http://www.townhall.com/columnists/l...20010926.shtml

The death of multiculturalism, and rebirth of assimilation?

Qoute: smcd

My real question is this really too early? I was born in 1961 and have never really felt
like those born in the late seventies supposedly also members of the 13th generation were really all that much like me. I have also never felt that different from those born in the late fifties, though I do feel a generation gap between myself and those who were of draft age during Vietnam. But perhaps the statistical data do indicate similarities. My point is rather than this coming too early is it possible that the generational boundaries and the boundaries postulated for the turning in this cycle might be off?


The previous article this was an extension of I would mirror in my own opinions almost entirely in observations regarding fragmentation and blatant stupidity of those who sought power on both sides becoming more and more comical until it was to0 painful to watch anymore with the exception of the excitement of the last presidential election.
As to identification with an age group I would hazard a guess it has to do with the rapid fire staccatto pace of events. Born in 59 I experienced only being assigned a draft number and not an active draft. Being that it was the last year (1975-76) of the draft. A strange situation considering I was totally ambivalent about politics and wrapped up in high school teenage dramas and sports. But it still caused some vague rumblings in my mind about "What would I do?" and I still remember the number (256) which meant that a person wouldn,t be called in the current overall situation.

The best anecdotal evidence of a fourth turning which has never occured in my life experience before is the distance dull roar of military jets patrolling the northeast corridor at regular periodic intervals. I have new windows from recent renovations but that is a low sound that can be heard if attention is turned to it. Also the nearby airbase is 50 miles away so they are high up but ever present in their patrolling patterns.

Evidence for 4T. Tonight we had a bunch of entertainment professionals in for our seminar series "The Future of Entertainment" (http://indiespace.com/foe), which relies heavily on S & H. We had a mixed group of Millennials, Xers, Boomers and event Silents. The result? They loved it. This is major change.

More possible 4T evidence: A poll on today's http://www.boston.com (12,000+ respondents) showed overwhelming response (68%-32% as of noon) in favor of racial profiling as an acceptable response to the attacks.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Kevin1952 on 2001-09-27 10:31 ]</font>

I recommend the latest issue of the New Yorker for several thoughtful articles about the attacks. I can't link to the articles because the New Yorker is not online.

But I found a number of points that imply we are still in 3T:


One article, by Jeffrey Toobin, is entitled "The Courts: Suing bin Laden."

Another called "Closework," by Joe Klein, is about the failure of the intelligence to detect what was coming, and talks about intelligence and military policy--"The history of the American military ever since Ulysses S. Grant has been about the use of mass and firepower and 'redundancy'--the application of overwhelming force," said Larry Smith, a defense strategist. "Overwhelming force implies, almost by definition, a lack of precision. That won't work now. What we're going to need is a much great emphasis on the concentrated application of street smarts."

Sound like they need Xers! And, more importantly, that they don't have any now.

Another article, entitled "The Options," by Nicholas Lemann is an interview with Bush senior counsellor, Karl Rove. He says, "It's going to be Cheney and Powell and Rumsfield. We'll see a lot of Colin Powell." (All Silents, am I right?)

The reporter then talks to Mark McKinnon, Bush's media advisor, and asks him if Washington will return to its usual state of incessant political rivalry.

"McKinnon smiled. 'Two weeks.'"

(all of the above is for educational use only)

