On 2001-10-16 13:07, Mike Alexander '59 wrote:
I don't see the similarty between the leftists rounded up by the Palmer Raids and al Qaida.

Bin Laden strikes me as a rightwinger. The worldview of men like bin Laden is not disimilar to that of the extreme American religious Right. Both hate the atheistic American culture with its strutting homosexuals and bra-burning feminists and both hate the US government. Both have an obsessive hatred of the Jews. One refers to the US government as "Zionist Crusader Alliance" and the other as "Zionist Occupation Government".

The targets selected by bin Laden were the very heart of "Blueland": New York City, the liberal press, the Democratic Senate Majority Leader and the US government--all natural targets for an extreme Rightwinger like bin Laden.

The biggest difference between them is fundamentalist Islam provides a glorious afterlife for suicidal attacks in a Jihad, whereas fundamentalist Christianity frowns on suicide. This is an extremely important difference for it makes the former far more dangerous.

I can see the similarities between Marc's reference to the Palmer Raids and resulting histeria, and the cliff America's citizens are standing on which, in one misttep, we, too, could be free-falling into similar events. I guess I can't see past viewing the Gulf War as WWI's counterpart, though, and the timing is off for me. I didn't get the impression that Marc was connecting Palmer with bin Laden....

Mike, my impression of bin Laden is not either-wing, but anti-capitalist and anti-modernist. I consider bin Laden's targets as all being Capitalist: NYC is the Capitalist Capital, the press is capitalist (increasing owned by capitalists), and we have a Capitalist President (business-oriented). In another thread, I think it was OddlyStrange who makes a great point: that if the anthrax letters are a bin-Laden job, then they would have been engineered or planned before 911, which means since their goal was to take out Bush & Cheney with the PA-downed plane, then Daschle WAS next in the gov't line, right?

As for the press being liberal anymore, well, that's been debated before here, and I disagree. But, I find it interesting that even if we agree to agree to the press being liberal hypothetically, then certainly Rather is considered the most "liberal" of the 3 traditional networks, and he hasn't gotten a letter -- yet, anyway.

As for comparing bin Laden's ilk to the EXTREME American RR ---- oooh, that's on the whole, apples to oranges, IMO. I have heard parallels noted elsewhere (not on T4T, in *real life*) comparing the strategy of abortion clinic violence, as well as Timothy McVeigh's doings in OKC City (although I seriously doubt even the extreme RR claims him, as many of them do condone abortion clinic violence).

I have posted previously, though, that I found it interesting that had Falwell and Robertson made their now-famous 911 observations in a more objective light (by not judging and not saying, See, we told you so, etc.) that what they had to say may have been taken more seriously.

But, those are the only two points to me that parallel bin Laden's philosophy and that of the extreme RR.

Oh, and Mike - I did catch you were only talking about the EXTREME RR.

Daschle is not in line for the Presidency. After the VP is the Speaker of the House who is a Republican and then the presidential pro tempore of the Senate (I don't know what party he is). Then comes the cabinet members starting with State.

Well, oops! Of course, Mike, that is correct. I must have been too excited by that theory to not remember that. Still, I cannot yet buy that "liberals" are the ones being targeted. I suppose as more time goes by, we will see more clearly.

I got this very 3T email today:

Me Bin Analsoda:
Headlines Made from Anagrams
of Osama Bin Laden
by Jeremy Skinner


Osama Bin Laden: A Solid Bean Man

Osama Bin Laden: A Lebanon Midas

Osama Bin Laden: An N.D. Salami Bone!

Osama Bin Laden: Bad Man is Alone.

Osama Bin Laden: Do a Lenin Samba

Osama Bin Laden: Also a Bean Mind

Osama Bin Laden: Is Bad Anal Omen

Osama Bin Laden: Me Solid Banana

Osama Bin Laden: I'd Analbeam Son

Osama Bin Laden: I'm a Sandle Bone!

Osama Bin Laden: I'm No Bean Salad

Osama Bin Laden: Anal Bias Demon

Osama Bin Laden: Made in Anal S.O.B.

and my favorite:

Osama Bin Laden: A Lesbian Nomad :grin:

Kiff '61

On 2001-10-16 15:52, Mike Alexander '59 wrote:
Daschle is not in line for the Presidency. After the VP is the Speaker of the House who is a Republican and then the presidential pro tempore of the Senate (I don't know what party he is). Then comes the cabinet members starting with State.

