I don't know about all of you. But I am DYING to hear what Messrs. Strauss & Howe think about the 3T/4T issue now. It has been several months since we've heard from them about this and even then it was a "too early to tell" kind of thing.

Right after I write this post I will e-mail them and ask what their current analysis is about our "turning status". I know what I think, and have been reading what y'all think, but what do THEY think, and why do they think it?

Curiousity is killing me.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Metanoos on 2002-07-01 01:12 ]</font>

On 2002-07-01 01:11, Metanoos wrote:
I don't know about all of you. But I am DYING to hear what Messrs. Strauss & Howe think about the 3T/4T issue now. It has been several months since we've heard from them about this and even then it was a "too early to tell" kind of thing.

Right after I write this post I will e-mail them and ask what their current analysis is about our "turning status". I know what I think, and have been reading what y'all think, but what do THEY think, and why do they think it?

Curiousity is killing me.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Metanoos on 2002-07-01 01:12 ]</font>

This has been said by others here, but I think Strauss and Howe have been watching us...keeping a low profile and not posting so as not to influence our opinions...I think they are trying to decide what the consensus opinion is as to whether we are in a 3T or 4T. Right now, posters seem roughly evenly split on what turning we're in, and many (like myself) are undecided. I think they're trying to guage our reactions but are watching very closely. We're like the subjects in an experiment they're conducting.

On 2002-07-01 04:50, Heliotrope wrote:

This has been said by others here, but I think Strauss and Howe have been watching us...keeping a low profile and not posting so as not to influence our opinions...I think they are trying to decide what the consensus opinion is as to whether we are in a 3T or 4T. Right now, posters seem roughly evenly split on what turning we're in, and many (like myself) are undecided. I think they're trying to guage our reactions but are watching very closely. We're like the subjects in an experiment they're conducting.

I think it is very simple: they are waiting for the other shoe to drop. If there is another attack, say, on 4 July, then I think it is assured that we are in 4T. Until a second attack comes, it is still up in the air.

On 2002-06-30 22:28, Tristan Jones wrote:


Gore has the potential to be a next Lincoln (both men have a similar personality type), if he has knowledge of the generational cycle, he can captialise on it big time.

Did ever occur to Mr. Gore to stay away from Ford's Theater? Or is History rather more inexact?

On 2002-06-30 22:28, Tristan Jones wrote:

Prehaps, however Gore might be smarter enough to know that in 2000 the 4T was some time off. Gore has the potential to be a next Lincoln (both men have a similar personality type), if he has knowledge of the generational cycle, he can captialise on it big time.

What similarities do you see between Lincoln and Gore?

"Odds are the 4T won't be on us quite yet in 2004, either, unless something radical happens. 911 wasn't radical enough."

Come on, 9/11 was plenty radical "enough"! Let's not drop our brains and common sense into the toilet in order to achieve a means to an end.

Fact is, we are plainly "managing" this crisis in the time honored Silent mode... Ask Croaker, he'll tell ya.

The generational constellation ain't aligned yet, folks. Could you please just get over that and make the most of what "managing" weather we got left?

If catalysts were all that were important, 9/11 was plenty big enough.

Again, I ask what the big old catalyst was between the last 2T and the last 3T? If the 1984 Reagan campaign commercial "Morning in America" was a big enough catalyst (chuckle! The Little Caesars commercials had a bigger effect!), 9/11 certainly ought to be as well.

As for this being 4T or not, while I do agree that there was a mood shift associated with 9/11 (obviously), I have yet to be convinced that there has been the sort of major change in the ways we do business.

S & H identify certain key policies that are supposed to shift, and I don't see it quite yet. To take one example, will the 2002 immigration numbers be significantly different than 2001? Another example would be, what will happen this November?

There are good reasons to believe that we are still in 3T.

On the other hand, things being fuzzy as usual, if this sort of major shift does take place within a couple of years, 9/11 was such a major event that people could probably conclude that it was "the catalyst". It would make as much sense as associating the Kennedy assasination with the start of 2T and (laugh) a campaign TV commercial with the start of 3T.

