On 2002-05-23 15:10, Eric A Meece wrote:
...

A Depression does not correspond to a war during a Crisis. The war is the final phase. Economic crises and conflicts preceed the great wars in every case (not sure about K.William's War).

Not Quite. In the Revolutionary 4T, the colonies experienced economic crises during the 1780s, after the war. Things didn't even begin to stabilize until 1787.

Ok, let's be out with it, folks: The twist and fold $20 dollar bill thing has legs...

I will never forget "that woman," and her far-fetched tale in 1970. I was a strapling, young "paper-boy" back then. It was "collecting" night, 67 cents per week for home delivery of the Columbus Evening Dispatch. Collecting meant going door to door, in those days, to get the 67 cents. She was my 67 cent customer, and she decided to illuminate me that night as I stood in her door way: She showed me the hidden message in Kennedy dollar bill.

There it is, that big "K" in the circle next to Washington's image. The "K" stood for KENNEDY, she said. Now look under the "K" and see, it says "DALLAS TEXAS"! And surrounding the circle "K" and "DALLAS TEXAS" are four numbers, and the number is "11". Get it yet?

Add em' up: "K"ennedy shot in "DALLAS TEXAS" in the "11"th month. Now add two "11"'s and you get the twenty second day of the month. And with this dollar bill she was showing me was a 1963 Series bill signed by the Secretary of the United States Treasury!

There you have it folks... a conspiracy born in 1913, when the Federal Reserve system designated the twelve regional banks ("K" being the "11"th letter in the alphabet), had accurately predicted the Kennedy assassination to the very day fifty years later!

This, fourteen-year old was very impressed by "that woman" that night. :smile:

On 2002-05-23 15:10, Eric A Meece wrote:

The anomaly (such as it is) comes about because saecula used to be longer when they were in Europe, which was a stratified class society in which most people did not participate. It took a while for that tradition to be effectively expunged from America. Essentially the Civil War was the end of a feudal aristocratic society in the south, which slowed history and the turnings down in America. Even today, the South and its traditional attitudes hold us back. But at least, with the ending of slavery, America was free to enter a more modern saecula that was up to speed.

The upshot of that was NOT that the Civil War Crisis came late; it was that the previous high and awakening lasted too long (as defined by S&H).

In order for the anomaly to be removed, then, the turnings and generations in that saeculum would need to be moved back. I suspect that can't be entirely done successfully, but what I have surmised is something like this:
(note I like to use overlapping dates for beginning and ending cusps)

Revolution Crisis: 1765-1789
pre-Civil War High: 1789-1815
pre-Civil War Awakening: 1815-1834
pre-Civil War Unravelling: 1834-1850
Civil War Crisis: 1850-1865
Great Power High (the gilded age): 1865-1886
(remaining saecula as S&H dated them)

(Note that, if anything, the recent Crisis and High periods were anomalously short; all the others before (and since) those, were 20 years or longer. Therefore the current unravelling will be longer to make up for the anomaly from 1929-1964)

The Current Millennial Unravelling therefore, will be: 1984-2008
Millennial Crisis: 2008-2028
(war crisis 2025-2028)

Compromise 1763-1787
Transcendentals 1787-1813
Gilded 1813-1831
Blue and Gray 1831-1848
Progressive 1848-1862
Missionary 1862-1882
(succeeding gens dated as S&H dated them)
Note that the GI civic generation is dated 1901-1924, and I think correctly; so some generations can be that long.

Boom 1943-1961
Generation X/13ers 1961-1982/4 (not sure)
Millennials 1982 (or 1984) -2005
Generation Z (new Silents) 2005-2025
Generation A (new prophets) 2025-2043

So we'll see whose prediction is correct.

On most of the above, I fully agree with you. The Transcendental Awakening *did* occur roughly ten years late, thus creating the apparent 'Civil War Anomaly'. The reason you mentioned for the delay I can also see. Just as I am actually surprised that the outcome of the War of 1812 failed to provoke the Awakening *on time*, unless your turnings are more accurate than S&H's, in which case it very easily could have, by showing that the Jeffersonian Emperor had no clothes on.