That would be Mr. Byrd,(D-WVa) ex-KKK and paver of West Virginia. HTH

I see the social unrest Marc talks about as being similar to awakening unrest like that of the late 1960's and early 1970's, and of the 1820's and 1830's. There were massive race riots in East St. Louis in 1917 and Chicago in 1919 in addition to Communist agitation (a nationwide wave of strikes occurred in 1919). Similarly there were race riots in 1965 and 1967 and massive antiwar unrest in the early 1970's. The earlier period saw Denmark Vessy's slave rebellion in 1822 and Nat Turner's famous revolt nine years later.

All of this unrest was "left-wing" type unrest in that the protesters were challenging the status-quo or "establisment" and "progressive" in that they were proposing something new.

Bin Laden, McVeigh and the disgruntled taxpayer in Bath MI who blew up 41 kids and teachers in 1927 (the #1, #2, and #3 top terrorist attacks in the US) are/were all right-wingers in that they were objecting to "progressive" governmental intrusion.

The 1960's and 1970's were a liberal era like the 1900's and 1910's Progressive era, and both periods were bedeviled by inflation. Arthur Schelsigner has the 1829-41 period a liberal era. The first two eras were ended by a conservative President who wished a return to older times (return to normalcy, Morning in America) and the start of a great bull market in stocks caused by an abrupt drop in inflation.

By the way, you are also right that WW I and the Gulf War are similar. There are different cycles (one of them shows this correspondence). Over the 1860-1929 period they were re-aligning and so they didn't all line up together then like they do today, and they did before 1860.

Well, I'm seeing your theory better now the more you explain, Mike.

BTW, does the AIDS epidemic parallel the Influenza pandemic, and does the institutionalization of drug-testing parallel Prohibition?

Folks, this particular one looks like a rather tasteless 3T to me, but make of it whatever you will:

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

On 2001-10-16 13:07, Mike Alexander '59 wrote:
I don't see the similarty between the leftists rounded up by the Palmer Raids and al Qaida.

Bin Laden strikes me as a rightwinger. The worldview of men like bin Laden is not disimilar to that of the extreme American religious Right. Both hate the atheistic American culture with its strutting homosexuals and bra-burning feminists and both hate the US government. Both have an obsessive hatred of the Jews. One refers to the US government as "Zionist Crusader Alliance" and the other as "Zionist Occupation Government".

I don't know how 'extreme' a faction of the Religious Right you're talking about. A good chunk of the Evangelical Christian Right is actually strongly pro-Israel for religious reasons. There are, of course, some super-extremists.

The targets selected by bin Laden were the very heart of "Blueland": New York City, the liberal press, the Democratic Senate Majority Leader and the US government--all natural targets for an extreme Rightwinger like bin Laden.

The biggest difference between them is fundamentalist Islam provides a glorious afterlife for suicidal attacks in a Jihad, whereas fundamentalist Christianity frowns on suicide. This is an extremely important difference for it makes the former far more dangerous.

From what I understand, the Koran is also rather harsh on the subject of suicide.

Barbra says "I read that exchange, and viewed it as angeli telling you your behavior was what she found racist. Never once did it lead me to think she was really calling YOU a blanket generic racist, no matter what her words might have been at the time"

Argh!!!!

okay, this is a major generational disconnect because that's not what I meant in the first place! And much as I don't want to go back there, if you, Barbra, didn't get what I meant, then I am really not communicating.

I imagine that most of you (Marc especially) don't get what I didn't like about the Web site and/or Marc's glee over the Web site.

First of all, I do *not* think Marc is a racist. (I might think he's a blowhard, but that's different). Nor do I think he was exhibiting racist behavior.

I thought he was being CLUELESS.

In fact so Clueless that the only reason he can come up with that I might object is because its racist. That's pretty darned Clueless, if you ask me.

The reason I didn't like the original Web site was not because I thought *it* was racist.

It's because I thought it was inappropriate and possibly dangerous.

While it was obvious to everyone on this forum that it was meant to be a joke, let me flatter you all with the reality that the posters here (Marc included) do not represent the average level of intelligence and critical thought.

I know (especially since the Prague fiasco) that there are people out there who aren't terribly sophisticated. There are plenty of White Supremicist sites that exist for the purpose of gathering like minded people. I've read them. (God, isn't reporting a fun job) And they sound a lot like that site.

And while I'm sure that the folks who put that site together thought that they were exaggerating so much that it would be obvious to everyone that it was a joke, I hate to tell them and all of you that they didn't exaggerate *enough*.

That site read scarily like sites that mean that stuff literally and seriously. And there are plenty of traumatized and messed up people out there who are already lashing out and attacking people who are just a little dark skinned. An Indian friend of mine in New Jersey got attacked last week.