There's a lot of wiggle room in S&H theory, enough to conclude that it's just a parlor game. Still, parts of the theory are reminiscent of the sorts of complex feedback loops that occur in nature.

A "campaign TV commercial with the start of 3T"??? :lol: Most of the folks posting here think it was when disco went out of style! :lol:

Make it up, folks, and have some fun. :smile:

On 2002-07-01 07:29, Marc Lamb wrote:

Fact is, we are plainly "managing" this crisis in the time honored Silent mode... Ask Croaker, he'll tell ya.

I suppose you're right, Marc. But that makes me even more nervous, sunce the Silents are involved. I don't trust them (us) with tradition any more than I trust the chruches. Seems like managing TRADITIONALLY got us into all sorts of trouble. Let's burn a witch and call her a cigarette.

On 2002-07-01 08:14, Marc Lamb wrote:
A "campaign TV commercial with the start of 3T"??? :lol: Most of the folks posting here think it was when disco went out of style! :lol:

OK. This was the 3T catalyst.

link

On July 12, 1979, between games of a scheduled double-header pitting the White Sox against the Detroit Tigers, Steve Dahl, a disk jockey from WLUP-FM radio in Chicago, sponsored Disco Demolition Night. From his perch in the bleachers, Dahl blew up a stack of disco records (donated by the fans in exchange for a discounted ticket) in center field. With that, thousands of teenage fans rushed out of the stands and onto the field. Some slid down fire hoses from the upper deck, while others flung records around at one another like Frisbees. Things quickly got out of control. Not even Harry Caray, then the announcer of the Sox, could get people to clear the field. The Sox forfeited the second game.
<TABLE BGCOLOR="#000000" ALIGN="center" WIDTH="210" BORDER="1" CELLPADDING="4" CELLSPACING="0">
<TR>
<TD><DIV ALIGN="center"><P STYLE="font-weight: bold; color: #FFFFFF">"Disco Demolition Night" in 1979</P>








<P STYLE="font-size: x-small; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-Serif; font-weight: 600; color: #808080;">The bottom photo is of Steve Dahl, organizer of the "demolition" and Garry Meier.</P>
</DIV>
</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: firemind on 2002-07-01 08:48 ]</font>

On 2002-07-01 00:41, justmom wrote:
I don't post on these forums but, I am intrested deeply about the 4th turning et. al.

It's very intresting that the Al Gor article has been brought up. I mostly inhabit conservative talk news sites. I saw that article too.

Please tell me in a nut shell if you can, what is the mix of posters religious and non religious, and conservative and progressive.

We have quite a variety of political and religious viewpoints here. I would say that as a group T4Ters probably slant more liberal (though it may depend on how you define that term!).

What is the prevailing thought on the 1st Turning (the next one) will it be a more liberal ie: "one" earth, or earth first or;
a more like the 50's with return to traditional values.

Heh. I don't know if there's anything like a prevailing thought on the next 1T. Right now we're still arguing if we're still 3T or have moved to 4T.

Personally, I don't think the next 1T will be anything like the 1950's.

Does the religious beliefs of posters sway their opinions as to how they forsee the 1st. Turning?

I suppose they could.

On 2002-07-01 04:50, Heliotrope wrote:

On 2002-07-01 01:11, Metanoos wrote:
I don't know about all of you. But I am DYING to hear what Messrs. Strauss & Howe think about the 3T/4T issue now. It has been several months since we've heard from them about this and even then it was a "too early to tell" kind of thing.

Right after I write this post I will e-mail them and ask what their current analysis is about our "turning status". I know what I think, and have been reading what y'all think, but what do THEY think, and why do they think it?

Curiousity is killing me.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Metanoos on 2002-07-01 01:12 ]</font>

This has been said by others here, but I think Strauss and Howe have been watching us...keeping a low profile and not posting so as not to influence our opinions...I think they are trying to decide what the consensus opinion is as to whether we are in a 3T or 4T. Right now, posters seem roughly evenly split on what turning we're in, and many (like myself) are undecided. I think they're trying to guage our reactions but are watching very closely. We're like the subjects in an experiment they're conducting.

