and check progress via the authors' list. Plus, it's quite moving to read the other first responses, also.

I was blown away by Bob Butler's amazing post, and just had to quote it here also for us to read again:

My crystal ball is coming up, ?Answer hazy, try again later.? The 1929 stock market crash changed the mood of the country, but no consensus on broad action was ready at the time. There is a difference between being wakened to an urgency that something has got to be done, and having a firm handle on what has to be done. By Pearl Harbor, the Essex class carriers and Iowa class battleships already well under construction. We had already made up our minds to go big government world power. Time wise, we are much closer to the crash than to Pearl. I believe we will start looking at problems and debating them, but we will not have answers for quite some time. Without answers we can?t march to transform society. Much of the energy expended early will be wasted. By the time we have answers, the Silent will be aged out of power, the Boomers will have their parking breaks removed, the Millenials will be aged into maturity.

I will quibble with one oft repeated complaint of Dubya?s people, especially Powell. I suspect this will be an international crisis. I suspect a new definition of human rights and an international enforcement of human rights is a likely outcome. I count the Balkans, Somalia, Middle East, East Timor, the embassy bombing and the USS Cole as earlier minor catalyst events, not enough to trigger the mood change, but part of the issues that must eventually be systematically addressed. Thus, I don?t see the pause to build an international coalition as weakness, but a portent of the main thrust of the crisis. The world uniting to solve common problems is a good thing. An idea that we can remake the world all by ourselves would have been a bad thing.

Some crises feature an ?On to Richmond? early phases where people believe a quick easy military solution will allow us to return to the old status quo. As Lincoln put it in his second inaugural, ?All knew that this (slave) interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding.? I am seeing a shadow of this. While some see the need to flex muscles, no one off this web site is yet foreseeing fundamental and astounding changes.

My wild guess is that Dubya is heir to Hoover, not FDR. He will attempt a brute force military effort to maintain the status quo. He might find that superpowers swatting terrorists is much like hunting house flies with a rifle. The 2004 elections might be interesting. Will anyone run on the platform, ?If you want peace, work for justice??

The other little gritch that has me scratching my head is the common idea that 911 will bring on recession or depression as consumer confidence fails. The fix for the last depression was a vast increase in military spending. Thus far, I have heard little about increasing taxes to rebuild the military. All I?ve heard is that we might have to shelve the missile defense system in order to keep fighters on runway alert near all our major cities. OK, we?re only a few days in, but we clearly are no where near ?fundamental and astounding.? So far as I can tell, Dubya is going to try to fight his all out war on a peacetime economic footing.

Bob, I cannot believe you wrote this on 9/14 and have nailed so many details 3 years later! Wow!

Bravo, Mr. Butler.

Ditto - I couldn't agree more with cb and Mr Butler. 8)

Originally Posted by BoomerXer

Originally Posted by cbailey

Originally Posted by Barbara

Bob, I cannot believe you wrote this on 9/14 and have nailed so many details 3 years later! Wow!

Bravo, Mr. Butler.

Ditto - I couldn't agree more with cb and Mr Butler. 8)

Appreciated. Definitely one of my better efforts. Still, looking back, I can see three disappointments, three areas where things did not go as well as I had hoped on September 14th.

The first disappointment is with the Republicans. Immediately following the attack, Powell was trying to maintain and build an international effort, while the American public and neo-cons were looking for immediate action. At the time I wrote the above piece, I still had hopes that Bush and company would try to unite the West, rather than go unilateral preemptive.

The second disappointment is with the Democrats. No matter what Bush did, the Democrats by the 2004 elections would have to find something Bush did wrong so they could campaign against him. I anticipated the Democrats might advocate reducing the division of wealth between the First and Third Worlds. This would be "If you want peace, work for justice." This would be something "fundamental and astounding." Alas, as Bush went preemptive unilateral, the Democrats could and did attack Bush for bad planning, insufficient troops and alienating allies. The Democrats did not perceive a need to propose fundamental and astounding attempts to address Third World economic difficulties. The Democrats might well be right, tactically. The public may not be ready for fundamental and astounding changes. The public may still be content with 'On to Richmond,' though I doubt the brute force military approach will continue to seem attractive much longer.