Anyway. I do not think Marc is being a racist. I do not think the site is racist. But I do think that because Marc is white he is not aware of the way this could be misconstrued ... because he doesn't have to be ... in the same way that because he is a man he probably doesn't know how much Kotex cost, or the difference between panty shields and maxi pads or why those darned wings ... but never mind, I've grossed you all out enough.

God, I hate having things I say co-opted into some kind of symbolic mystical arguement that everyone else is having!

Barb, I am going to quote you in the following post. I am going to quote you in context, so don't think I'm out to twist anything you wrote. But rather a search... a journey... unto the unknown, and the unkwow... able. K?

Barb, writes, "Marc, although I've usually tried to back away from commenting on some of your posts I disagree with (and I suspect you do the same with me), I must try to go against my generational tendency now (and also at the risk of re-appearing as "Mom" between you two.

[Marc] Ugh :smile: That is the last thing I desired. All I was thinking was that you and Mr. O'Conor could debate without intervention.

[Barb] IMO, Brian, in his "ignore" post, was simply repeating what he'd posited to Edgar over on the Women and 4th Turning thread. This I took to be consistency on his part and nothing else. Perhaps you hadn't read that thread, but I thought you had...

[Marc] To compare Mr. O'Conor (even previous to his post about his cousin) to 'Edgar' is, well, come on Barb.

[Barb] As for your recent comments about angeli and the prior squabble: hey, she posted her opinion and you posted yours. Neither of you is going to change the other's mind or viewpoint on that. I read that exchange, and viewed it as angeli telling you your behavior was what she found racist. Never once did it lead me to think she was really calling YOU a blanket generic racist, no matter what her words might have been at the time (and I've not enough time right now to go read them again - and please don't post them again!).

[Marc] Yes, I made a mistake in bringing that mess up again in the 'Berkley' matter. I guess it was ms angeli's comment of 'Yeah, America at its finest,' that really got me. It just sounded so... patronizing, so in- your-face, 'white-boy, you is livin' in America easy, smooth and soft. You ain't gotta clue as ts the real world we, fill-in-the-blank-favorite-minority-group-picked-on-group-down-trodden-group-out-cast-group, that you 'white boys' love to just pick on. :smile:

Still, I shoulda just let it die. Sorry.

[Barb] We know you aren't racist, then and now. I liked your first recent words, to paraphrase, that we all need to coexist here, warts and all. And that very much includes having angeli remain here as one of us. I'm glad to see you back, Angeli. Please stay.

[Marc] Amen! Come back, ms angeli, come back! I love you.

And I mean that.

[Barb] Lastly, Marc, a gentle curiosity: that you can bring up so many quotes of other posters' seemingly at a moment's notice is something I find both fascinating and well, sort of intimidating. How in the world can you do that without expending vast amounts of time on it? Is this something you've developed in your vocation as a documentary producer? (And, a plea: please don't *show* me by regurgitating everything I've ever said. That would be a huge space-waster , and I'm already convinced you could if you needed to, no need to prove it, please).

[Marc] This I find a little baffling. I have no problem with anyone 'regurgitating everything I've ever said'! If I have said something I regret... I will freely admit it. Otherwise, I will defend what I have said. Why does this bother you, Barb?

[Barb] I do respect you Marc, as I respect Brian and Angeli, as well as everyone else here posting. I know you bring up these things again as food for thought, but the immense, vast quotation system is beginning to remind me too much of Big Brother.

[Marc] 'Big Brother'? You make my 'vast quotation system' sound like the 'vast right-wing conspiracy,' Barb.

Perhaps you need to reread Generations, or The Fourth Turning, mom. S&H made a few bucks there 'quoting' folks like a 'vast quotation system'.

I love you, Barb. And unlike most at this very website, I think your generation has a lot left to say about how this world 'turns' and the 'turnings' it makes. :smile:

Now unto Michael Alexander.

[Mike] I don't see the similarty between the leftists rounded up by the Palmer Raids and al Qaida.

[Marc] It is a post-Awakening fear. A 'fear' based in a weaken position in a world, yet to be discovered. The crack-down on the 'Reds' in 1920, was followed by the embracing of them ten years later by a new generation that was completely unaware of the Awakening that spawned such 'fear.'

[Mike] By the way, you are also right that WW I and the Gulf War are similar. There are different cycles (one of them shows this correspondence). Over the 1860-1929 period they were re-aligning and so they didn't all line up together then like they do today, and they did before 1860.

[Marc] I don't recall saying this. Are you directing this comment my way?

[Mike] I see the social unrest Marc talks about as being similar to awakening unrest like that of the late 1960's and early 1970's, and of the 1820's and 1830's.