Perhaps if the postings in this forum are being used for an "experiment" of theirs, they could still post periodic collections of their data. In other words, they could post a summary of the change in mood according to what people on this site have said, and use the evidence mentioned by the posters as evidence for whether we are in a fourth turning or not. It can still be a very objective and somewhat vague posting--with out affecting their expeiment much--as was their initial response right after 9/11. Still, such postings by the authors, I believe, would be greatly appreciated by all members of the forum.

On 2002-07-01 09:05, Hari Seldon wrote:

Perhaps if the postings in this forum are being used for an "experiment" of theirs, they could still post periodic collections of their data. In other words, they could post a summary of the change in mood according to what people on this site have said, and use the evidence mentioned by the posters as evidence for whether we are in a fourth turning or not. It can still be a very objective and somewhat vague posting--with out affecting their expeiment much--as was their initial response right after 9/11. Still, such postings by the authors, I believe, would be greatly appreciated by all members of the forum.

I second this.

On 2002-07-01 09:40, madscientist wrote:

On 2002-07-01 09:05, Hari Seldon wrote:

Perhaps if the postings in this forum are being used for an "experiment" of theirs, they could still post periodic collections of their data. In other words, they could post a summary of the change in mood according to what people on this site have said, and use the evidence mentioned by the posters as evidence for whether we are in a fourth turning or not. It can still be a very objective and somewhat vague posting--with out affecting their expeiment much--as was their initial response right after 9/11. Still, such postings by the authors, I believe, would be greatly appreciated by all members of the forum.

I second this.

As do I.

I bet Strauss and Howe are waiting for a full year to pass by first.

On 2002-07-01 00:41, justmom wrote:
I don't post on these forums but, I am intrested deeply about the 4th turning et. al.

What is the prevailing thought on the 1st Turning (the next one) will it be a more liberal ie: "one" earth, or earth first or;
a more like the 50's with return to traditional values.

There really isn't one yet. However, I can say this almost for certain...that it will be a mixture of cultural conservatism and political liberalism. It falls within a cycle.

During the 1T, the conservatives have more control over the culture while the liberals have control over the political and economic affairs. In the 1950s, conservatism meant Christianity, and liberalism meant socialism. While a fraternity entered government, proclaiming conservative Christian policies (remember the fuss over JFK's Catholicism). But at the same time, the nation largely lived under a command-and-control economy with many socialistic elements. In the 1870s, cultural conservatism meant Victorian-Era ethics. Public liberalism was the rise of corporations. In the early 1800s, cultural conservatism was mainly a preservation of English values, while public liberalism meant republicanism. Likely, we can apply the same. While the liberal culture will gain many victories, it will move towards a new form of social stasis. As for politics, we can expect for it to be much more progressive than it is today. Under a background of cultural conservatism, the public sector will look more "green."

In the 2T, the left loses interest in politics and economics, and focuses on cultural, moral, and spiritual issues. This leaves room for the conservatives to push the liberals from public life at the end of the 2T. This means that while the culture revitalizes and the culture breaks into pieces, the old conservative sector eventually renews itself, takes over politics, and begins to establish private interest over public interest. The era ends when ideological conservatives give up fighting the 2T, and launch their own revival. In the prior 2T, this can be seen with the left raising new cultural and moral issues in the 1960s and the 1970s. After it climaxed in 1973, the conservatives launched their own renewal, and by 1980, had elected a conservative president. The progressives were too focuses on the inner world to notice or even care. In the Missionary 2T, you can see the progressive sector of culture and values emerge with the launching of a mainstream socialist, agrarian, and missionary movements. The conservative sector was more unclear during this period. The Transie 2T saw the rise of romanticism, anti-masonry, evangelism, transcendental thought, and abolitionism. By the time of the Mexican-American War, the conservatives were largely in control.