The third disappointment is with most of the Fourth Turning Discussion Board contributors. Well before September 11th, I was watching the African - Asian - Balkan spiral of violence, pegged it as the central thrust of the upcoming crisis. I had identified the First / Third World economic gap as the key factor requiring fundamental social change.

I had not anticipated the sudden escalation in that spiral of violence on September 11th. Still, September 11th was a continuation of a pattern I had already been focused on. With 20 20 hindsight, September 11th fit right into the pattern I had been trying do advocate on this boards for years before, and for years since. The above entry was not based on a new Post September 11th perspective. It was a update of a perspective I had been building since the conservative militia v BATF Red / Blue spiral of violence went cold after the Oklahoma City bombings.

And still people focus on the domestic Red Blue divide. There is very little spiral of violence there, folks. The Crisis is not heading in that direction. The Red Blue issues might be the issues you care about, the issues you would like to see at the center of the crisis, but the spirals of violence are the reality check. We should be focusing on the Crisis that is really developing, not on the crisis we would prefer to have.

And as to where we are now, we are still in the 'On to Richmond' phase. We're beginning to learn. It seems clear at this point that nation building -- winning the peace -- is much much harder than taking Richmond / Bagdad. It is clear that if we go it alone, we can at best handle one or two preemptive unilateral invasions at a time. With the Sudan going hot, it should be clear that the spiral of violence is continuing to develop. The consensus built during the Clinton years that the international community should actively intervene when ethnic cleansing, genocide, military scale rapes and politically motivated famines develop is not holding. The situation in Sudan is being allowed to fester. There are some real lessons learned that ought to be clearly visible to any with an interest in seeing, but there is no urgent resolve to transform global society at the scale a global crisis requires.

No one seems interested in seeing. There are very few advocating a fundamental and astounding assault on the economic and ecological problems underlying the Third World ethnic and security hot spots.

We have no regeneracy. We have no Gray Champion. We do have a spiral. If we have a spiral, the rest is apt follow. Our reluctance to look at the Crisis does not imply it is not continuing to grow and fester.

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

Originally Posted by BoomerXer

Originally Posted by cbailey

Originally Posted by Barbara

Bob, I cannot believe you wrote this on 9/14 and have nailed so many details 3 years later! Wow!

Bravo, Mr. Butler.

Ditto - I couldn't agree more with cb and Mr Butler. 8)

Appreciated. Definitely one of my better efforts. Still, looking back, I can see three disappointments, three areas where things did not go as well as I had hoped on September 14th.

The first disappointment is with the Republicans. Immediately following the attack, Powell was trying to maintain and build an international effort, while the American public and neo-cons were looking for immediate action. At the time I wrote the above piece, I still had hopes that Bush and company would try to unite the West, rather than go unilateral preemptive.

The second disappointment is with the Democrats. No matter what Bush did, the Democrats by the 2004 elections would have to find something Bush did wrong so they could campaign against him. I anticipated the Democrats might advocate reducing the division of wealth between the First and Third Worlds. This would be "If you want peace, work for justice." This would be something "fundamental and astounding." Alas, as Bush went preemptive unilateral, the Democrats could and did attack Bush for bad planning, insufficient troops and alienating allies. The Democrats did not perceive a need to propose fundamental and astounding attempts to address Third World economic difficulties. The Democrats might well be right, tactically. The public may not be ready for fundamental and astounding changes. The public may still be content with 'On to Richmond,' though I doubt the brute force military approach will continue to seem attractive much longer.

The third disappointment is with most of the Fourth Turning Discussion Board contributors. Well before September 11th, I was watching the African - Asian - Balkan spiral of violence, pegged it as the central thrust of the upcoming crisis. I had identified the First / Third World economic gap as the key factor requiring fundamental social change.

