It's really hard to say whether we are or aren't in a Fourthturning.......the mood of the country has changed, but in many ways it's still the same.......It's almost as if the mood shift stalled and went retrograde, but it's still not what it was on 9/10......could we still be in an extended Indian Summer? What will have to happen to push the mood change over the edge? And why aren't the authors weighing in on this? :???:

The authors aren't wieighing in on this because they are busy weighing some new book project and they want to hear our opinions for thier research without seeming too partial to any kind of view. If they weighed in too much they would influence our views which wouldn't be good for the dynamism of the forums. Another thing worth noting is that this is how they make their bread and butter. It's not for the sake of just hearing our opinions, though I'm sure they value all of our opinions. Which is to say they can't make their bread and butter if they are weighing in because much of their research, while methodical, still relies on anecdotal evidence as well as everyday discourse for valuable information. Think of them as being umpires in a baseball game or talkshow hosts and you get the idea.

For the record I'm not suggesting there is anything wrong with making one's bread and butter off of research about social phenomena. My college professors did the same and they gave me plenty of knowledge I will value for the rest of my days.

JayN, thanks, that makes sense, I sorta thought of the therapeutic model.........The paitient asks....the therapist replies...what do YOU think?

Does anyone know the subject of the current project?

My guess: an analysis of 9/11 and discussion about the question: "Is this it (4T)?"

That makes sense I quess, but what if something earthshaking happens in the meantime? Won't the point be moot then?

On 2002-01-18 12:41, BoomXer wrote:
It's really hard to say whether we are or aren't in a Fourthturning.......the mood of the country has changed, but in many ways it's still the same.......It's almost as if the mood shift stalled and went retrograde, but it's still not what it was on 9/10......could we still be in an extended Indian Summer? What will have to happen to push the mood change over the edge? And why aren't the authors weighing in on this? :???:

It was the same after President Kennedy was shot and ushered America into the 2T. In 1964, '65 and '66, life in suburban New Jersey had pretty much reverted to what it was in '63....although I understand from my parents that an intangible "something" felt a tad off-kilter, out of place, not quite right. It wasn't until the Newark riots, the RFK and MLK assasinations, and the Tet offensive in 1967-68 that it became clear what that "something" actually was.

For this reason, I believe that we are now in 4T, even if in many ways life still feels 3T. As in '64, the mood in '02 is similar to that of '00 and early '01 except.....what???....again, a certain something that doesn't feel quite right. But by Twenty-Oh-Four, whatever that something is will acquire a very clear shape that is obvious to all.

Mr. Parker writes, "It was the same after President Kennedy was shot and ushered America into the 2T."

What was so special about Kennedy going down? I mean the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 was much more dangerous and frightening.

And what about the leadership 'peak' factor that S&H talk about in Generations? Every generation, previous to the GIs, peaked in their associated season: Like the Missionaries in 1923, or the Lost in 1943. But because Kennedy got shot prior to the GI peak in 1965, or Reagan's victory prior to the Silent peak in 1985, the whole generational 'driver' is somehow changed?

This appears to me to be another "anomaly," Mr. Parker. And just how many anomalies does a 'theory of history' get every one hundred years before the 'homelanders' trash it as pure bunk!

No! Summer did not arrive because the myth of Camelot seemingly crumbled in downtown Dallas in 1963. LBJ managed to keep the GI hubris going quite strongly in the years following with the completely approving public.

Perhaps a little history from those Silents that were actually there might enlighten the 4T crowd on just when summer really did arrive in the USA:


The Year the Dream Died: Revisiting 1968 in America

Coming Apart : A Memoir of the Harvard Wars of 1969


1929, and the stock market crash, stands out among historians because what followed was a radical infusion of federal government power (ie., Karl Marx) into a free-market capitalistic system that had been only hinted at previously. The "Death of a [GI] President," in 1963 had no such bearing upon the generation of Whitcover and Rosenblatt.

But Bobby and Martin, two of there own did. And as noted in their books, it changed them into political "compromisers."

And such is the Silent Generation today with a 37% share of national leadership and men like Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Gephardt, John McCain, Jim Jeffords, John Ashcroft and Trent Lott.

Folks, we are 3T. Period.





<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc S. Lamb on 2002-01-18 21:36 ]</font>

Mr. Lamb writes, "What was so special about Kennedy going down? I mean the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 was much more dangerous and frightening."