[Marc] I have yet to respond to your post over in the Numbers thread, Michael. The 'materialist' philosophy to which you adhere to goes a long way in explaining why you don't understand the difference in your observation here.

[marc says] "I guess it was ms angeli's comment of 'Yeah, America at its finest,' that really got me. It just sounded so... patronizing, so in- your-face, 'white-boy, you is livin' in America easy, smooth and soft. You ain't gotta clue as ts the real world we, fill-in-the-blank-favorite-minority-group-picked-on-group-down-trodden-group-out-cast-group, that you 'white boys' love to just pick on. :smile:"

That wasn't quite how I meant it but Marc, if you're going to be an advocate of free speech and anti-political correctness you've got to get reconciled to hearing people say things that you find insulting once in a while. That's the way it bounces sometimes.

I'm not sure when it became inherently insulting to say to someone of European ancestry that they don't have the same experiences of someone who isn't of European ancestry. I mean membership hath its priviledges. And I am possibly more aware of this than someone who is black because sometimes South Asians are "white" and sometimes we're "minorities" and boy does it make a difference! The contrast is pretty interesting.

It doesn't make you bad. It does sometimes make you clueless, but that's okay. Everyone is clueless sometimes.

What's not okay is willful cluelessness, of the I-refuse-to-hear-that-I-don't-know-it-all-so-I'll-call-you-cheap-names-instead variety.

That was how I heard what you were saying.






<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: angeli on 2001-10-16 21:18 ]</font>

Not to change the subject or anything but I found some 4T evidence.

My hometown paper, The Buffalo News, ran a Sunday magazine article relating how everything has changed since 911. How everyone is thinking differently and how we can't go back to things they way they were.

Buffalo is as a middle of the road place as any, so I think it's good evidence of a 4T.

On a related note, somewhere I also saw that Tony Blair could be the new moral leader of the first world. The ariticle likened him to Winston Churchill. Could a GC be foreign?

I haven't been able to keep up on all the newest posts since I've started a new job. And I've missed having the time to add my two cents. Guess I'll keep lurking for now.

:smile:

Well said, all. Page 38. It has been a nice, progressive read. I liked it. Marc, I didn't even get nervous when you quoted me. :smile:
However, you did make me think when you asked me why it makes me so nervous for you to quote me. It does, and I can't really tell you why at present. But I'll think on it.

I do have one quibble. I just want it on the record, whatever the misunderstanding was on this, in no way did I ever mean to compare Chris with Edgar, nor did I mean to infer that Brian did, either. That's important to me that I say that. There is no similarity at all in my mind, never was, never even occurred to me. I hope that explains that.

Oh, and the comment Mike made about the comparison between Gulf War and WWI, Marc, I think he was throwing that my way. I had mentioned it in an earlier post.

Nice post-post, chosehl. We do rule. I risk stealing your intent here (and Marc's about two pages back), but please excuse me, I want to add my meager 2 cents. I'm verklempt (talk amongst yourselves) -- okay, I don't think I spend my valuable time reading all these posts much less composing replies just so I can interact daily with people I'm not connecting with on some level. And double ditto as to all of you spending your valuable time. We do connect, and sometimes, cyber relationships have bad days with the good. On other sites, you flick someone off and leave. Not here, hopefully. Here, every day is a new and different day, with many of the same people, like a family.

Yeah, I know it's cheesy and mushy, and I'm doing the typical Silent thing, but if you people are right, and we are going towards full-tilt 4T, we will be doing alot of the mushy stuff.

Hey, Donna! I've missed you having the time, too. I wondered where you'd gone to. You'll have to tell us about your new job sometime, please.

Not evidence, but a place to find it from: I've come around in the last week to really clicking onto what David Kaiser said awhile back, to watch the Xr parents with their (a label for the New Silents some of us are experimenting with on another thread) Homelander gen children. I hadn't really really thought about it before.

If this anthrax scare widens and deepens, that should force Xr parents to start the extra protection. Whereas GI kids and Millies were raised under the luxury of perceived greatness, Homelanders will be raised, like I was, under the danger or necessity of perceived survival. Even if the 3T proponents are right, it will still signal the coming Winter in a very reliable and tangible way. A Homelander baby now has cutaneous anthrax. That's going to be remembered, IMO, even if hundreds more get it. Anyway, here's hoping the Xr parents observe themselves and post, as well as friends and loved ones and other observers of Xr parents. I'm thinking David had it going on right from the get-go, as usual. :smile:

I guess I'm honing in on it now because I found out a few days ago from my Xr son and his wonderful Xr wife that I'm going to be the grandmother of a brand new little baby next Spring. It's on my radar now.