I had not anticipated the sudden escalation in that spiral of violence on September 11th. Still, September 11th was a continuation of a pattern I had already been focused on. With 20 20 hindsight, September 11th fit right into the pattern I had been trying do advocate on this boards for years before, and for years since. The above entry was not based on a new Post September 11th perspective. It was a update of a perspective I had been building since the conservative militia v BATF Red / Blue spiral of violence went cold after the Oklahoma City bombings.

And still people focus on the domestic Red Blue divide. There is very little spiral of violence there, folks. The Crisis is not heading in that direction. The Red Blue issues might be the issues you care about, the issues you would like to see at the center of the crisis, but the spirals of violence are the reality check. We should be focusing on the Crisis that is really developing, not on the crisis we would prefer to have.

And as to where we are now, we are still in the 'On to Richmond' phase. We're beginning to learn. It seems clear at this point that nation building -- winning the peace -- is much much harder than taking Richmond / Bagdad. It is clear that if we go it alone, we can at best handle one or two preemptive unilateral invasions at a time. With the Sudan going hot, it should be clear that the spiral of violence is continuing to develop. The consensus built during the Clinton years that the international community should actively intervene when ethnic cleansing, genocide, military scale rapes and politically motivated famines develop is not holding. The situation in Sudan is being allowed to fester. There are some real lessons learned that ought to be clearly visible to any with an interest in seeing, but there is no urgent resolve to transform global society at the scale a global crisis requires.

No one seems interested in seeing. There are very few advocating a fundamental and astounding assault on the economic and ecological problems underlying the Third World ethnic and security hot spots.

We have no regeneracy. We have no Gray Champion. We do have a spiral. If we have a spiral, the rest is apt follow. Our reluctance to look at the Crisis does not imply it is not continuing to grow and fester.

I hope you are right about the Culture Wars not morphing into something worse. But the evolving civilizational conflict is becoming enmeshed with our Red/Blue divide, and when the latter taps into differing opinions on "national survival", AND you put the generational constellation where it's at at the moment . . . well then the unthinkable becomes plausible.

Furthermore the Dollar Crash and Great Devaluation are going to add a lot of strain to the system. Who knows where fear will lead us?

Originally Posted by William Jennings Bryan

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

Originally Posted by BoomerXer

Originally Posted by cbailey

Originally Posted by Barbara

Bob, I cannot believe you wrote this on 9/14 and have nailed so many details 3 years later! Wow!

Bravo, Mr. Butler.

Ditto - I couldn't agree more with cb and Mr Butler. 8)

Appreciated. Definitely one of my better efforts. Still, looking back, I can see three disappointments, three areas where things did not go as well as I had hoped on September 14th.

The first disappointment is with the Republicans. Immediately following the attack, Powell was trying to maintain and build an international effort, while the American public and neo-cons were looking for immediate action. At the time I wrote the above piece, I still had hopes that Bush and company would try to unite the West, rather than go unilateral preemptive.

The second disappointment is with the Democrats. No matter what Bush did, the Democrats by the 2004 elections would have to find something Bush did wrong so they could campaign against him. I anticipated the Democrats might advocate reducing the division of wealth between the First and Third Worlds. This would be "If you want peace, work for justice." This would be something "fundamental and astounding." Alas, as Bush went preemptive unilateral, the Democrats could and did attack Bush for bad planning, insufficient troops and alienating allies. The Democrats did not perceive a need to propose fundamental and astounding attempts to address Third World economic difficulties. The Democrats might well be right, tactically. The public may not be ready for fundamental and astounding changes. The public may still be content with 'On to Richmond,' though I doubt the brute force military approach will continue to seem attractive much longer.

The third disappointment is with most of the Fourth Turning Discussion Board contributors. Well before September 11th, I was watching the African - Asian - Balkan spiral of violence, pegged it as the central thrust of the upcoming crisis. I had identified the First / Third World economic gap as the key factor requiring fundamental social change.

I had not anticipated the sudden escalation in that spiral of violence on September 11th. Still, September 11th was a continuation of a pattern I had already been focused on. With 20 20 hindsight, September 11th fit right into the pattern I had been trying do advocate on this boards for years before, and for years since. The above entry was not based on a new Post September 11th perspective. It was a update of a perspective I had been building since the conservative militia v BATF Red / Blue spiral of violence went cold after the Oklahoma City bombings.