I tend to agree-- considering that I remember the CMC (which occurred just before my third birthday), whereas I don't remember Dallas at all except what I learned after the fact. However, Marc, are you suggesting that the Awakening didn't begin until 1968, and that the Unravelling didn't begin until sometime after 1985? That is a new wrinkle indeed-- an interesting one.

I myself have often written that my own personal High experience ended with the burning of Downtown Newark in '67, and the National Guard saving us from the rioters. And I still wonder if the Unravelling did not, in fact, begin with the explosion of Space Shuttle Challenger in 1986. Both of those events left a far stronger impression on me than JFK's assassination and Reagan's reelection, respectively.

The problem I see with your scenario, Marc, is that although the High mood may have lasted until the Summer of Love on the surface, the societal trends which later came to define the early Awakening -- the British Invasion, campus protests over Vietnam, urban riots in general -- began in 1964 and '65, almost immediately after Kennedy's murder and long before The Year The Dream Died. Likewise, one cannot deny that the mood of the so-called Reagan Revolution that ended the Awakening was pretty much etched in stone long before Challenger (or, for that matter, the 1987 Stock Market Crash....). 1985 would seem to be the latest date, not the earliest, that the Unravelling could have begun, based on what was going on in America at the time.

On the matter of our current turning status, we may very well remain in 3T (though I still doubt it). The jury is still out on whether 911 was the 3T climax or the 4T trigger, and I suppose we may not know for sure either way for two, five, even ten years. We'll have to wait and see. The final answer, it seems to me, may well determine whether the saeculum, in fact, continues to shrink as Mike Alexander(?)and others on this site believe.

Makes sense to me Kevin. Time will tell.

Mr. Parker writes, "I myself have often written that my own personal High experience ended with the burning of Downtown Newark in '67, and the National Guard saving us from the rioters."

One needs to understand the cycle, and how it goes up and down. Consider a generation that faced "race" riots during WWII:

The 1943 Detroit race riots, or the race riots in Mississippi, El Paso, Texas, Beaumont, Texas, Detroit. Or the "Zootsuit race riots in Los Angeles, or the Port Chicago Explosion and Mutiny.

The race riots of the 1960's, Mr. Parker, were a continuation of the Dubois revolution that burnt itself out with the death of King in 1968. The "dream" had "died." And it gave way to such utter failures, such as forced school busing and the silly rehtoric of Jessie, that guy with the bad hair day and, of course, Political Correctness.

HTH.





Two Centuries of Race Riots in the USA

What's special about the Kennedy assassination? It started the Awakening. Solstice turnings begin with the action of the generation entering elderhood, and the subsequent reaction by the generation entering young adulthood.

Why did the Kennedy assassination start the Awakening? Because of the GIs. While S&H mark it when the Prophets start rebelling, we can also mark it by the actions of the Hero generations. The Cuban Missle Crisis did not cause a reaction from the elder generation, and they handled it well.

The death of Kennedy, however, hit at the heart of people alive at that time. So, what's a GI to do? They tried to pretend that nothing happened. In doing so, the began to push down on the economic accelerator, tried to rationalize everything, and decided to "build their way to bliss". After the assassination, the GIs overpowered the Lost, and gained national power. That's the significance of the Kennedy assassination. With that, the Boomers decided to rebel. With the action of the GIs, one can say that the Awakening began in 1963.

Let's look at today. The endowments of the Artist archetype has quickly fallen out of favor. Boomers have taken the scene. While there are Silent in power, it is the Boomer persona that is VERY dominant at this time. After the 2002 election, Boomers will be even more dominant. Now, we only need to wait the reaction of Millies this year.

On 2002-01-18 22:39, Marc S. Lamb wrote:



Mr. Parker writes, "I myself have often written that my own personal High experience ended with the burning of Downtown Newark in '67, and the National Guard saving us from the rioters."

One needs to understand the cycle, and how it goes up and down. Consider a generation that faced "race" riots during WWII:

The 1943 Detroit race riots, or the race riots in Mississippi, El Paso, Texas, Beaumont, Texas, Detroit. Or the "Zootsuit race riots in Los Angeles, or the Port Chicago Explosion and Mutiny.

The race riots of the 1960's, Mr. Parker, were a continuation of the Dubois revolution that burnt itself out with the death of King in 1968. The "dream" had "died." And it gave way to such utter failures, such as forced school busing and the silly rehtoric of Jessie, that guy with the bad hair day and, of course, Political Correctness.