I've been pondering something the last few days regarding whether we're still in 3T or in 4T, which is how much momentum the no war/pacifist/moral equivalence movement may gain in the coming days and weeks.
A very vocal antiwar movement would indicate to me that we could still be in the 3T. If it ends up just fizzling out then it would be an indication that we've entered the fourth turning. It will be interesting to see how big the protests are on 9/30.
One other thought regarding the no war movement: this seems to me to be a continuation of a quarrel between the boomer generation about Vietnam. There's still a lot of emotion just under the surface for those of us who were old enough then to be involved in one way or another with that war or with opposition to the Vietnam war.
Believe me [I'm a boomer myself] it wouldn't take much to get a lot of people fighting that fight all over again but in the context of this crisis.
The people whom I've been hearing stating adamant opposition to military action and also saying that the USA got what it deserved are boomers who have been against the government since the war and on through the 1980's central America actions of the Reagan administration and the Gulf war.
If a very ugly public brawl develops among the baby boomers it will be fierce
and unforgiving. [ask Bill Maher if he's had a nice week]
I think that this quarrel will indicate 4T, especially when thinking of what S &H said that the baby boomers would be the most martial generation seen in a long time.

Some of my teachers are really big on assimilationism...into the whole "American culture" idea. That everyone should belong to "American" culture. They were just like this long before 9-11, as a matter of fact I think it just gives these people who want all of us to follow the same rules of behavior and all be actively involved in civic stuff and highly active in AMERICA an excuse to talk their minds. It's clear to me that Americans haven't actually eraced their racial divisions yet, I mean when 64% of them are in FAVOR of racial profiling, they've got to be able to see racial distinctions among people in America. I am shocked to no limit of degree with the racism of the American people on this. Sure I don't want everyone of every race bowing down to the god America, but discriminating against people just because of their race is completely wrong, no matter what. I'm certainly not going to excuse racial profiling for reasons of "security" or some crap like that. What's wrong is wrong. Besides, they aren't going to get them all because I know some Middle Eastern people who look Italian, and some Hispanics who look like Anglos. They'll just end up stopping a bunch of innocent Hindus instead. -Craig

A chilling account of the thinking in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor offers light as to whether we be 3T, or 4T?




What Should We Do?
By Edward R. Murrow
Washington, D.C.
December 8, 1941

President Roosevelt will call for a joint session of Congress today to discuss yesterday's bombing of Pearl Harbor and the reported loss of 2,400 Americans. I can report that our commander-in-chief is calm and will not ask for a precipitous "outright" declaration of war against the Japanese, but instead leans toward a general consensus to "hunt down the perpetrators" of this act of "infamy." Speaking for the Congress, Senator Arthur Vandenberg promised bipartisan support to "bring to justice" the Japanese pilots. Many believe that the "rogue" airmen may well have flown from Japanese warships. In response, Secretary of War Stimson is calling for "an international coalition to indict these cowardly purveyors of death," and will shortly ask the Japanese imperial government to hand over the suspected airman from the Akagi and Kaga ? "and any more of these cruel fanatics who took off from ships involved in this dastardly act." Assistant Secretary Robert Patterson was said to have remarked, "Stimson is madder than hell ? poor old Admiral Yamamato has a lot of explaining to do."

Secretary of State Cordell Hull, however, this morning cautioned the nation about such "jingoism." He warned, "The last thing we want is another Maine or Lusitania. We wouldn't want to start something like a Second World War and ruin the real progress in Japanese-American relations over the last few years." Hull himself is preparing for a long tour to consult our allies in South America, Africa, and colonial France: "If we get the world on board, and make them understand that this is not merely an aggressive act upon us, much less just an American problem, such a solid front may well deter further Japanese action."

Even as Hull prepares to depart, special envoy Harry Hopkins is calling for a general statement of concern from the League of Nations, condemning not only the most recent Japanese aggression, but also an earlier reported incident in Nanking, China. "If we can get an expression of outrage from the League, Japan may well find itself in an interesting pickle. We're looking for some strong League action of the type that followed the banditry in Ethiopia and Finland." Hopkins finished by emphasizing the rather limited nature of the one-day Pearl Harbor incursion, and suggesting such piecemeal attacks were themselves a direct result of past American restraint. "We did not rattle our sabers when they went into China. Had we listened to the alarmists then, we might well be seeing Japanese anger manifesting itself from the Philippines to Wake Island in the coming days."

Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau, Jr., a few hours ago reminded the nation of the current disturbing economic news. "Four million Americans are still out of work. Americans are not out of this Depression by any means. Are we to borrow money to build planes that we don't even know will fly?" The industrialist Henry Kaiser was no more optimistic: "There is simply no liquidity in these markets. We shouldn't even be considering rearming. It is not as if we are going to build a ship a day. Even launching a carrier every couple of years could put us back to 1932."

Military leaders, smarting over yesterday's losses, were no more ready for war. Even the usually colorful Admiral Halsey sounded a note of concern to this reporter, "Look, they have all the cards, not us. The bastards over there could give us a decade of war at least. Where do I get bases for my subs and flattops? Who gives me strips for the flyboys? This could be a new war with no rules. Believe me, brother, we ain't going to Midway or some place like that in six months and cut down to size the whole damn imperial fleet. It's just not going to happen." Admiral King was nearly as blunt, "Hell's bells, no one has ever conquered Japan since they kicked the Portuguese out. Do the American people really want to go over to that part of the world and fight those samurai madmen? The logistics are impossible. These people have been at war for years. I've seen these Zeros ? you put a suicide basket case with a wish to die for the emperor in with a tank of gas, and you've got a guided rocket that will blow our ships out of the water." Colonel James Doolittle was even more cautious than the top brass when told of calls for potential early American counterattacks. "Swell ? the last thing we need is to send in some hot-dogger to drop a few bombs for the press boys that cause no real damage and get our fellas killed in the bargain."

On the home front, prominent voices in the arts expressed far stronger reservations about possible American "revenge". Robert Maynard Hutchins of the University of Chicago explained to me that the Pearl Harbor incident cannot be separated from its larger cultural context. "We must guard against this absurd and ongoing moral absolutism on the part of the United States in seeing complex cultural differences in black and white terms of the Occident and the Orient. We have no monopoly on morality or justice." His colleague, Mortimer J. Adler, elaborated: "Far too often we look at the world through Western lenses. But in Japanese eyes, this rather desperate attack is seen as a "slap", a lashing out of sorts to get the attention of the United States, really more of a desperate cry of the heart than anything else." Adler went on, "Japan has had a tradition of isolation from and distrust of Western civilization ? rightly so in some respects, given everything from past European missionaries to racism, economic exploitation, and colonialism. If we inflame passions, they may well simply divorce themselves from the world community ? or worse, set off a conflagration of pan-Asian hatred toward Occidentals that could last for generations. It seems to me Pearl Harbor is rather more of a case of Admiral Perry's chickens at long last coming home to roost."

Contacted at home, the noted naval historian Samuel Eliot Morison was pessimistic about the strategy involved in any U.S. response: "Good God, do they want us to fight the entire world ? Germany, Italy, Hungry, Bulgaria, Romania, and now Japan? We lose 2,400 sailors ? less than an annual poliomyelitis outbreak ? and then we start a World War II? I find these calls for mindless retaliation not only na?ve, but disturbing as well in their failure to take account of America's strategic impotence. That's a part of the world we know very little about."

Prominent American clergymen blasted the very idea of armed retaliation, calling instead for interfaith services and greater tolerance of Japanese religious beliefs. Cardinal Cushing warned against castigating the entire Japanese people for the actions of a few fanatics, adding that "Bushido, is, in fact, merely a variant of Shintoism, itself an age-old and misunderstood faith that is as humane as anything in Christian teaching." Cushing added, "There is nothing in Bushido, much less Shintoism that is inherently bellicose or at all anti-Western. These few extremists are hardly representative of either public or religious opinion in Japan." Cushing concluded, "The Emperor himself is a pacifist, a Zen scholar in fact deeply devoted to entomology, with no interest at all in bloodshed. And so the better question might be posed: 'Why does so much of Asia hate us?'"