Let me say this slowly as I still cannot halfway believe it (so, everbody, read it slowly for me (g): I am going to have a grandchild who will be the same generational archetype as me. Wow, huh. Is that cool, or what?



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Barbara on 2001-10-16 23:00 ]</font>

As a coworker of mine has said, "The experiment is now over."

Several times in the past few weeks, I've read things some people have written, thought about trying to argue a point, and sometimes even written a long post describing the problems with the person's argument and/or the reasons why we disagree. Barbara, on at least five of these occasions (yes, five), you were the person I would have been aiming at. You and I disagree substantially on a number of things... but this post isn't about those arguments, so please forgive me if I don't delineate them here. However, I think it's important to let you know that "this attack" did not come "out of nowhere" as far as I'm concerned. I prefer to think of it as 13er pragmatism up to that point, having thrown away so many heated arguments I didn't think were worth the effort to fight.

While I'm on the subject of forgiveness, let me clear up a few things before I start: I'm sorry if this post offends anyone, as I'm trying to be straight up in what I'm saying here. On the other hand, I won't apologize for anything I've said up to now, because I've tried to convey my attitude and opinions honestly (even if you think I have been stretching the boundaries of civil behavior). Likewise, I'm sorry if you feel you've been manipulated unfairly by what I'm about to admit, since I was simply trying to use the forum for it's intended purpose: to offer evidence toward the argument of 3T vs. 4T, and S&H's theories in general.

When this whole conversation (a.k.a. "this abyss") began, I allowed myself to react to something Barbara had said. I simply got fed up, and allowed the Xer in me to reign full force. But the "textbook" way some people responded (as far as generational stereotyping) simply fascinated me (not to mention that it occasionally gave me fits of laughter). As the conversation continued, I couldn't help but offer some more fuel to the fire, just to see how it would burn. Most of these (especially some of the jabs in my last post), specifically included hints that I thought would clue people in to what I was doing. The (apparently) funny part was, no one did. In fact, it seems as though I hit buttons so accurately that people ignored or misunderstood the hints altogether.

As luck would have it (for good or ill), Marc posted something I had said on another topic that I think brought the conversation to a nice climax, and I sat back to watch how people might respond to him. Though you can only take my word for it, I accurately predicted how some people replied, and found the whole thing quite instructive.

I offer now an analysis of some of the highlights of the conversation, with detailed explanations of what I meant when I said some things.


<BIG>NOMADS</BIG>

S&H wrote:

We remember Nomads best for their rising-adult years of hell-raising...

My first post (which I won't bother to quote) was a typical 13er tirade against the elder generations, complaining about how they screwed things up for us, cloaked in a healthy dose of fatalism. My main focus was the Silent generation, since they (including my parents) are mainly responsible for the way we are. For all that I rail against Boomers, they are also merely reacting as they have been programmed, but in their own way. (Not saying this absolves them of any blame - I just understand more than I care to let on sometimes.)

Go back and look that post over. Try not to let the venom distract you, and look at what I'm saying. Now pull out your copy of 13th Generation and tell me that S&H couldn't have been my ghost writer.

And now, compare:

Chris '68 wrote:

Evidence that we have passed the catalyst into a 4T will come when children who were required to speak the words of the Pledge of Allegiance return to Arlington National Cemetery in body bags, and there's a national consensus that they learned the meaning of those words well, and the gratitude and pride overshadow the sorrow and grief.

Evidence that we are at the climax will come when we - without flinching - ask our own children to fill one of those bags themselves.

with:

S&H wrote:

As pragmatic NOMADS replace Prophets in midlife during a Crisis, they apply toughness and resolution to defend society while safeguarding the interests of the young.

I seem to be approaching the 4T, or I'm already in it.

Okay, putting Millennials into body bags it's exactly "safeguarding", but during the Crisis, they aren't the ones we're trying to save - S&H are talking about the new Artists here, and we're going to use the Millennials "to defend society". You might not be able to sense it from the words, but I'm not happy about what might happen to Millennials (including my own children, now 11 and 9). But if we're to save the future....

S&H wrote:

(Nomads') principal endowments are in the domain of liberty, survival, and honor.

IOW, we're gonna do what we gotta do.

BTW (a mostly unrelated aside coming up...), I thought about the word "honor" in the statement above, and then thought about Barbara's complaints about my "diatribe". I'd think perhaps a Silent would say I wasn't very honorable back there, but I felt very 13er as I did it. So where's the catch?