I do have other names selected for two of your proposed Generations. Your 'Blue and Grey' Generation (1831-1848) I tend to call the 'Victorian' Generation, though either name would work. As for the 'New Silent', I believe the working name some use for them in this forum is the 'Homeland' Generation. No idea what one might call the 'New Prophet' Generation. That name may have to wait for *their* Awakening to emerge. Or maybe they *could* borrow 'Aquarian' for the time being, for lack of a better idea. Even though they clearly have no need for it, or anything else but our survival, as of yet.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: jds1958xg on 2002-05-24 09:41 ]</font>

On 2002-05-24 09:39, jds1958xg wrote:
name would work. As for the 'New Silent', I believe the working name some use for them in this forum is the 'Homeland' Generation. No idea what one might call the 'New Prophet' Generation. That name may have to wait for *their* Awakening to emerge. Or maybe they *could* borrow 'Aquarian' for the time being, for lack of a better idea. Even though they clearly have no need for it, or anything else but our survival, as of yet.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: jds1958xg on 2002-05-24 09:41 ]</font>

Hey, Hold up man! These kids aren't even born yet, don't go rushing the arival of more prophet types on us! LOL! (Now Eric has got to respond to that little tweak of the Aquarians :grin:

On another front I found an article about Radio and payola that might intrest those who want to kick this "what T are we in" football around some more.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/2...la_020524.html

Would this be more 3T?


drudgereport.com/flash9.htm

Man Files Lawsuit Against Bush For 9/11 Intelligence Failures
Fri May 24 2002 10:52:08 ET

A man is ready to sue President Bush for failing to prevent the 9-11 attacks!

San Francisco area attorney Stanley Hilton this week filed a $7 billion lawsuit on behalf of a handful of attack victims' relatives claiming that America's leader failed to carry out his constitutional duties.

MORE

Hilton also named top members of the Administration for failing to carry out their duties to protect the United States.

The suit claims the President 'allowed' September 11th to happen.

The attorney says he is representing several people who lost loved ones on September 11th however, they wish to remain 'anonymous.'


UPDATE

Hilton is also the author of "Senator for Sale: An Unauthorized Biography of Senator Bob Dole" and "Glass Houses : Shocking Profiles of Congressional Sex Scandals and Other Unofficial Misconduct," a book that investigated the details of Republican sex lives, and came out in December, 1998 at the height of the Clinton impeachment trial.

When asked whether he was fearful of getting sued by Congressman for his Republican sex expose, Hilton stated at the time, "Truth is a defense. Besides, I'm a litigator."

Developing...

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/wor...FR24HOROV.html

If this attack on the Israeli fuel depot had succeeded thousands would have died and Israel would then have no choice but to pull out of occuppied Palestine. I would cheer the end of the occupation.

Sbarro

More and more of the world's punditry seems to be concluding that the U.S. is not going to depose Saddam after all. If this is true, it is VERY 3T.

More and more, it seems like Marc Lamb could be right. The Colin Powell's of the world seem to be holding sway...

On the other hand, I disagree with those who say that, if this was all just a "dress rehearsal" for 4T, it means that it will be harder than ever to push America into 4T.

Dress rehearsals IMPROVE readiness for opening night, not the opposite.

I will find it amusing if all of the so-called "Millenials" on the board turn out to be X-ers when people look back from a few decade's hindsight.

On 2002-05-24 15:53, firemind wrote:
More and more of the world's punditry seems to be concluding that the U.S. is not going to depose Saddam after all. If this is true, it is VERY 3T.

More and more, it seems like Marc Lamb could be right. The Colin Powell's of the world seem to be holding sway...

On the other hand, I disagree with those who say that, if this was all just a "dress rehearsal" for 4T, it means that it will be harder than ever to push America into 4T.

Dress rehearsals IMPROVE readiness for opening night, not the opposite.

Bush is still fairly serious about going aganist Iraq, news outlets are going to Baghdad as we speak, they are expecting something big.

I expect the offensive (to take about 2-4 weeks and without European help) to be launched in the fall of 2002, say October/November. The USA, Plus Australia, New Zealand, Turkey, Britain and possibly Russia put on the ground the 75,000 to 100,000 troops necessary for a permanment occupation.