In a 3T, the conservatives now have control of the political institutions, while the progressives have control of the culture. With conservatives in power, and a largely liberal Artist generation converted by Prophets in the previous 2T, the old order is shunned, and the Artists prepare the way for individual liberation. As conservatism takes over the institutions, society stiffens its moral orthodoxy. The progressives, however, are busy reshaping the world from the inside-out. This contributes to a background of public gridlock while individual lives, liberated by the 2T, moves ahead. This definitely explains the 1980s and 1990s. The Bush I and Clinton years exemplify this. But this can also be seen in the 1920s, 1850s, etc.

In the 4T, the left loses interest in cultural, moral, and spiritual issues, and gains interest in political and economic issues. This leaves a vacuum in the culture, which the conservatives now have a chance to fill. This contributes to a public intolerance for excessive individualism, the cleaning of the culture, and collegialism, and the commonwealth. The liberals reassert public authority onto life, rebuilding it from the ashes of the 3T. They forge a pragmatic alliance with the cultural conservatives. After the climax, the new public sector is etched in stone. The era ends when the ideological conservatives accept defeat, but retain control over the cultural direction of society. We can see signs that we are headed in this direction. This was apparent in the 1930s and 1940s, with the new public works programs, and the aligning with the cultural conservatives in World War II.

On 2002-07-01 10:29, madscientist wrote:

There really isn't one yet. However, I can say this almost for certain...that it will be a mixture of cultural conservatism and political liberalism. It falls within a cycle.

During the 1T, the conservatives have more control over the culture while the liberals have control over the political and economic affairs. In the 1950s, conservatism meant Christianity, and liberalism meant socialism. While a fraternity entered government, proclaiming conservative Christian policies (remember the fuss over JFK's Catholicism). But at the same time, the nation largely lived under a command-and-control economy with many socialistic elements. In the 1870s, cultural conservatism meant Victorian-Era ethics. Public liberalism was the rise of corporations. In the early 1800s, cultural conservatism was mainly a preservation of English values, while public liberalism meant republicanism. Likely, we can apply the same. While the liberal culture will gain many victories, it will move towards a new form of social stasis. As for politics, we can expect for it to be much more progressive than it is today. Under a background of cultural conservatism, the public sector will look more "green."

In the 2T, the left loses interest in politics and economics, and focuses on cultural, moral, and spiritual issues. This leaves room for the conservatives to push the liberals from public life at the end of the 2T. This means that while the culture revitalizes and the culture breaks into pieces, the old conservative sector eventually renews itself, takes over politics, and begins to establish private interest over public interest. The era ends when ideological conservatives give up fighting the 2T, and launch their own revival. In the prior 2T, this can be seen with the left raising new cultural and moral issues in the 1960s and the 1970s. After it climaxed in 1973, the conservatives launched their own renewal, and by 1980, had elected a conservative president. The progressives were too focuses on the inner world to notice or even care. In the Missionary 2T, you can see the progressive sector of culture and values emerge with the launching of a mainstream socialist, agrarian, and missionary movements. The conservative sector was more unclear during this period. The Transie 2T saw the rise of romanticism, anti-masonry, evangelism, transcendental thought, and abolitionism. By the time of the Mexican-American War, the conservatives were largely in control.

In a 3T, the conservatives now have control of the political institutions, while the progressives have control of the culture. With conservatives in power, and a largely liberal Artist generation converted by Prophets in the previous 2T, the old order is shunned, and the Artists prepare the way for individual liberation. As conservatism takes over the institutions, society stiffens its moral orthodoxy. The progressives, however, are busy reshaping the world from the inside-out. This contributes to a background of public gridlock while individual lives, liberated by the 2T, moves ahead. This definitely explains the 1980s and 1990s. The Bush I and Clinton years exemplify this. But this can also be seen in the 1920s, 1850s, etc.

In the 4T, the left loses interest in cultural, moral, and spiritual issues, and gains interest in political and economic issues. This leaves a vacuum in the culture, which the conservatives now have a chance to fill. This contributes to a public intolerance for excessive individualism, the cleaning of the culture, and collegialism, and the commonwealth. The liberals reassert public authority onto life, rebuilding it from the ashes of the 3T. They forge a pragmatic alliance with the cultural conservatives. After the climax, the new public sector is etched in stone. The era ends when the ideological conservatives accept defeat, but retain control over the cultural direction of society. We can see signs that we are headed in this direction. This was apparent in the 1930s and 1940s, with the new public works programs, and the aligning with the cultural conservatives in World War II.

