Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: Evidence We're in a Third--or Fourth--Turning - Page 239







Post#5951 at 02-09-2003 04:10 AM by Jason C Carnevale [at Ontario, CA joined Oct 2002 #posts 28]
---
02-09-2003, 04:10 AM #5951
Join Date
Oct 2002
Location
Ontario, CA
Posts
28

Still think we're in a 3T

As I mentioned several pages up, I still think we're in a 3T. 9-11 was just an event which could have been a catalyst, but happened a few years too early. What the country is feeling now is simply the last days of the Unraveling, a time when Strauss and Howe mention that people are getting the feeling that "the party can't last forever."

None of the dismal forecasts that people predicted in 2001 have come to pass...no more terrorist attacks, the nation hasn't become a police-state, civil liberties are still fairly much intact. There is still a 3T mentality about this country, in that folks are still generally behaving as they were back in the 1990's. I think my best friend in LA put it best, "dude, everyone outside of the east coast has totally forgotten about 9-11"

That being said, however, I think we may be due for the real McCoy either this year or next. I don't think Iraq will bring it on unless the war turns into a bloody stalemate or Hussein (or someone else) launches some catastrophic attack on the United States (God forbid!)

I'm personally afraid of North Korea. If Kim Jong-Il decides to launch an attack on South Korea, Japan, or the US, THAT WILL BE THE CATALYST EVENT. A major war in Asia where millions could be killed (including thousands of US servicepersons) would probably be enough of a jolt to send this country barreling into the Crisis, even if North Korea falls within a few months.

Ironically, even if September 11 had never happened, this might still be the catalyst event. Both would seem to arise from problems that should have been dealt with in the 1990's, rather than being more or less "swept under the rug" by negotiations (Korea in 1994), or by inactivity (Clinton's failure to go after Bin Laden throughout the 1990's).

I think 2003 is a horribly dangerous year for this country. The only way for the Unraveling to continue is for Iraq to be dealt with quickly (or if Saddam decides to flee), no more terrorist attacks, and North Korea decides to play it cool for awhile.

And then we just have to make it through 2004...







Post#5952 at 02-09-2003 11:09 AM by [at joined #posts ]
---
02-09-2003, 11:09 AM #5952
Guest

Here seems to be an argument that we're in 4T. Standard disclaimers apply.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2003Feb7.html

Aweek ago today, one of two things happened.

A terrible tragedy occurred, plain and simple.

Or, a terrible tragedy occurred, which served as yet more confirmation that life, the world order and the onward march of progress are disintegrating.

Call this the Uh-Oh Decade. The television, like a unlucky friend, seems to bring only bad news. The superstitious wonder what tyrannical force has it in for us. Those of a certain religious ilk hear the rumblings of Armageddon. Yesterday, the national terror alert was raised from yellow to orange, but perhaps it's more fitting that Congress has declared this the Year of the Blues (music, of course, but music of tragedy). Anxiety has become fatalism.

Even though the Columbia shuttle disaster has nothing to do with 9/11, the anthrax scare, the poor economy, the accounting scandals, the sniper killings or the impending war with Iraq, it seems of a piece.

Context is all. A tragedy in the shadows of other tragedies can't help but seem like proof of a trend. One person's negativism can reinforce another's. Northwest stay-at-home mother Laura Trivers, saw the Columbia explode last Saturday, went to a yoga class and told someone, "I don't think I can take anything else." Then she commiserated over lunch with her friend Andy Solomon, a normally optimistic guy, who said, "Nothing good has happened in the last two years."

In that instant, a story was being told. It's the story of America under a bad sign. And even though a manned shuttle mission can go awry during other periods, and has, the Columbia explosion feels appropriate to our time, like something that belongs in our dangerous, fragile new reality. The event is interpreted to fit the moment.

"When we have a new narrative introduced into our lives, what we do is take everything and conform it to the narrative," says Neal Gabler, an entertainment and cultural critic in Amagansett, N.Y.

Andy Solomon is a case in point. On the morning of the explosion, he assumed the worst when the words "Breaking News" flashed across his television screen. "That's kind of the mind frame that many Americans have been in since 9/11," he says, "that there's almost an expectation that major news, that major happenings in the world are bad things." Very bad. Naturally, the explosion reinforced his expectations.