And still people focus on the domestic Red Blue divide. There is very little spiral of violence there, folks. The Crisis is not heading in that direction. The Red Blue issues might be the issues you care about, the issues you would like to see at the center of the crisis, but the spirals of violence are the reality check. We should be focusing on the Crisis that is really developing, not on the crisis we would prefer to have.

And as to where we are now, we are still in the 'On to Richmond' phase. We're beginning to learn. It seems clear at this point that nation building -- winning the peace -- is much much harder than taking Richmond / Bagdad. It is clear that if we go it alone, we can at best handle one or two preemptive unilateral invasions at a time. With the Sudan going hot, it should be clear that the spiral of violence is continuing to develop. The consensus built during the Clinton years that the international community should actively intervene when ethnic cleansing, genocide, military scale rapes and politically motivated famines develop is not holding. The situation in Sudan is being allowed to fester. There are some real lessons learned that ought to be clearly visible to any with an interest in seeing, but there is no urgent resolve to transform global society at the scale a global crisis requires.

No one seems interested in seeing. There are very few advocating a fundamental and astounding assault on the economic and ecological problems underlying the Third World ethnic and security hot spots.

We have no regeneracy. We have no Gray Champion. We do have a spiral. If we have a spiral, the rest is apt follow. Our reluctance to look at the Crisis does not imply it is not continuing to grow and fester.

I hope you are right about the Culture Wars not morphing into something worse. But the evolving civilizational conflict is becoming enmeshed with our Red/Blue divide, and when the latter taps into differing opinions on "national survival", AND you put the generational constellation where it's at at the moment . . . well then the unthinkable becomes plausible.

Furthermore the Dollar Crash and Great Devaluation are going to add a lot of strain to the system. Who knows where fear will lead us?

A very important point - and central to what kind of nation we become after all is said and done.

I generally agree with BB54. The Crisis spiral is growing - and our Red/Blue divide is not the center of the conflict. However, we must admit that there is a Red/Blue overlay to the global Crisis. One could say that a major aspect of the growing Crisis is Modernity being challenged by pre-modern fundamentalism. Not only abroad - but here at home (now...I don't want to get into any hair-splitting debates about the "death" of Modernity, Post-modernity, etc. If the Crisis ends on a high note - then whatever results will be something that is built upon Modernity and will draw from it - call it what you will). We will likely direct our conflicting internal energies outward - but I do see the possibilty of WJB's implied scenario if things go badly.

Originally Posted by BoomerXer

I generally agree with BB54. The Crisis spiral is growing - and our Red/Blue divide is not the center of the conflict. However, we must admit that there is a Red/Blue overlay to the global Crisis. One could say that a major aspect of the growing Crisis is Modernity being challenged by pre-modern fundamentalism. Not only abroad - but here at home (now...I don't want to get into any hair-splitting debates about the "death" of Modernity, Post-modernity, etc. If the Crisis ends on a high note - then whatever results will be something that is built upon Modernity and will draw from it - call it what you will). We will likely direct our conflicting internal energies outward - but I do see the possibility of WJB's implied scenario if things go badly.

Oh, the foreign crisis is another Red Blue crisis. Both the foreign and domestic conflicts are between rural, religious, conservative factions and urban, secular progressives. It has ever been so since the urban protestants and rural Catholics started fighting holy wars in Europe after the Reformation. In modern times, both the foreign and domestic conflicts are about traditionalists not willing to adapt their cultures to more modern technology, economics, politics and culture, while changing technology implies a changing society. While conservatives may not like change, change comes, too often over the dead bodies of conservatives.

Still, our domestic Reds are a century or so ahead of the foreign reds.

(Remember when 'reds' meant communists? Can you imagine the confusion if the old 1950s House Unamerican Activities Committee were to come forward in time to hunt modern reds? Perhaps Saturday Night Live ought to put together a skit...)