HTH.

That still does nothing to support, or refute, the notion that the 2T and 3T started later than S&H's dates, or whether the 4T started with 911.

"After the assassination, the GIs overpowered the Lost, and gained national power."

Sorry, Mr. Reed, but that's exactly what it supposed to happen during a spring of mid-life Civic hubris! In 1965 the GI generation were squarely (no pun intended) in mid-life at an average age of 51 years! Dig it, man!

You've fallen for the Kennedy myth! :smile:

The Lost still had enough power to prevent many, many pieces of legislation from getting through until about 1964.

On 2002-01-18 19:24, Kevin Parker '59 wrote:

On 2002-01-18 12:41, BoomXer wrote:
It's really hard to say whether we are or aren't in a Fourthturning.......the mood of the country has changed, but in many ways it's still the same.......It's almost as if the mood shift stalled and went retrograde, but it's still not what it was on 9/10......could we still be in an extended Indian Summer? What will have to happen to push the mood change over the edge? And why aren't the authors weighing in on this? :???:

It was the same after President Kennedy was shot and ushered America into the 2T. In 1964, '65 and '66, life in suburban New Jersey had pretty much reverted to what it was in '63....although I understand from my parents that an intangible "something" felt a tad off-kilter, out of place, not quite right. It wasn't until the Newark riots, the RFK and MLK assasinations, and the Tet offensive in 1967-68 that it became clear what that "something" actually was.

For this reason, I believe that we are now in 4T, even if in many ways life still feels 3T. As in '64, the mood in '02 is similar to that of '00 and early '01 except.....what???....again, a certain something that doesn't feel quite right. But by Twenty-Oh-Four, whatever that something is will acquire a very clear shape that is obvious to all.

I couldn't have said this better myself. Thanks Kevin.

On 2002-01-18 19:24, Kevin Parker '59 wrote:

It was the same after President Kennedy was shot and ushered America into the 2T. In 1964, '65 and '66, life in suburban New Jersey had pretty much reverted to what it was in '63....although I understand from my parents that an intangible "something" felt a tad off-kilter, out of place, not quite right. It wasn't until the Newark riots, the RFK and MLK assasinations, and the Tet offensive in 1967-68 that it became clear what that "something" actually was.

For this reason, I believe that we are now in 4T, even if in many ways life still feels 3T. As in '64, the mood in '02 is similar to that of '00 and early '01 except.....what???....again, a certain something that doesn't feel quite right. But by Twenty-Oh-Four, whatever that something is will acquire a very clear shape that is obvious to all.

I think you nailed it. Many old Lost and GI will (or did when they were alive) tell you that they remember where they were when they got the news of the crash in '29. But life did not change radically overnight. It took a year or two for the new mood to sink in when there was full realization that life was not the same as it was before. Once it did, everybody looked back to that day in 1929 they remembered so well as the point at which everything changed.

Obviously there was that off-kilter feeling for about two years after the Crash. That is what I feel now and I guess you do too. There have been so many radical changes in our government since 911 that surely a lot of people feel a bit off-kilter even if they cannot articulate why. Our future, both nationally and internationally, is very uncertain today when it was perfectly linear and predictable prior to 911. This is the source of that off-balance feeling. And this is why we are now in the 4T and it should be clear to us by perhaps 2003 or 2004.

Look for a critical election in 2004. The Republicans are moving blatantly from conservatism to fascism/corporatism. In response, the Democrats will shift to be more anarchist and Green so as to diametrically oppose the Republicans (per the two-dimensional grid).

Today's predictions for the 2002 elections are ludicrous. These year out projections worked during the 3T when things were so stable and predictable. But events have been happening so fast since 911 and they should continue to do so. In other words, anything could happen because the earlier stability and predictability is gone. The 2002 elections should be inconclusive. The 2004 elections should be critical.

"After the assassination, the GIs overpowered the Lost, and gained national power. That's the significance of the Kennedy assassination." --Robert Reed

I know full well that I might as well try to empty the Atlantic Ocean with a tea cup as to attempt to refute this belief with the actual numbers, but...

In 1775, there were no members of the Enlightenment generation in national leadership. And by contrast, the Ben Franklin's Awakeners had already peaked and were falling rapidly of the charts to a dismal 25% share in 1777.