Celebrated director John Ford reflected Hollywood's unease with the early rumors of war. "Hell, we are artists, not mouthpieces. What are we to do ? join the Navy to make movies on government spec? Had we had more Japanese films available to the American people in the first place, we wouldn't have had this misunderstanding." A few Hollywood stars who were willing to speak on the record agreed. Jimmy Stewart called for a world conference of concerned actors and screenwriters. "There have been some great Japanese movies. We need to reach out to our brother actors over there. The last thing we need is a bunch of us would-be pilots storming over to Burbank to enlist." Clark Gable was adamant in his belief in keeping America from doing something "stupid," as he put it. "If you haven't heard lately: We're actors, artists really, not war-mongers. I'm sure that our Japanese counterparts feel the same way. We need to put away the B-17s and get the cameras rolling on both sides."

Celebrated veterans were especially angered about knee-jerk American anger. Alvin C. York, Medal of Honor winner and hero of the Great War, was reported as "madder than hell" at the "war scare." "We shouldn't fight in some jungle island just because the Japanese hate old man Rockefeller as much as we do."

In an in-depth newsmaker interview, 81-year-old General John J. Pershing told Henry Luce of Time magazine, "I've made war before ? long and hard. I've seen it. These sunshine sluggers talk a great game, but wait until our dead pile up. No, it is time to collect our thoughts and think like adults for a change. Lashing back is just what these extremists want us to do. If a war breaks out, then their mission is accomplished. I'd hate to see us playing into the hands of a few militarists who want to topple the moderates and the emperor. This ocean war with carriers is an entirely new challenge, nothing like we have ever seen before. Why get our boys killed only to make a few samurai martyrs?"

And so it is with confidence today that this reporter assures the American people and the world that sobriety, maturity, and prudence ? not bombs ? are the watchwords on the home front. Remember ? our enemies can only win if they make us answer their violence with more needless violence.


What you just read was a construction of how things would have played out in 1941, if the same thinking that is playing out today were that of 1941.

A master stroke called What If?
Rethinking 1941 with Edward R. Murrow.

By Victor Davis Hanson, author most recently of Carnage and Culture: Landmark Battles in the Rise of Western Power.
September 27, 2001 9:00 a.m.

Reprinted for educational purposes only.

In light of previous misunderstandings on this Evidence thread, I reiterate: The previous story by Ed Murrow WAS A PARODY.






And not real. :lol:

On 2001-09-27 17:11, Craig '84 wrote:
Some of my teachers are really big on assimilationism...into the whole "American culture" idea. That everyone should belong to "American" culture. They were just like this long before 9-11, as a matter of fact I think it just gives these people who want all of us to follow the same rules of behavior and all be actively involved in civic stuff and highly active in AMERICA an excuse to talk their minds. It's clear to me that Americans haven't actually eraced their racial divisions yet, I mean when 64% of them are in FAVOR of racial profiling, they've got to be able to see racial distinctions among people in America. I am shocked to no limit of degree with the racism of the American people on this. Sure I don't want everyone of every race bowing down to the god America, but discriminating against people just because of their race is completely wrong, no matter what. I'm certainly not going to excuse racial profiling for reasons of "security" or some crap like that. What's wrong is wrong. Besides, they aren't going to get them all because I know some Middle Eastern people who look Italian, and some Hispanics who look like Anglos. They'll just end up stopping a bunch of innocent Hindus instead. -Craig

I, too, believe that everyone should belong to the American culture. Besides, we ARE Americans, or do you not consider yourself one? It has gotten to the point where we do not even acknowledge our similarities. Do you agree with there being black music and white music, black clothes and white clothes, black television and white television? I'm not comfortable with it, and I think it is stupid. Since the late 1600s, we have divided ourselves into descendents of Europeans and descendents of Africans. I believe that this trend must stop. I think we need to start seeing ourselves as Americans, and not as merely members of a certain race. I think that we need to remove the hyphens, and truly become a nation. And is this propaganda for us to be involved in civic stuff? For some people, maybe. But you talk about "being civic" as something that is evil. Would you please go in greater depth about why you are so much against being civic?