On 2002-05-24 15:53, firemind wrote:

More and more of the world's punditry seems to be concluding that the U.S. is not going to depose Saddam after all. If this is true, it is VERY 3T.

You don't go on TV and create some "Axis of Evil" out of thin air, naming Iraq, Iran, and North Korea, without being fully prepared to go after all three countries. These people in the Bush administration know exactly what they are doing. To make a bold assertion about this "Axis of Evil" on the world's stage is to deliberately goad one or all three of these nations into launching pre-emptive strikes on the US. You don't just shoot your mouth off about these sorts of deadly things like a cowboy with a loose trigger finger, and these Bush types are most definitely not cowboys. They do not do a damn thing without a plan.

The intent of that "Axis of Evil" speech was to provoke a response on the US and the American people which would then provide the administration with the "political capital" to go after one or all of these nations. Indeed the US provoked precisely this sort of response with 911 by threatening the Taliban with war last summer (at some European conferences as reported in the international press). You do not go on TV and make an "Axis of Evil" speech without being fully committed to going to war with one or all of these nations. Rest assured, the administration is just waiting for Americans to die in the "response" they provoked with that clever "Axis of Evil" speech, at which point they will finally have the political capital, domestically and internationally, to go after Saddam and whoever else. It really is that simple.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Stonewall Patton on 2002-05-24 16:30 ]</font>

On 2002-05-24 16:29, Stonewall Patton wrote:
You don't go on TV and create some "Axis of Evil" out of thin air, naming Iraq, Iran, and North Korea, without being fully prepared to go after all three countries. These people in the Bush administration know exactly what they are doing. To make a bold assertion about this "Axis of Evil" on the world's stage is to deliberately goad one or all three of these nations into launching pre-emptive strikes on the US. You don't just shoot your mouth off about these sorts of deadly things like a cowboy with a loose trigger finger, and these Bush types are most definitely not cowboys. They do not do a damn thing without a plan.

The intent of that "Axis of Evil" speech was to provoke a response on the US and the American people which would then provide the administration with the "political capital" to go after one or all of these nations. Indeed the US provoked precisely this sort of response with 911 by threatening the Taliban with war last summer (at some European conferences as reported in the international press). You do not go on TV and make an "Axis of Evil" speech without being fully committed to going to war with one or all of these nations. Rest assured, the administration is just waiting for Americans to die in the "response" they provoked with that clever "Axis of Evil" speech, at which point they will finally have the political capital, domestically and internationally, to go after Saddam and whoever else. It really is that simple.

A good reason why the Europeans are scared s***less about the Axis of Evil speech is that the United States will go after the countries in the Axis of Evil.

The Europeans have been getting cosy with these countries, the prospect of pro-Americian regimes in these countries is unerving to say the least.

If Bush was willing to follow my foreign policy advice it would sent a message to the nihilists in Europe and elsewhere that some westerners are willing to defend themselves and make the world into a better place.

There is truly an axis of evil in world, that of Islamic Fundamentalism, which threatens Western Civilisation, any methods in its destruction like the destruction of Nazism are totally justified.

The intent of Bush's speech was pretty good, however not much on ideological content, FDR stated why we fought WW2 was to preserve the four freedoms. We need a person like FDR who can see the ideological urgency of this conflict.

"More and more, it seems like Marc Lamb could be right."

<FONT SIZE="+2">Economy Grows Brisk 5.6 Percent</FONT>

By Jeannine Aversa
Associated Press Writer
Friday, May 24, 2002; 11:18 AM

WASHINGTON ?? The economy snapped back from last year's recession, growing at an annual rate of 5.6 percent in the first quarter, the strongest performance in nearly two years.