I believe this is a word that resonates with every generation, but each once hears something different in the sound:

To an Artist, Honor means playing by the rules.

To a Prophet, Honor means standing by your principles.

To a Nomad, Honor means keeping a promise.

To a Hero, Honor means standing by your friends.

(please offer comments or criticisms on this)

My "promise" was (and has been for about 15 years now) that when I had some, I would not allow my children to have the same kind of permissive upbringing I had. And so (perhaps aided by a month's worth of pent-up angst) when there was a conversation that essentially made fun of how young students don't (can't?, won't?) understand the Pledge, my fangs came out.

(3 paragraphs of unrelated drivel deleted. Ask and I'll discuss it somewhere else.)


Lastly, we turn to TrollKing:

TrollKing said:
ok, well, then to play by your game, let me simply say:

blow it out your ass.

This is just such a fantastic 13er quote, I had to point it out again! :smile:



<BIG>PROPHETS</BIG>

Brian Rush wrote:

Well, Chris, with that bit of nonsense, indicating that you are being rude purely for the sake of rude, you place yourself firmly into the "ignore" category.

I will make no more response to anything you post until such time as you have demonstrated a bit more maturity. My advice to everyone else here is to do likewise.

You will, of course, feel inclined to respond to this with a bit more rudeness, and my advice to you about that, which you will probably disregard, is: don't waste your time. You certainly won't be wasting any more of mine.

S&H wrote:

Their principal endowments are in the domain of vision, values, and religion.... These have been principled moralists, summoners of human sacrifice, wagers of righteous wars. Early in life, none saw combat in uniform; late in life, most came to be revered more for their inspiring words than for their grand deeds.

Hmmm.... well, you're still young yet, Mr. Rush. Maybe you're a late bloomer.

Marc Lamb wrote:

I dunno about that. I seemed to remember a time not too long ago when such kinds of "maturity" were demonstrated quite loudly....

Furthermore, I continue to be troubled by your never ending insistence that those who disagree with you must shut-up.

You are not the owner of this website, Mr. Rush. And you are not the moderator of this website, Mr. Rush. And you are certainly not the sole authoritive voice of truth at this website, Mr. Rush.

Now get over it!

Marc, there is a difference between being rude simply for the sake of being rude, and insulting someone who has earned the treatment.

I have never been rude for the sake of being rude, nor insulted anyone who hasn't earned the treatment.

Moreover, they earned the treatment not be "disagreeing with me" (something most people do about one thing or another), but by being obnoxious, bigoted, and insufferable. As, on a number of occasions, you have done.

Now, I am also aware that I'm not the moderator of this site. I am, however, the moderator of my own responses to people. In that area, my authority is absolute. And it was to that area only that I was referring, when I promised to ignore Chris henceforth until he demonstrated a bit more maturity.

You've already demonstrated a bit more maturity than you used to, which is why I'm bothering to respond to that bit of backsliding you evidenced earlier. You've shown yourself worth the effort.

S&H wrote:

As judgmental PROPHETS replace Artists in midlife during an Unraveling, they preach a downbeat, values-fixated ethic of moral conviction.

Yes, Mr. Rush is definitely stuck in 3T.

For some reason, the sound of Marlin Perkins' voice comes back to me from my childhood. I can just hear him doing an episode comparing the duels of opinionated Boomers to the fights for dominance among the male red-breasted thrush. (No, I don't know anything about birds, but it sounded cool. For the uninitiated, this is a reference to Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom.) :smile:

S&H wrote:

As visionary PROPHETS replace Artists in elderhood during a Crisis, they push to resolve ever-deepening moral choices, setting the stage for the secular goals of the young.

Both you gentlemen have a ways to go, IMHO. But your adherence to the script is... breathtaking.



<BIG>ARTISTS</BIG>

S&H wrote:

As empathic ARTISTS replace Heroes in elderhood during an Unraveling, they quicken the pace of social change, shunning the old order in favor of complexity and sensitivity.

Barbara wrote:

2)wanting to worry about his state of mind and his hurt feelings, did he have a horrible no good terrible bad day, (being the uncaring, unworthy former teacher that I am accused of, how fitting I'd worry about someone who just verbally slapped me in the face!),

Barbara wrote:

You need to calm down, Chris. This coming crisis will eat you up if you don't.

S&H wrote:

Their principal endowment activities are in the domain of pluralism, expertise, and due process.... These have been sensitive and complex social technicians, advocates of fair play and the politics of inclusion.

Barbara wrote:

And don't make me or anyone else who was enjoying the conversation with me your scapegoat either. You crossed the line, son. That wasn't healthy and vigorous discourse.