In 1823, the vaunted peers of Jefferson held a paltry 15% of the leadership share across the nation as the Second Great Awakening began. Their so-called hubris had been completely unchecked by the Liberty generation for over ten years!

In 1859, only 2% of the Compromisers were left in national office. In 1887, the beginning of the Third Awakening, only 38% of the Gilded were left, and when the Awakening ended in 1908, the Progressives had already peaked ten years earlier.

And how many Progressives were on the scene in 1929? Seven%, Mr. Reed! Compare today's Silents that still command over 30%.

And how many members of the Lost were still around in 1968? Eight%, the same generational constellation as compared to 1929.


"The final answer, it seems to me, may well determine whether the saeculum, in fact, continues to shrink as Mike Alexander(?)and others on this site believe." --Kevin Parker

While, Mike Alexander has made it very clear, time and time again, that unless Marc Lamb is interpeting the S&H theory correctly (and he has stated that he believes I am) then the S&H theory is completely invalidated with a fourth turn any earlier that 2005.

It's just that simple, folks. :smile:

Marc:

You do make a good argument. But however, remember that we can't really make a judgement based on numbers until November 2002. If There is a generational landslide, then it will confirm that we are in 4T.

Quite basically, the 9/11 event would be an early event. Not only that, but it was extremely sudden. So while we were in 3T on September 10th, September 11 caused such a large psychological, political, cultural, and economic shockwave to override this. Still, as many people say, even while things seem more normal, something is just "out of sync". So clearly, we are not out of the water yet. And of course, the question can be best answered in November 2002.

On page 367 of Generations, there is a table with the "Principal Callings, by Generational Type". Under Adaptives, we have Artists, Lawyers, Therapists, Legislators, and Statisticians. Under Idealists, we have Preachers, Writers, Radicals, Publishers, and Teachers. Clearly, in this post 9/11 era, the Silent generation has been marginalized. Even with the Silent's large numbers, no one is listening to them. The Boomers are getting all of the attention, and Millies are even starting to grab some of this attention away from Boomers themselves. Turn to page 372 in the same book. "Within any era, the most striking pattern is not so much the emergence of a new endowment activity (which is gradual), but the decline of an old activity (which is rapid). Now, go to T4T, on page 96. The Prophet endowments are vision, values, and religion. The Artist endowments are pluralism, expertise, and due process. Clearly, the Artist endowments have fallen out of favor with blinding speed. Even today, with calm nerves, the shift is still very apparent. Xers, Boomers, and Millies no longer care for Artist endowments, and are even starting to despise these endowments. The Prophet endowments are much more favored, the Nomad endowments (liberty, survival, and honor) are now looming large, and growing. Hero endowments (community, affluence, and technology), are just starting to enter the picture. Community is the largest part of this, but the emergence of class politics is a sign of affluence. Technology will come a little later. The only thing is that the citizens have yet to go to the polls since the 9/11 attacks. But if this trend continues, and the Prophet endowments continue with their popularity today, and the Artist endowments continue with their unpopularity today until November, then we will begin to see a generational landslide in which the make-up of national leadership will reflect the current mood today. There is no sign that Artist endowments will return. Prophet endowments are getting more powerful. The Nomad endowments are at this time much more powerful than the Artist endowments, and are also getting stronger. For now, it still looks like 4T.

_________________
Robert Reed III (1982)
---------------------------------------------
"Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: madscientist on 2002-01-19 12:18 ]</font>

Marc is quite right. If S&H's model for generational history is valid *and* they have identified the correct generations (including that the Civil War hero gen is missing) then the 4T must yet be quite some time away.

However, suppose there *was* a Civil War hero gen? After all the construction given by S&H was originally developed with the idea that generations average 22 years in length. This idea died after they identified six additional generations which averaged much longer than 22 years.

It now became inescapable that generational length was shortening and there was no longer a need to adjust the generational scheme to keep the recent average length close to 22 years. A Civil War hero gen can now be added in:

Gilded (1820-37), Civil War heroes (1838-55), Progressives (1856-73), Missionaries (1872-91), Lost (1892-1909), GI (1910-1927), Silent (1928-45), Boom (1946-63), Xer (1964-81), Millie (1982-99).