What can I say, except that your analysis makes a lot of sense, as do most of your other analyses of where we are and where we are going. I can definitely see you becoming a generational (national or global) leader during the 1T. Assuming this 4T turns out reasonably well, that is. Who knows? I may be replying to a post by the next Walter Cronkite, or even the next JFK (though hopefully with a far better outcome than he had!).

Yes, good analysis Robert.

The challenge then for liberals, is not to lose interest in the spiritual and moral issues, even despite the Crisis. That would be natural for prophets at least. We can see that any crisis is also a spiritual one, whatever others may say. Then the liberal prophets can hopefully influence culture as well as politics and institutions, so that the neo-Cartesian gap and chasm between them is not as wide as in previous American saecula (which were thus dysfunctional), but closer as they were in European saecula. Thus, for example, the French Revolution brought a political revival, but also sparked romanticism (which reached America only during a delayed 2T).

It is really our mission as prophets this time around, not only to forge a vision that gets implemented by institutions, but to change the saeculum itself; so that spirituality, culture and morals becomes for the first time a genuine part of American society, and guides the way it is "built" concretely during 4Ts and 1Ts, so that in turn America becomes for the first time a true civilization, instead of a gilded commercial wasteland too dead for dreaming.

There is no excuse for Americans building such dead worlds, including the excuse of the saeculum cyclically forcing us to forget about spiritual values, morals and aesthetics. There is no time and no place in which it is a good idea to forget these. And in turn, why should there be periods in which our civic duties are so completely ignored, as they have been the last 30 years?

If anything, the last saeculum highlighted why the extremes of the saeculum have to be resolved, because they were so extreme this time. This may not be over, if the next 4T turns out to be (or seems to be, or gets portrayed as being) an unprecedented challenge to survival itself, due to rampant commercialism's unprecedented assault on the very sources of our livelihood-- the environment of planet Earth. Or if we are carried away by unnecessary fear of foreigners.

The move toward civilization will have to be done eventually here in this still-young and barbaric country, if we are to evolve instead of crumble into an unredeemable miasma of greedy, corrupt and destructive commercialism and mediocrity. Why not now, in our own generations; especially after an Awakening that for the first time reached well beyond the confining, squelching limits of traditional religion, as it had existed in America in other 2Ts??

While hidden, the seeds for this new world civilization lie all around us.

So while I expect that the culture will be more restrained by the needs for collegiality, and perhaps hampered by unfortunate attacks on liberty, prophets can still for the first time influence culture toward excellence and enlightenment. Wild excesses, incivility and lack of decorum are not necessary for this to occur.

Nor does diversity have to be the highest value, nor does the current "liberal post-modern" belief that one thing is as good as another have to prevail. And in great cultures, tradition and history are valued along with inspiration and creativity, rather than sheer innovation for its own sake. Thus perhaps, a more spiritual 4T and 1T can be perceived as "culturally conservative" to that extent. A new golden age is supposed to have a "classical" style, according to the history of civilization cycles.

Prophets just need to continue to be who they are, and remember their dreams. I can't speak for Xers and Millenials in this context, or to what extent if any they will agree with prophets like me. Obviously, some of them will need to see beyond the purely material needs of survival and technical power as they mature, for any of this to happen.

_________________
Keep the Spirit Alive,
Eric Meece

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Eric A Meece on 2002-07-01 13:52 ]</font>

On 2002-07-01 13:46, Eric A Meece wrote:
Yes, good analysis Robert.

The challenge then for liberals, is not to lose interest in the spiritual and moral issues, even despite the Crisis. That would be natural for prophets at least. We can see that any crisis is also a spiritual one, whatever others may say. Then the liberal prophets can hopefully influence culture as well as politics and institutions, so that the neo-Cartesian gap and chasm between them is not as wide as in previous American saecula (which were thus dysfunctional), but closer as they were in European saecula. Thus, for example, the French Revolution brought a political revival, but also sparked romanticism (which reached America only during a delayed 2T).