Barbara wrote:

IOW, to me, this attack came out of nowhere, and any difference of opinion could have been addressed in a much more civil manner and I'd have been very gracious in feeling someone else's pain if it had been communicated as such.

I keep a bright outlook that Chris and I will see better, more communicative times. Every day is a new day, in my book. But, the blood of overboard attacks, if he chooses to continue in same vein, are on his hands, not mine.

Barbara wrote:

I suspect Chris is further into this Crisis emotionally than most of us due to his loss, and most understandably so. It will be a minefield of emotions for many of us during this coming Turning, so I reseolve to try to remember 2 things: when we have unwittingly hurt, understand the other's perspective, if possible; and when we have been hurt, remember to keep perspective, if possible. Life - the Reality, is relentless in that it does tend to continue on, unabated.

So, Chris, I may have reacted like Charlie McCarthy, but it was only because I didn't realize what was going on with you, and I now grieve with you over the loss of your cousin. Whether my teaching career was insulted is no longer as important to me. Come back and post again, we don't want to lose you, as well. I took the time to read several of your prior posts here on T4T, and you are a sensitive, intuitive writer with important things to say.

(Side note: I wrote earlier that I seem to be approaching the 4T already, and apparently Barbara agrees with me.)

The above say it better than I ever could. In fact, I don't think I could have written better than that if I'd set out to write a "Silent" parody. I guess I do indeed "have a talent for... giving a good tweak (to) members of (your) generation," because every time I posted something, you replied with exactly what I was expecting you to say next. I eventually had to say:

Chris wrote:

Charlie McCarthy never said it better, Barbara.

Much to my bewilderment, you made the "I may have reacted like Charlie McCarthy..." remark. I couldn't understand why anyone would agree! with such a barbed pun, when a friend suggested you might be thinking of Joe McCarthy - someone who severely overreacted, contributing to his own downfall. Is that what happened?

Barbara, I was referring to my "talent for... giving a good tweak". I was "pulling your strings", as it were. I was referring to Charlie McCarthy. You remember him, don't you? Does the name Edgar Bergen ring any bells?


Again, everyone look back over the last few days of posts. This topic is supposed to be dedicated to "Evidence We're in a Third--or Fourth--Turning". In many cases, our own words betray us. Not only do they highlight our generational archetype, but in some cases, they can indicate whether we're approaching 4T or if we've already entered it. I sense that we've started the march, even if some elements of the column haven't crossed the border yet.

Of course, that could just be because I'm in The Fourth Turning.


_________________
Christopher O'Conor
aka "Opusaug"
proud 13er, '68 cohort

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chris '68 on 2001-10-17 01:30 ]</font>

Marc, the bit about WW I and the Gulf wars was directed to Barb.

IMO your last post where you started to explain your views was much better than your other posts when you mak elliptical statements with the implied expectation that the reader can "read your mind" as to what you are trying to say.

[Marc:] It is a post-Awakening fear. A 'fear' based in a weaken position in a world, yet to be discovered. The crack-down on the 'Reds' in 1920, was followed by the embracing of them ten years later by a new generation that was completely unaware of the Awakening that spawned such 'fear.'

[Mike:] Wouldn't the slave revolts of the 1820's and 1830's also inspire fear on the part of slave owners that their position was weakening? Nat Turner caused a level of terror and a crackdown on the part of slaveowners all out of proportion with what actually happened. Yet were not such seemingly irrational fears justified by what eventually happened? There *was* a massive insurrection with widespread death and destruction that freed the slaves, and the way of life of the Southern gentleman was destroyed forever.

Just in case anyone's clueless:



(clockwise from top) Edgar Bergen, Mortimer Snerd, and Charlie McCarthy

:smile:


_________________
Christopher O'Conor
aka "Opusaug"
proud 13er, '68 cohort

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chris '68 on 2001-10-17 07:16 ]</font>

[Hopeful Cynic:] I don't know how 'extreme' a faction of the Religious Right you're talking about. A good chunk of the Evangelical Christian Right is actually strongly pro-Israel for religious reasons. There are, of course, some super-extremists.

[Mike:] The people I am talking about are folks like Randy Weaver and Bo Gritz. They have wierd, very conspiracy-minded views of the world. These strange beliefs serve to "explain" to the losers that embrace them *why* they are failures. Since these people are losers they have no organization and no competance and so we have little to fear from them, aside from an occassional Oklahoma City or Bath MI bombing.

In the Islamic world their entire society has become somewhat of a loser relative to the West and wierd beliefs that "explain" their failure will have greater currency than in the US. Not only that, but the US really *is* overtly involved in Middle Eastern affairs (because of the oil). This provides some factual basis for their beliefs about the US as a Great Satan.