These gens are just arbitary 18 year periods that end with the 1982 start of the Millie gen. I'm not proposing these dates, just showing that there is *room* for a Civil War hero gen if you use 18 year gens after the Transcendentals. Those who like an earlier start of the Xers and Millies can step it back a couple of years, in which case the Silent and Boomer match up better with S&H.

If you buy into 18 year gens (phase of life) then the power-alignment method that Marc uses isn't going to work. The reason is that the age of max power is the early 50's, which occurs smack in the middle of the mature phase of life for a 22 year gen, but close to the mature/elder divider if you use 18 year gens. What this means is the characteristic turning at which max power occurs moves up about half a turning. That is, prophets should peak early in the Crisis instead of in the Unraveling as they did before, and artists should peak early in the Unraveling instead of the Awakening, and heroes should peak early in the Awakening instead of the high. You get the point.

The reason I don't agree with Marc is his analysis is ultimately based on the concept of an invariant 22 year *average* generation length. That is, he is using a fixed duration cycle (FDC) method to make his projections. FDC methods have gotten all the previous cycle prognosticators into trouble. Use of the FDC approach with the K-cycle by Shuman and Rosenau (1971) predicted a stock boom in the 1970's and a depression in the 1980's. WRONG! In 1987 Ravi Batra used a FDC method to predict a depression in the 1990's. WRONG AGAIN! Then in 1994 Barker projected the end of the boom for 1995, still using a FDC. WRONG YET AGAIN!

Use of the FDC approach with the hegemonic cycle led to the prediction of continued American decline after the 1980's. WRONG! Use of the FDC approach with the political cycle predicted a resurgence of liberalism after the 1992 election. WRONG!

Use of the FDC approach with the saeculum predicted a secular crisis era in the 2013-2029 period. I suspect this prediction will not pan out either, but the verdict is not yet in.

In general, using FDC analysis just doesn't work. This is why the use of markers is necessary.

But perhaps, generational statistics do not correlate exactly with turnings. In a sense one can say that the beginning of this 4T is kinda anomalous because of the unusual severity of the catalyzing event. Remember that the previous three 4Ts began with groups of people dumping boxes of tea into the ocean, with Lincoln winning the national election, and with a stock market crash. These catalysts were very small and ordinary events in themselves, but major in their ramifications. These same events would mean absolutely nothing in any other time. You can say that these catalyzing events were the straw that broke the camel's back. 9/11, however, is an entirely different story. It would be very historic in ANY era, whether it happened in 1955, 1975, or 1990. It was a major event, and is having major ramifications. Perhaps, 9/11 is better described as the bale that broke the camel's back. Because of this, the events of 1773, 1860, and 1929 correlated well with each other statistically in terms of leadership.

So perhaps, a better way to measure turnings would be not generational statistics, per se, but generational endowment activity. For instance, in the aftermath of the Kennedy assassination, on page 371 of Generations, <font color="green">"An Awakening Era begins with [Hero] endowment activity in confident overdrive. Society is building big things, exploring new worlds, organizing new institutions [sounds like my dream society...but wait, the Prophets mess it all up :sad:] As the moral claims of young idealists emerge, a spiritual awakening lashes out at society's secular bias-which suddenly halts and frustrates its forward motion. :sad: ...A Crisis Era begins with [Prophet] endowment activity rising to maximum fury. Society now places total priority on establishing a consensus of good-versus-bad, right-versus-wrong."</font>

Normally, the endowment activities make gradual changes through time. This was certainly true for most other eras, with the exception of the Civil War (I might even do an analysis of the Civil War anomaly using endowment analysis in the future). 9/11, however, is different because of its unusually severe and shocking nature. So while we usually see a gradual change, we experienced a more catastrophic jump. The Prophet endowment activities crushed the Artist endowment activities. But if there is one thing that is very apparent in light of this, it is that endowment activity never moves backwards. Artist endowment activity made no gains in light of 9/11, and has actually decreased with time. So while endowment activity has made a huge jump, the generational statitudes have not yet caught up with the new reality, mainly because there hasn't been an election to do so. But with November 2002, Congress should look more like the reality of today, and in November 2004, it will totally catch up.

Mike writes, "The reason I don't agree with Marc is his analysis is ultimately based on the concept of an invariant 22 year *average* generation length. That is, he is using a fixed duration cycle (FDC) method to make his projections."

I'm not sure why you use the phrase invariant 22 year *average*, Mike.