But it may well be very important which American culture will be interacting with the foreign states attempting to reshape themselves, or avoid getting reshaped. Gut feeling, our fundamentalist conservatives are too rigid and judgmental to work well with their fundamentalist conservatives. Me right. You different. Therefore, you wrong. Be like me or die! I suspect forward looking progressives might be more likely to be helpful in bringing other cultures forward.

But it is all far messier than that...

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

Originally Posted by BoomerXer

I generally agree with BB54. The Crisis spiral is growing - and our Red/Blue divide is not the center of the conflict. However, we must admit that there is a Red/Blue overlay to the global Crisis. One could say that a major aspect of the growing Crisis is Modernity being challenged by pre-modern fundamentalism. Not only abroad - but here at home (now...I don't want to get into any hair-splitting debates about the "death" of Modernity, Post-modernity, etc. If the Crisis ends on a high note - then whatever results will be something that is built upon Modernity and will draw from it - call it what you will). We will likely direct our conflicting internal energies outward - but I do see the possibility of WJB's implied scenario if things go badly.

Oh, the foreign crisis is another Red Blue crisis. Both the foreign and domestic conflicts are between rural, religious, conservative factions and urban, secular progressives. It has ever been so since the urban protestants and rural Catholics started fighting holy wars in Europe after the Reformation. In modern times, both the foreign and domestic conflicts are about traditionalists not willing to adapt their cultures to more modern technology, economics, politics and culture, while changing technology implies a changing society. While conservatives may not like change, change comes, too often over the dead bodies of conservatives.

Still, our domestic Reds are a century or so ahead of the foreign reds.

(snip)

But it may well be very important which American culture will be interacting with the foreign states attempting to reshape themselves, or avoid getting reshaped. Gut feeling, our fundamentalist conservatives are too rigid and judgmental to work well with their fundamentalist conservatives. Me right. You different. Therefore, you wrong. Be like me or die! I suspect forward looking progressives might be more likely to be helpful in bringing other cultures forward.

But it is all far messier than that...

I suspect that the same is true of their fundamentalist conservatives IRT ours, for the same reasons. In fact, one could easily predict yet another 'progressive' victory this time, at least over 'ours', for the very reason that Leftists worldwide will be able to do what their enemies are apparently so very unable to do - put aside their differences to join against a common foe (In this case, the common foe they'd rather fight - the US.). Unified Left vs. Fragmented Right? That's an easy one to call, I'm afraid.

Originally Posted by Titus Sabinus Parthicus

I suspect that the same is true of their fundamentalist conservatives IRT ours, for the same reasons. In fact, one could easily predict yet another 'progressive' victory this time, at least over 'ours', for the very reason that Leftists worldwide will be able to do what their enemies are apparently so very unable to do - put aside their differences to join against a common foe (In this case, the common foe they'd rather fight - the US.). Unified Left vs. Fragmented Right? That's an easy one to call, I'm afraid.

"Unified Left"? As if. Where? Germany? Britain? France?

The US? The minute this election is over, the facade of unity among the Democrats will vanish like the dew.

The Left has proven itself capable in the past of putting aside the sorts of differences you have just reminded me of, to face a common foe. (Or have you never heard the term 'Popular Front'?) OTOH, I, like BB54, strongly doubt that the Global Religious Right (Christian, Muslim, Hindu, etc.) would be at all capable of doing likewise, for the very reasons BB54 outlined above - rigidity, intolerance, and judgmentalism.

BTW, back to the original topic of this thread, I would say now, "Only indirectly, if at all - by ramping up the stakes of this latest 'Culture Wars' election enough to where E2K+4 will very likely reach or exceed the threshold point for 4T Catalyst status."

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

. . . Still, our domestic Reds are a century or so ahead of the foreign reds . . .

By saying this I'm not saying that our "Reds" don't have something to contribute to our future, but I really like your comment above. But I would increase "a century or so" to "centuries". Our Reds are a combination of Enlightenment (yes, there was some) and Reformation religiousity. The enemy is outright medieval.