Does anybody out there need any more evidence that "America remains in a third turn"? :smile:







<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-05-24 17:32 ]</font>

I, for one, do not need an ideological urgency for this conflict. I am sick of ideological urgencies. I don't think it requires and ideology to kill people who are trying to kill you back, but I'm just funny that way. :smile:

By the way, it's a 4T, we're just pretending its not. But we may as well. Why panic the passengers, lets have dance music on deck. Strings, anyone?

ms angeli wrote
"By the way, it's a 4T, we're just pretending its not. But we may as well. Why panic the passengers, lets have dance music on deck. Strings, anyone?"


you must be on to something there ms angeli because the same wash post that gave us the brisk growth report also gives us the headline GDP Grows Less Than Forecast By John M. Berry at 12:54 PM today and he says "The U.S. economy grew slightly less strongly in the first three months of this year than it originally estimated..."

this is not as nearly the rosey report by Jeannine Aversa of the associated press at 11:18 AM today. hummm what a difference 90 minutes can make, huh?

glass half empty or half full ms angeli? you are a reporter with great instincts for a story so i would say you go with the later reporters half empty tale of woe is me, huh. :smile:

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

You don't just shoot your mouth off about these sorts of deadly things like a cowboy with a loose trigger finger, and these Bush types are most definitely not cowboys. They do not do a damn thing without a plan. --Stonewall Patton



<FONT SIZE="+2"><center>"There is no war plan on my desk."</FONT>
--President George W. Bush (May 23, 2002)</center>


Why, Mr. President?

<center><FONT SIZE="+1">Simple, Jumpin' Jim Jeffords stole my plans!</FONT></


</center>














"Jeffords changed history" --Carl P. Leubsdorf, The Dallas Morning News




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2002-05-24 20:17 ]</font>

Has anyone else noticed how differently the media is treating the Chandra Levy case now, than if her body had been found pre-911? Note that there is no "whodunit" media frenzy, no hint of (or demand for?) political intrigue, no reporters camping outside of Gary Condit's door (even though I believe they sort-of suspected all along that Condit the Cad was innocent of her murder). I find the attention given the case on the "Today" show to be tasteful, compassionate and very sad. And as such, it is somehow more chilling than if her death were still being sensationalized by the media.

Sensationalism-less reporting of ugly, sad news. It is what one would expect in a Fourth Turning, not a Third.

On 2002-05-24 20:23, Kevin Parker '59 wrote:
Has anyone else noticed how differently the media is treating the Chandra Levy case now, than if her body had been found pre-911? Note that there is no "whodunit" media frenzy, no hint of (or demand for?) political intrigue, no reporters camping outside of Gary Condit's door (even though I believe they sort-of suspected all along that Condit the Cad was innocent of her murder). I find the attention given the case on the "Today" show to be tasteful, compassionate and very sad. And as such, it is somehow more chilling than if her death were still being sensationalized by the media.

Sensationalism-less reporting of ugly, sad news. It is what one would expect in a Fourth Turning, not a Third.

You're right, Kevin. In a 3T, the media would be making a much bigger deal of this story. No one seems to care much anymore.

[/quote]

You're right, Kevin. In a 3T, the media would be making a much bigger deal of this story. No one seems to care much anymore.

[/quote]

That's because we've all got bigger things on our plate than a dead intern and her lame duck congressman lover who *might* have killed her. In a 3T people are desperate to find something, anything, to amuse themselves and take their mind off it. In a 4T we grow up and say, "OK, we better deal with that's important". It's a shifting of priorities.
If we are not in the 4T yet, then it's a long transition period to one.

On 2002-05-24 15:53, firemind wrote:
More and more of the world's punditry seems to be concluding that the U.S. is not going to depose Saddam after all. If this is true, it is VERY 3T.

More and more, it seems like Marc Lamb could be right. The Colin Powell's of the world seem to be holding sway...

On the other hand, I disagree with those who say that, if this was all just a "dress rehearsal" for 4T, it means that it will be harder than ever to push America into 4T.

Dress rehearsals IMPROVE readiness for opening night, not the opposite.

I will find it amusing if all of the so-called "Millenials" on the board turn out to be X-ers when people look back from a few decade's hindsight.