Basically, as you know, I am looking at the midlife peak as a barometer, but after that peak anything can happen in my book.

When I take the dates 1899, 1923, 1943, 1965, 1985 (peaks years for each gen), the average is 22 but if you remove the hybrid (Civil War anomaly driven) Progressives, the average drops to twenty years and is much more consistant with the 20th century trend. A trend which has seen huge changes in industrial and technological innovations along with staggering increases in human longevity.

Yet, during 100 years with four generations, the peak has been consistant. That impresses me. (I remember your statistical analysis of this manner of hypothesis, Mike. :smile: )

Now concerning events like 9/11...

I just posted a story of a, now forgotten disaster, "The Great Mississippi Flood of 1927," that occured in this country just two years before the Crash. Yet historians never look upon this disaster with much of a bearing on anything other than inspiring the TVA.

And the reason for this is that without the Crash, the New Deal doesn't come. And if the New Deal doesn't come then no TVA (We still can't tame the Mississippi River though. Think 1993.)

And the New Deal was so radical a departure from what, 200 years of business as usual?

But what if the flood would have occured in say 1930, or in 1932, or in 1936 (excluding that the Crash happened), and perhps it would have triggered a New Deal. In 1936, the Missionaries were at 52%, or the very same as Ben Franklin's generation in 1775. And this would be consistant with the S&H theory too: Seven years after the Crash!

But an event that takes place before the generation peaks, like WWI, the Great Flu Epidemic, or the Red Scare, or the Oil Scandal, or 9/11 introduces another anomaly into the theory.

And two anomalies in just 130 years, folks, blows a hole large enough to send that theory to the bottom of the Atlantic faster than the one that ripped Titanic. :smile:





<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc S. Lamb on 2002-01-19 14:21 ]</font>

Actually, the Great Flood would not have meant anything even in the 1930s. Sure, it is a disaster, but it was a natural disaster. Nothing more. 9/11 was an event that reflected our institutional failures. There is a huge difference. Let's say that the New Madrid fault sudden caused an 8.5 earthquake, that killed 150,000 of people in Western Tennesee (Memphis anyone?), Western Kentucky, Northeastern Arkansas, along the Mississippi River in Missouri (St. Louis?), and Southern Illinois. Would that cause the same reaction that 9/11 caused? Sure, people would want to help and give blood, but since it does not reflect the political and cultural situation of society, there would've been no jump in endowment activity.

Recall in T4T, on page 257: <font color="green">Each of these sparks is linked to a specific event about which society had been fully informed but against with it had left itself poorly protected.</font> By nature of the Great Flood, it could not have had any affect on the saeculum.

_________________
Robert Reed III (1982)
---------------------------------------------
"Those who give up essential liberties for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: madscientist on 2002-01-19 14:33 ]</font>

"Actually, the Great Flood would not have meant anything even in the 1930s. Sure, it is a disaster, but it was a natural disaster. Nothing more."

Actually, the flood was much more than a natural disaster, Mr. Reed. It was a man-made disaster as well. Why? Because government and business interest attempted to control this valley in order to exploit it: Build it (levees) and they will come. And came they did, but the millions.

Only the man-made protections completely broke down. Then the political machinery broke down. Then there was an awful racial element involved to boot...

Here's one more review:

Rising Tide: The Great Mississippi Flood of 1927

"Barry's tale, however, focuses as much on the men involved with the River as on the River itself.: Nineteenth-Century engineers James Eades and Andrew Humphreys; the Percy family of Greenville, Mississippi, particularly Senator LeRoy Percy; the Club, an influential group of powerful New Orleans businessmen and community leaders; and Herbert C. Hoover, soon to be elected the President of the United States. Indeed, the spotlight cast on Mr Hoover as President Coolidge's appointee to oversee the flood relief vaulted Hoover from unlikely presidential candidate to dark-horse candidate to the White House in a mere 18 months. At the time, Hoover's coordination of relief efforts re-earned him the title of "The Great Humanitarian" -- a far different image of the man than we have today as we link his name and presidency with the Great Depression."



And a Google search... :smile:

Even so, such a disaster could happen anytime. Sure it was partly man-made, but it still cannot be linked to problems society had been warned about. The disaster has to be political, or secular. The Great Flood does not qualify as one of these. Sure, Prophets did mess up, buy Heroes are not going to challenge a failure like this.