It is really our mission as prophets this time around, not only to forge a vision that gets implemented by institutions, but to change the saeculum itself; so that spirituality, culture and morals becomes for the first time a genuine part of American society, and guides the way it is "built" concretely during 4Ts and 1Ts, so that in turn America becomes for the first time a true civilization, instead of a gilded commercial wasteland too dead for dreaming.

There is no excuse for Americans building such dead worlds, including the excuse of the saeculum cyclically forcing us to forget about spiritual values, morals and aesthetics. There is no time and no place in which it is a good idea to forget these. And in turn, why should there be periods in which our civic duties are so completely ignored, as they have been the last 30 years?

If anything, the last saeculum highlighted why the extremes of the saeculum have to be resolved, because they were so extreme this time. This may not be over, if the next 4T turns out to be (or seems to be, or gets portrayed as being) an unprecedented challenge to survival itself, due to rampant commercialism's unprecedented assault on the very sources of our livelihood-- the environment of planet Earth. Or if we are carried away by unnecessary fear of foreigners.

The move toward civilization will have to be done eventually here in this still-young and barbaric country, if we are to evolve instead of crumble into an unredeemable miasma of greedy, corrupt and destructive commercialism and mediocrity. Why not now, in our own generations; especially after an Awakening that for the first time reached well beyond the confining, squelching limits of traditional religion, as it had existed in America in other 2Ts??

While hidden, the seeds for this new world civilization lie all around us.

So while I expect that the culture will be more restrained by the needs for collegiality, and perhaps hampered by unfortunate attacks on liberty, prophets can still for the first time influence culture toward excellence and enlightenment. Wild excesses, incivility and lack of decorum are not necessary for this to occur.

Nor does diversity have to be the highest value, nor does the current "liberal post-modern" belief that one thing is as good as another have to prevail. And in great cultures, tradition and history are valued along with inspiration and creativity, rather than sheer innovation for its own sake. Thus perhaps, a more spiritual 4T and 1T can be perceived as "culturally conservative" to that extent. A new golden age is supposed to have a "classical" style, according to the history of civilization cycles.

Prophets just need to continue to be who they are, and remember their dreams. I can't speak for Xers and Millenials in this context, or to what extent if any they will agree with prophets like me. Obviously, some of them will need to see beyond the purely material needs of survival and technical power as they mature, for any of this to happen.

_________________
Keep the Spirit Alive,
Eric Meece

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Eric A Meece on 2002-07-01 13:52 ]</font>

Very well written Eric. I can't see a lot of your fellow Boomers getting off their butts and doing it though. It would be great if they did, but I don't see it. Some were disillusioned when their plans were rejected by society, others gave the plans up willingly and fell for the seduction of easy money in the 80s. Either way, those that were beaten, or those who turned coat, many of them seemed to loose their passion.

I can't speak for all Xers, and I am going to think about your post a bit more, but I do think there is room for both the grand visions you suggest and the more pragmatic needs of day to day living. There will need to be some balance, and that means you keep your feet on the ground while you reach for the stars, to paraphrase some radio psychic I heard once.

More later

Actually, it might have been Top 40 host Casey Casim who said that!

On 2002-07-01 14:08, Eric A Meece wrote:
Actually, it might have been Top 40 host Casey Casim who said that!

And isn't he a Silent? :lol:

Very good reply, Eric.

However, I am going to make a radical proposition that doing so will actually do more harm than good. The reason is not because of the "concept of progress" that I would normally use to debate this point.

It is based upon one of the simplest concepts, and it is that of the circle. With the theory of S&H, it is established that history is circular, even as many people redefined it to be a spiral. Not only that, but society is a chaotic process. Whenever you have a society in which the ability to think and do freely is built into it, I think that you will have this cycle. In American tradition, each generation feels the need to improve on society. That drives the cycle of generations, and this, the saeculum.