As for racial profiling, I agree that it is wrong.

African Americans and 911.

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=11595

so marc, we still in a 3t?

so marc, we still in a 3t?

Sigh.

Marc, it only takes one moron ... and boy are there morons out there ... who doesn't pick up on the irony and bang, someone gets hurt and a harmless joke becomes incitement to violence.

I'm not saying you're racist. I'm saying you are suffering from profound failure of imagination about a threat that doesn't concern you. The site is scary and not because it may hurt my wittle feelings. It's funny like shouting fire in a crowded theater is funny.

Ms. angeli notes, "I'm not saying you're racist. I'm saying you are suffering from profound failure of imagination about a threat that doesn't concern you."

Doesn't concern me? How utterly ridiculous.


What t we be? We be 3t.



imho, of course.

"Doesn't concern me? How utterly ridiculous."

Oh? And who is going to come beat you up on the El because you might look Arab? Nobody, of course. So its easy for you to laugh.

And don't tell me if you did face the same danger you'd have much sense of humor about it, cause you wouldn't. You're the most touchy person on this forum over percieved slights on your race, gender and religious identity. If there was the slightest chance you'd be hurt or killed over them you'd absolutely howl about it.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: angeli on 2001-09-28 09:32 ]</font>

Another dispatch from the Blue Zone -- Yom Kippur closing service at my liberal Reform Temple.

There were LOTS of cars with flags & red white and blue ribbons in the temple parking lot. Lots of worshippers wearing red while & blue ribbons on their clothes.

On September 12, our synagogue reversed a nine-year-old decision and put the American flag back up on the dais.

On the evening Rosh Hashanah service, Rabbi Fink gave a very rousing patriotic sermon about good (USA & Israel and democracy and freedom) versus evil (Islamic fundamentalism) taken straight from the cover article of the September 24 "New Republic".

And at the end of the Rosh Hashanah evening service and the closing Yom Kippur, the choir and the entire congregation sang all four verses of "America the Beautiful". Maybe it was lack of any food for 24 hours (yes, we Reform Jews also fast on Yom Kippur -- we don't eat ham sandwiches!), but I found singing "America" to be extremely moving.

Evidence we're in 4T - Jon Stewart's statement on restarting Comedy Central's edgy news show "The Daily Show"
http://www.comedycentral.com/tv_show...politics.jhtml

The webcast version -- here you see the emotion:

http://mfile.akamai.com/2597/rm/comc...on_6030_56.ram

--------------------
Evidence we're in 3T

"Alternative" newspaper backlash. In LA on Thursday, both alternative weeklies dropped their excellent reporting from last week (LA Weekly in particular, did a good job) and reverted to sarcasm. Now, we're not just getting cynics -- we're getting cynics that are angry that we're not cynical! This contrarian opinion replaced serious discussion of the big problems with our current response to 9/11.

One article in LA Weekly celebrated the return of sarcasm and cynical discussion in American life. In other areas, reviewers blasted positive films with particular bile, and attacked mainstream media for acting like "something actually happened". Another printed a picture of a 60s era peace rally -- hoping the decade can be repeated. Since many alternative weeklies had their start in that decade, it is logical for them to root for that era to return.

I suspect we're about to see a sullen backlash by those who have a strong interest in keeping the sideshow open.

Back on these forums (fora?) after a few days off and look what happens . . . we have people telling Angeli she needs to get a sense of humor when people who look like her (and me and my husband and my baby and my dad and my sister and all my cousins) are DEAD.

Uh, as for those who compared fearforthe republic to A Modest Proposal -- I'll bet the only people laughing at A Modest Proposal were English "intellectual" types. I'll bet Irish people were not exactly howling with laughter.

Not only is it "humor" in poor taste, not only is it NOT funny, it is irresponsible. I would have found it annoying in a 3T, today it is frightening.