I would not be surprised at all... let's see, who are the "Millennials" on the board?
Counting everyone born in the 80s we have
Jesse Manoogian (a Nomadic S&H Xer with a few Hero traits),
Robert Reed (an 82-born outcast),
Chris Loyd (obviously a cusper; he just likes to THINK of himself as being 90% or 100% millennial instead of 60%), and
myself (who has been assigned to just about everything on the N/H continuum and even I am listed as an Xr by the washington post!)
We have no one even post-84 or after the college class of 2004 yet! (I think Manoogian, Reed, Loyd and myself all belong to that year)

On 2002-05-24 22:36, mmailliw wrote:
I would not be surprised at all... let's see, who are the "Millennials" on the board?
Counting everyone born in the 80s we have
Jesse Manoogian (a Nomadic S&H Xer with a few Hero traits),
Robert Reed (an 82-born outcast),
Chris Loyd (obviously a cusper; he just likes to THINK of himself as being 90% or 100% millennial instead of 60%), and
myself (who has been assigned to just about everything on the N/H continuum and even I am listed as an Xr by the washington post!)
We have no one even post-84 or after the college class of 2004 yet! (I think Manoogian, Reed, Loyd and myself all belong to that year)

The boundary line between Nomad and Hero generations is quite fuzzy, more so than boundaries of other archetypes. So the 1982-start date Bill and Neil did was their best estimate not a precise measurement.

Generational studies is not like Surveying which is a very accurate science and even quite small mistakes can cost you dearly, in Generational studies we do not need to that accurate. For instance you could make a good case of putting the Millennial generation boundary back say a year or two. However it does not make much of a difference in the generation scope of things.

It is handy to take a society wide view of generations and turnings more than one community.

On 2002-05-24 19:44, angeli wrote:
I, for one, do not need an ideological urgency for this conflict. I am sick of ideological urgencies. I don't think it requires and ideology to kill people who are trying to kill you back, but I'm just funny that way. :smile:

By the way, it's a 4T, we're just pretending its not. But we may as well. Why panic the passengers, lets have dance music on deck. Strings, anyone?

I do think a broad-based ideological view instead of just brute terror is needed to bring lasting peace between the Arabs and Jews. Israel needs to win the hearts and minds of the Arabs not just scare the living daylights out of them.

The Allies not did destroy Nazism and Germany's tradition of authoritarian militarism just by bombing the living s*** out of them (although it was helpful). With the right methods we can turn the Arabs into a pacifist, secular people who have great respect for human rights.

On 2002-05-24 23:23, Tristan Jones wrote:

On 2002-05-24 22:36, mmailliw wrote:
I would not be surprised at all... let's see, who are the "Millennials" on the board?
Counting everyone born in the 80s we have
Jesse Manoogian (a Nomadic S&H Xer with a few Hero traits),
Robert Reed (an 82-born outcast),
Chris Loyd (obviously a cusper; he just likes to THINK of himself as being 90% or 100% millennial instead of 60%), and
myself (who has been assigned to just about everything on the N/H continuum and even I am listed as an Xr by the washington post!)
We have no one even post-84 or after the college class of 2004 yet! (I think Manoogian, Reed, Loyd and myself all belong to that year)

The boundary line between Nomad and Hero generations is quite fuzzy, more so than boundaries of other archetypes. So the 1982-start date Bill and Neil did was their best estimate not a precise measurement.

Generational studies is not like Surveying which is a very accurate science and even quite small mistakes can cost you dearly, in Generational studies we do not need to that accurate. For instance you could make a good case of putting the Millennial generation boundary back say a year or two. However it does not make much of a difference in the generation scope of things.

It is handy to take a society wide view of generations and turnings more than one community.

yeah... i agree on that - and I was counting you as 1980 because Australia is 3 years back

Hi!
I'm new here. I read Fourth Turning quite a few years ago and loved it. That's why I'm happy to have stumbled onto this site. Now that I know there is a site, I'll have to go back and reread the book as my memory is getting kind of fuzzy on it. I remember wishing the last time I read it though, that I had people to discuss it with. So happy to see all the enthusiasm here.

Couple of questions...Are most people here pretty much in consensus that we are indeed in a 4T? And if this is a 4T, hasn't it come a little early? Would 9/11 be considered the catalyst?

Born in 1965, I guess I would be considered to be a Nomad. What will Nomad roles be like for the 4T years ahead? If I remember correctly the book talked about nomads being trusted advisors during 4T's. We will be forced into doing what needs to be done even if it is unpopular. However, currently it would appear that there are not enough nomads in postions of power to accomplish much of anything. Will this change as the 4t years go on? Will we see less apathy among my nomad generation when it finally occurs to us that SOMEBODY has to do something?