Because of the circular aspects of history, your prescription will only do the opposite of your intentions. As each generation takes it upon themselves to leave the world in a better shape than the last one, it drives a circular process because the collective ambitions of the population will always strive for balance. A naturally created circle will always strive for perfect balance. Yin and Yang will always be kept in balance of each other.

As Boomers enter elderhood, they will face what every other Prophet generation did at the same phase of life: they will see in younger people a disregard for the inner life, and will take it upon themselves to infuse values into the ambitions of the youth. As such, they will become GCs.

During the 4T, Gray Champions will infuse culture into society. That much is certain. Remember, however, that it is the Prophets who are the order givers, and the Heroes who are the order takers. If the Millies become more like Boomers, the cycle will be thrown off-balance, but that will not happen. By nature, Millies will come of age to be not similar, but complementary to the Boomers. Why is it that every effort by Prophets to infuse culture into society in elderhood failed? Exactly because of this reason.

You start with the uber-religious Puritan Generation. They sought to provide moral guidance for the creation of a kingdon of god. However, the Glorious went on to create a secular and spirit dead society. The Great Awakeners sought act like wisemen, but ultimately, Republicans chose materialism. The Transie Generation had one of the most extreme displays of ideological rage in history, which culminated in a war in which each side sought to send their "evil" nemesis straight to hell in mass numbers, ending in an amazingly destructive war. However, the ensuing 1T was one of "unusual cultural sterility." For the Missionary Generation who sought to persuade the young that, "a nation can be born in a day if the ideals of the people can be changed," and whose late-in-life mission was to create "that humanistic society which under the name of Paradise, Elsium, Heaven, City of God, Millennium, has been the craving of all good men these last four thousand years or more", they saw society revert to "low-brow materialism" during the 1950s. If we can define "sucess" by the degree in which spiritualism was infused into society, each Prophet generation failed at the end, no matter how hard they tried. Saying that they failed doesn't so this justice, as they failed horrendously.

Now, here is a thought experiment. If the GIs tried to push Boomers to become collegial, rationalist, and friendly, would it ever have worked? I doubt it. In fact, studying the last 2T, it only PUSHED the Boomers in the opposite direction. The same thing would happen today. The more Boomers try to infuse spirituality and culture into society, the more Millies and Xers will ignore it into the 1T. Xers will try to push Boomers away from public life in order to keep them from causing any more civic risk. Millies, whose coming of age trial will force them to adopt a more "outer world" approach to life, will have their own agenda once their trial is complete and the need for urgency ebbs.

Getting deeper into the mechanics of this, let's look at what happens in a 4T. Prophets will try to implant values into every sphere of life. As a result, Millies will not have to. In fact, there will be no room for this generation in the values domains. For there to still be culture and spiritualism, Millies would have to create it themselves, which means that they will have to launch an Awakening. The problem with 1Ts is not necessarily that there are no values. The problem is that without a struggle around which to organize society around, everyone begins taking values and the culture for granted, and that the meaning of them erodes into nothingness leaving society in a spirit-dead culture. In fact, Millies keeping the culture alive is like the Boomers in the 1960s or in the 1990s organizing their generation for collective action for a collective goal.

Accordingly, the only way to kill the cycle is to break the natural inclinations of the Boomers who will be the new elders in society during the 4T. It is the elder generation that drives the inclinations of youth. If the Boomers act more like a Hero generation in elderhood, then Millies will compensate by acting more like Prophets.