The belief system they must hold to function as terrorists is much less wierd in the context of their day-to-day life as is the belief system American terrorists must hold. Muslims who are sane can believe these things. Not only that, but a higher calibre of individual can be recruited.

It is also a fact that the Islamic terrorists (as opposed to our domestic breed like McVeigh) ARE willing to die for their cause, and that this willingness appears to be greatly aided by their version of Islam. There is no version of Christianity of which I am aware that American terrorists can use to justify suicidal attacks. I note that guys like McVeigh don't seem to be willing to make suicidal attacks.

What this means is there is a large population of potential terrorists (some of whom are talented, and a few who are both talented and willing to die if necessary) in the Islamic countries to begin with. Finally the dominant cultural influences in their society do not actively discourage extreme relgious beliefs to anywhere the same level as they do in the USA. Finally the fact that the US is so much more tolerant of rightwing beliefs than leftwing beliefs does NOT help. Our own CIA had (and continues to have) a major role in training, equipping and encouraging these people.

As a result it is possible to create armies of *competant* and *sane* rightwing terrorists (often with American help) in Muslim countries while in the US all that you could get is a bunch of loons. It is the high quality of the Islamic terrorist that makes them so dangerous.

Bottom line: you can't expect to breed armies of terrorists to fight a war against one Great Satan and be surprised when they find another one (YOU!) to fight with after the first one is defeated.

This is not a new problem. In certain intriguing ways its like a repeat of the problem of the "Free Companies" in 14th and 15th century France.

From the "clueless" one comes some 'war' posters from a different time and place?




Note: Replace 'Hun' with 'Taliban'

http://www.msnbc.com/news/643914.asp?0dm=L18QN

To paraphrase the book...In the Third Turning, these fears would be subliminal but rising. During the catalyst, these fears will rush to the surface, jagged and exposed.

Stars cancel major events, including weddings.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10162001/gossip/pagesix.htm

This is another example of early 4T era fears.

Not evidence, but a place to find it from: I've come around in the last week to really clicking onto what David Kaiser said awhile back, to watch the Xr parents with their (a label for the New Silents some of us are experimenting with on another thread) Homelander gen children. I hadn't really really thought about it before.

If this anthrax scare widens and deepens, that should force Xr parents to start the extra protection. Whereas GI kids and Millies were raised under the luxury of perceived greatness, Homelanders will be raised, like I was, under the danger or necessity of perceived survival. Even if the 3T proponents are right, it will still signal the coming Winter in a very reliable and tangible way. A Homelander baby now has cutaneous anthrax. That's going to be remembered, IMO, even if hundreds more get it. Anyway, here's hoping the Xr parents observe themselves and post, as well as friends and loved ones and other observers of Xr parents. I'm thinking David had it going on right from the get-go, as usual. :smile:
[/quote]

My wife (Boomer '53) recently admitted to me that, since 911, she has found it difficult to leave our two year old at daycare, her mother's or anyplace away from her protection. In fact her standard line of reassurance for our little Homelander/post-Homelander is "Mommy won't let anything happen to you." How's that for a 4T sign, Barbara?

On a related note: Do we need a contest to name the generation of Barbara'a new grandson and my next child (adoption paperwork is dragging on and on and ...)

It's weird to read about something that's in my own field to see the hype. I now understand the huge rally in late 1999 that cost me big bucks (being short). These computer guys *knew* that nothing would come of Y2K and they cleaned up.

I see an article that says the presence of alumina compounds in the anthrax powder means it is so high tech that a government HAS to be behind it. Oh come on! These compounds are flowing agents added to all sorts of powders to keep them free flowing. Another standard use it to add them to your spray driers to prevent clumping. (Spray drying is a possible techology one would consider when making such an agent).

A common agent used is cornstarch. One of the articles I read suggested that very fine particles were obtained suggesting high tech. OK they used a micronizer, in which case they might very well have used cornstarch as the dispersal agent.

Let's look at some facts. The anthrax responds to penicillin. Another article I read said to responds to all antibiotics. This has to be a native strain. Scratch a bioweapon strain. That means that very expensive high-tech gene jocks like Jon Carson were *not* involved with this bug.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Mike Alexander '59 on 2001-10-17 17:14 ]</font>

A good web site for the strategic implications of the events occurring in our world every day is http://www.stratfor.com which, admittedly, is a subscription service. For example, they just posted a report on how an assassination in Israel is pushing the Isaeli government to take a harder line, and how this would threaten our coalition.