More "mood" or anectdotal evidence that things have changed-- suggesting a 4T mood to me...


Forever changed

By Brian McGrory, Globe Staff, 9/28/2001

Rudy Giuliani is asking us to come and spend money in his ailing city, which doesn't seem like such a bad idea when you consider that the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel is offering rooms this weekend for $159 a night.

George Bush is urging us to resume our regular lives. The baseball playoffs start in just a few days. Bryant Gumbel laughed on television the other morning and declared, ''We're getting back to normal here.''

So why then, I have to ask, do I still feel so awful?

The calendar says it's coming up on three weeks since the two planes from Boston slammed into the twin towers in New York. That's three weeks to grieve, three weeks to assimilate, three weeks to vent - three weeks, in short, to regroup.

But the burden of Sept. 11, the fog that descended that day, only seems worse now, not better. And I have a feeling I'm not alone.

The simple acts of everyday life now seem labored, as if they're unfolding under water. Food doesn't taste the way it should. Moods flip as quickly as the numbers on a digital clock. Conversations all have an uneasy, even artificial stilt.

A fellow reporter tells me he tears up at those full-page newspaper ads that companies take out to commemorate the dead - this from a guy who views most homicides as a front-page opportunity. A local leader confides that he cried his way through that telethon last week. A celebrated restaurateur was on the phone yesterday saying he hasn't slept a full night since the attack, and often turns CNN on at 3 a.m.

With me, it's not that I knew any of the 6,000-plus people who died, because I didn't. It's not that I'm particularly sensitive, because, my teeth aside, I'm not.

It's not as if I live in fear of future attacks, because I don't. I fell sound asleep last week on a flight from Logan to Dulles. And I flew back to Boston on Sept. 22, the day that the city as we know it was expected to end.

And it's not like I haven't been around death, because my job requires it - building collapses, natural gas explosions, murders, and acts of terrorism. I've stood on front doorsteps asking parents for pictures of their dead sons.

But this one is different, even beyond the sheer numbers. I grieve for the dead I didn't know and I feel sorrow for the husbands, wives, parents, children, and friends who lost someone they loved. But it goes beyond that as well.

Minutes after the attacks, fatuous commentators took to the airwaves to declare that the world had forever changed. Perhaps now, with nearly three weeks of perspective, I'm starting to get a hazy understanding of what they meant, even if they had no idea at the time.

We lost more than thousands of lives that day. We lost faith in the world around us, trust that such catastrophe would never occur in nearby places to people just like us. As New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote this week, trust is based on the presumption that some actions are ''outside the bounds of human behavior or imagination.'' No more.

So is it OK, is it normal, to feel this way, somewhere between sad and depressed? Thankfully, experts say it is.

''As we gain some distance, we begin to see the complexity of it all,'' says Dr. Jeffrey Rediger, a Cambridge psychiatrist. ''What was initially anger and depression, the anger diminishes and the depression takes up more of our emotional energy. We begin to realize the enormity of this.''

Without an easy resolution, he adds, these emotions may get worse before they get better.

Says Dr. Frederick Stoddard of Massachusetts General Hospital: ''The term `A new world' is something we're grieving about, we're sad about. We lost something we had before.''

We'll continue to wave flags. We'll cry at memorial services. Soon, we'll fight back. But it won't ever be the same, and that's the casualty that we all share.

Brian McGrory's e-mail address is mcgrory@globe.com.


This story ran on page B1 of the Boston Globe on 9/28/2001.
? Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company.