_________________
Robert Reed III (1982)
"Where they have burned books, they will end in burning human beings." -- Heinrich Heine
"The World is my country, all mankind are my brethren and to do good is my religion."-Thomas Paine

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: madscientist on 2002-07-01 16:48 ]</font>

This article certainly seems to sum up the recent events of the country--especially the economic ones--and how they are leading to an overall distrust of the current system. Perhaps this is the spiraling down of events that we are finally exhibiting, as the deep issues (not just those on the surface) are being uncovered.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2002Jul1.html

Thanks for the input.
I am an X'r but wholeheartedly a polictical and social conservative. And thusly see my culture from that vantage point.
As far as whether or not we are in a fourth turning. I believe we are at the tail end of the 3rd, but, 9-11 was certainly the catalist that threw us irrevocably into the path of the 4th. All the factors are in play BIG TIME on the conservative news chat sites.
ie:
immagration --BAD
celebrities-- irrelivent
social politics-- utter stupidity
( as far as defined as 'under God ' ruling, fire-roadless national land, ESL education) {of course these have always been a division between the 2 schools of thought, the schism seems more obvious, the liberals, IMO more ridiculous ie: Al Gore stating *this time* "to hell with the polls".)

I think it will take 2 more attacks on the U.S. before we are cemented into a 4th. Unless it's something crazy beyond belief.
(Like , "The Sum of All Fears".)
I fear that the monumental *size* of 911 was so devestating emotionally that a lesser sized attack wouldn't be taken too seriously.
(for example a suicide bomber killing only a handful of people. After all aren't we used to this type of behavior from the inner cities? We've become numb, somewhat, to it)
For example the Anthrax scares, yesterdays news.... yet 5 people are dead.

The reason I think it will take a couple more is because we as a people love our comfort. And will hold onto it regardless of exterior circumstances, and whatever lies we wish to tell ourselves.The people here at fouthturning.com sort of have a heads up on where we are headed. The rest of the country is not willing to make the sacrifices neccessary yet. Which is why I say 2 more, at that point the general population will unable to deny the truth of the threat we face, and public attitude will be forever, premanently changed.

Hari,

Thanks for the link. Very interesting.

I have bounced, like many of you, back and forth on the 3T vs. 4T issue. From 9/11 until about Thanksgiving, I was leaning toward 4T. From then until March, I was 50/50. From March until a couple of weeks ago, I was leaning toward 3T (strongly). But this recent erosion (bordering on implosion) of societal trust is making me move AT LEAST back toward the middle.

I agree that one or two more sizable events and we will be over the edge for sure. Indeed, if that anthrax scare had manifested as something a couple of orders of magnitude bigger, I think that would've done it. But even without new terrorist strikes, perhaps 9/11 did enough damage under the surface that it is just taking time for the fundamental change to become obvious.

Yet again (don't you just love the schizoid-inducing nature of this topic?) this cycle's Artist generation is still pretty prominent in our institutions. The prophets do not yet completely occupy midlife (on the bottom just about but not yet on the top end) and thus their vanguard cohorts are not face to face with retirement-style mortality in large numbers yet -- thus not initiating that final prophetic fervor.

Our Nomads are still more-or-less in frenetic-mode, though I see clear signs of the elder half slowing down. And of course, S&H's rough Millenial-gen estimates would have the lead Hero cohorts not yet even fully occupying the 18-21 high-profile selective-service-fodder bracket.

The past few paragraphs were just a long-winded way of agreeing with previous links that the initial 4T constellation has not arrived. But we all know that was not necessary for the Civil War.

As for that anomaly some parting thoughts: That 4T was disasterous largely because of the Trannies' passions not being effectively filtered by enough surviving Artists or middle-aged Nomads (the Gilded were too young). This was in turn largely caused by a LONG previous 1T leading to a LONG Trannie generation (or something along those lines).

This time 'round, we have an extraordinarily short Prophet generation. If, however unlikely, a 4T has been triggered by 9/11, there will still be a very significant Artist presence around and, in a short time, middle-aged Nomads. So even if we are early here with a 4T, there are significant differences with the only other (and horrendous) example we have of one.

Lastly, the typical constellation requirements, coupled with the rough 21-year phase-of-life-to-match-a-turning rule ( among other tidbits in S&H writings), call for the 4T to start apx. 2005-2006. But the Boom Awakening probably shouldn't have started, by these markers, until 1967 or so, yet things worked out fine (or perhaps they did not--someone could explore the premature nature of our recent 2T and its effects).

Some food for thought. Love to hear what you think (are you listening Mr. Strauss?)

Sean Love, 1968 cohort