Hi, Molly. Welcome aboard.

Are most people here pretty much in consensus that we are indeed in a 4T?

No. There's a lot of dispute about that. I'm pretty sure we are, and so are a few others, but there are a few posters equally convinced we're still in an Unraveling. Most people are reserving judgment.

And if this is a 4T, hasn't it come a little early? Would 9/11 be considered the catalyst?

If this is a 4T, then it has come at most four years early, since the original S&H estimate was 2005. My own prediction was '03, earlier on. I personally believe the authors were a little off on the Xer/Millennial boundary and the date the Awakening ended, so I don't think it's early by as much as they would. But yes, it's a bit premature no matter how you slice it.


Yes, the 9/11 attack would be the catalyst. Which may be why we're not in agreement about whether the Turning has actually turned. The regeneracy is still a ways off, and we probably won't fully agree on Crisis status until shortly before that.

Born in 1965, I guess I would be considered to be a Nomad. What will Nomad roles be like for the 4T years ahead? If I remember correctly the book talked about nomads being trusted advisors during 4T's. We will be forced into doing what needs to be done even if it is unpopular. However, currently it would appear that there are not enough nomads in postions of power to accomplish much of anything.

Yes, you would be an early-wave Xer. Or "Atari wave" as S&H put it in 13th Gen.


I don't know about "trusted." I think the word I would use is "necessary." Somebody's got to cut to the chase, do the dirty work, and not get bogged down in ideology.


There are plenty of Xers in corporate positions, law firms, the media, state and local governments, and nonprofit NGOs to make a difference even now, and that will grow. To be sure, there are too few in the Bush administration, and too many Silent. But that was also true of the Hoover administration, I believe. (Well, switching same-archetype-different-saeculum generations.)

Will we see less apathy among my nomad generation when it finally occurs to us that SOMEBODY has to do something?

I think we already do. In fact, I would disagree that Xers ever exhibited notable "apathy" -- try cynicism and distrust, a belief that the system is broken and nothing can be done within it. That belief is unlikely to change, but what better for clear vision of the need to fix, or replace, the system?

Hello, Molly. I would recommend that you read these books by Strauss and Howe: Generations; 13th Gen; and Millenials Rising. Generations was the original book-the authors used different terms for the generations. Idealist=Prophet, Reactive=Nomad, Civic=Hero, and Adaptive=Artist. Except for Nomad, I prefer the terms from Generations. Generations also gave more in depth descriptions of some of the earlier saeculae.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Tim Walker on 2002-05-25 11:07 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Tim Walker on 2002-05-25 11:10 ]</font>

On 2002-05-24 17:31, Marc Lamb wrote:

"More and more, it seems like Marc Lamb could be right."

<FONT SIZE="+2">Economy Grows Brisk 5.6 Percent</FONT>

But, Marc, we've covered this. (Don't be like Eric, please!) I have argued that the economy is not neccessarily relevant, and you have agreed.

While I think you may be right, it ain't the economy that convinces me. The economy was fine in a lot of 4T's.

There are different kinds of crises. They are not all economic.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: firemind on 2002-05-25 13:55 ]</font>

On 2002-05-24 16:29, Stonewall Patton wrote:
These people in the Bush administration know exactly what they are doing...

Rest assured, the administration is just waiting for Americans to die in the "response" they provoked with that clever "Axis of Evil" speech, at which point they will finally have the political capital, domestically and internationally, to go after Saddam and whoever else.

I thought you said that was what 9/11 was. How much more "political capital" is required then 3000 Americans dead in one day? And American's have already died in the provoked response. Servicemen in Afghanistan have died, Daniel Pearl was killed, etc.

Perhaps the Bush administration already has enough political capital, and something else is stopping them.

Look, I'm not saying I know what is going to happen. I don't.

But, if you are so sure, can you tell us what could happen to prove that you're wrong?

For example, if the Bush administration ends without a U.S. attack on another nation, would that prove you are wrong now?

The hallmark of a rational theorist is that he acknowledges what could prove him wrong.