I've been away from the discussion forums for most of the week... Is there much discussion of the planned peace protests? A Twin Cities talk station-- KSTP 1500AM-- has bumped Dr. Laura off our air(taped replay from 8-11 each morning) since September 11, for Local discussion of the crisis, and developing response. As I drove in today, lots of back-and-forth on the peace protest plans. Truth be told, I can't get a handle on whether it's 3T or 4T (or even some belated effort to capture the essence of the old 2T). While everyone on the program (except a former NYPD detective who spent Sept 11-17 helping his former colleagues in the aftermath, while "vacationing" in NYC) spoke in support of their 1st Amendment right of free speech, no one could figure out what they were protesting or why. That station is not going to have many voices in support of prototypical Awakening era efforts (11-2 is Rush's block of time), but what are others hearing out in your areas? I sense that if these efforts are barely tolerated or acknowledged, that we've moved into 4T, but if the major Media plays this up big, that we it could be a 3T sign. Comments?

Wes

I don't know if this be 3T or 4T, as I am choosing to remain agnostic on that as long as possible. But, earlier this week my senior citizens county group was one of many across the country to test-pilot new handheld electronic voting machines.

At our particular demo day, there were elected reps and/or officials from almost every state there. I was told this is the way they are doing it, and in partnership with the League of Women Voters, among other groups. They are apparently using senior citizen groups to introduce and guinea-pig the various state-approved voting equipment alternatives.

Shades of Palm Beach County and E2K! They were very interested in how easily we could use these machines (we could, even those who consider computers toys and don't use them). My machine looked alot like a sidways EtchoSketch, with the controls instead on the bottom skinnier side. About the size of a piece of paper - 8.5 x 11 inches, but about 2 inches thick. My machine used a touch screen, but there also was one there that used knobs you turned like a door knob, to navigate the screen. You then pushed the knob to "click" enter once you had highlighted your choice on the screen by turning the knob (like you would navigate the cursor using a trackball). I liked the touch screen much better.

We'll supposedly be using these machines only for early voting, not for election days. But, no concrete decisions have been made yet as to whether it will be 2002 or 2004. BTW, I looked hard to see if anyone from Florida was there, and found no one. I may not have seen them, but I was disappointed not to find someone from there.

On 2001-09-27 18:49, madscientist wrote:

I, too, believe that everyone should belong to the American culture. Besides, we ARE Americans, or do you not consider yourself one? It has gotten to the point where we do not even acknowledge our similarities. Do you agree with there being black music and white music, black clothes and white clothes, black television and white television?

I was never one of the people who want to divide things into black-and-white to speak as if someone's doing something wrong if they want to listen to certain music, wear certain clothes, watch certain shows...everyone should have the freedom to do that without being told it's inappropriate for their race or something. If a Caucasian person wants to listen to rap or hip-hop, that's nothing wrong at all and besides almost everyone born from 1964 on seems to agree with that anyway. But what I am against is people saying we should all belong to "the" "American" culture. Just as a Caucasian has every right to listen to rap and an African-American has every right to listen to grunge as well as vice versa, no one should force a Mexican or Filipino immigrant to stop eating Mexican or Filipino foods, or stop wearing Mexican or Filipino clothes. If they want to lay around and dress just like they do in Mexico and the Filipines, with all their elaborate ethnic festivals, and only speak Spanish or Tagalog, why shouldn't they? Does everyone who gets placed on some American dirt because their parents immigrated have to hug America and take an active part in its governing and making its wheels turn? Now there are these people who talk about "fitting in" and "American culture", and they always say how immigrants should change their old behavior and stop doing things that "American" culture won't accept...just like anything else, assimilationists/fascists/typical Boomers in positions of authority say these immigrants have to conform, as that not abiding by the rules that society has decided on is bad. As everyone knows, the straitlaced, repressive culture that they call "American culture" is filled with rules and manners that say basically everything is wrong, is rude...they want everyone to change their mindset into that intolerant hell. As to whether I'm American I am in the sense that I live in the United States but if you mean someone who abides by all the norms of what teachers and politicians call American culture...then I guess I wouldn't be a real American if you had to abide by the right norms to be an American. -Craig

Assimilationists always believe that every country has its own rules and that people should obey the rules of whatever country they're in. There's nothing that's unchangingly right or wrong...except for the one unchanging principle that the right thing to do is to conform to the "society" of wherever you are. These people think everyone in these Arab countries should cover up, but outside those countries it's OK not too. They actually think that if Finnish culture says something's acceptable but French culture does it it's all right to do it in Finland but not in France. These people insist that it's wrong for American women to show their breasts unless they're abroad in Sweden, they won't let people do it because "we're in America" and if they were in Sweden it would be fine. Don't you see any more purpose in life, anything more fulfilling, than conforming to what society wants you to do all the time???

-Craig

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Craig '84 on 2001-09-28 14:05 ]</font>

Thanks to Bill for starting this forum--I was giving up on the other one (one below). This has been excellent.

I think some historical perspective may help clear up some of the confusion. I really respect Victor Davis Hansen, but if he knew the theory, he would have thought about 1929, not 1941. And indeed, even though (pace Fred Allen, as Bill points out) the MOOD OF THE COUNTRY was profoundly different in 1930, until 1933 dominant elite political opinion was that the depression did NOT require a reordering of our government, our economy, and the relationship between the two. Still, we date the Fourth Turning, correctly, from 1929, not 1933.

Regarding the First World War, entry into the war was very controversial, war aims (peace without victory vs. unconditoinal surrender) became the key issue of the 1918 elections, the Red Raids were declared illegal by a federal judge, and the Senate rejected the peace treaty. I suspect we are about to reach more of a consensus on our issues than they ever did. (Socialist Eugene Debs, running from prison, got nearly a million votes in 1920, by the way. Strong third parties are signs of a 3T, invariably.)

Now I was most struck by Neisha's story of the helmet. As I posted on the other forum (I don't know if anyone picked it up), if 9/11 was it, that eleven-month old is going to be an Artist. And her Mom is certainly treating her like one! Just as kids in the 30s grew up surrounded by terror of bankruptcy, these kids, alas, will grow up surrounded by fear of terrorism. This is all the more true given the new panic over bioterrorism.

Rush will not survive, at least not in his present status, if he doesn't change. I believe the Church kicked Coughlin off the air during the war (not sure exactly when.)

Panic really is characteristic of the outbreak of Fourth Turnings--I think there was panic in Boston when the Brits arrived, panic in 1928, panic in 1789 France--the Great Fear-- (definitely the beginning of a 4T, I think, that lasted about 15 years), panic in Britian in 1940, panic in France in 1958. England had a panic in 1778 when France entered the revolutionary war, although I normally date their 4T a few years later--could be wrong.

I could change my mind later but I tink the evidence is overwhelming that this is it. I agree with Jenny, by the way, the Condit's appontment is hardly a sign of a 3T. Sorry, Bill, but your desire to hang various parts of Condit and Clinton's anatomy out in public was rather 3T on your part. . .

I am rereading the wartime (Second World War) diaries of Harold Nicolson, a British author and MP. It's clear the 3T didn't end until the attack on France; all through the winter of 1939-40 there was disgust with Chamberlain and fear that Britian would have to make peace with Hitler.

Angeli, by the time this is over I suspect other Americans will be more sensitive to the differences among Central Asian/South Asian peoples. And Jenny, one thing for you to watch for is a renewed growth of reform Judaism at the expense of Orthodoxy/Conservatism--a clear sign, I would think, of a 4T.

David

On 2001-09-28 14:05, Craig '84 wrote:
(snip)Don't you see any more purpose in life, anything more fulfilling, than conforming to what society wants you to do all the time???

-Craig

(snip)

Of course. In fact, I'm probably one of the biggest nonconformists that you will ever meet. It is enough that I am an atheist, but I'm nonconformist in several other ways too. But I am not going to do something just because it is different. Is there something wrong with being different? No. Is there something wrong with conforming? No. I am a nonconformist, but I also acknowledge that there is nothing wrong with conforming, or with people who want to conform.