Solomon, a nonprofit public affairs director, thinks now about what's reality and what's perspective. He wonders if he's selectively edited out whatever good news there's been in the last two years. He wonders if a really positive story -- "a small potential tragedy turning into a heroic piece of good news" -- could shake him out of his funk.

Like, perhaps, the nine coal miners saved from a flooded shaft in Pennsylvania last summer?

Solomon is flummoxed. "Was that during this period, since 9/11?" he asks.

The answer is only technically yes. Good news doesn't fit the paradigm of our darker America.

Consider negativity like the mythic snake eating its tail. When you're depressed, "you have a depressed filter," says Alexander Rich, a psychologist at the University of South Florida. "It primes your memory so you remember your feelings and things that have gone wrong and your regrets and things you're ashamed of."

You're more likely to feel helpless and give up on things. You have more difficulty solving problems. And even those who aren't depressed, Rich says, become more vigilant when a series of bad things happens, to prepare for the next bad thing. The metaphorical shoe dangles precariously.

"One thing goes wrong, most of us don't say, 'Ah, jeez.' " Gabler says. "Most of us wait for the next thing to go wrong because it somehow gives us shape to our bad luck."

We may continue to pay attention to the news or we may tune it out altogether. Charles Figley, a psychologist with Florida State University, says that in one of his classes he recently tried to get a conversation going about local and world events. He realized his students weren't reading the newspapers. One of them explained: "It's kind of like, I already know the headlines, and by reading the newspaper I just learn how bad it is," Figley recalls. Classic student apathy here seems like a sign of the times.

Gabler and cultural historian Steven Stark both believe that the media have focused on certain kinds of stories over the past two years, stories like last years' kidnappings and killings of children, which seemed to emphasize the prevalence and randomness of evil in our country. (Robert Lichter of the Center for Media and Public Affairs doesn't buy this. "It's in the nature of the news media to focus on negatives," he says.)

In any case, mind-set is powerful. Paul Saffo, a director of the Institute for the Future, a think tank in Menlo Park, Calif., uses the phrase "unharmonic convergence" to describe how an event can fit into unrelated circumstances. "Did you ever wonder how Cortes and his band of 400 men conquered Mexico?" he asks. Cortes' arrival was interpreted by some as the coming of Quetzalcoatl, an Aztec god who was predicted to return at that time, and this made the Aztecs less prone to resisting the conqueror. They thought he was destiny.

The story that we tell ourselves about the Columbia disaster is a story about our times. In this interpretation, the shuttle turns out to be yet another dangerous phenomenon in a dangerous world, says Gabler. "Here is yet another event, yet another thing we can't control," he says.

We've had bad times before, of course, times when a series of major events seemed to pile onto our national psyche, creating a weighted feeling, a feeling like doom.

Consider the latter days of the Carter administration, as we stumbled through our so-called malaise. There was stagflation, and the growing sense that America was no longer King Midas but Midas's bad-luck cousin. Everything we touched turned to mud.

Cardigan-wearing, ineffectual-seeming Jimmy Carter became the explanation for our troubles, rightly or wrongly. Ronald Reagan became, as Stark puts it, our "good-luck charm." But those days were nothing compared with these, compared with the run of events that -- for now -- culminated in the shuttle disaster. We feel put upon. We feel singled out.

"I think it adds to this sense of . . . how much more can we collectively take?" says Trivers, Solomon's yoga-going friend.

"It does seem implausible when you begin to add it all up," says Peter Schwartz, a co-founder of California-based Global Business Network, which specializes in scenario planning for organizations. "If somebody had written it as thriller, you'd say, 'No.' "

How to explain the implausibility? As always, there is religion. Bush emphasized the spiritual side of the disaster in his remarks last Saturday and in his speech on Tuesday. He quoted four lines from Isaiah, he invoked "the Creator," and he told the astronauts' families they'd see their loved ones again "in God's own time."

Religion comforts because it explains. Hence what Saffo heard on the radio after the crash: "A Baptist guy, he was talking about this was God's message: 'Come back to earth, connect with me.' " Or the person who left this on an Internet message board: "I don't know if anyone has brought this up but the whole thing looks like an omen. There was an Israeli on board and the shuttle exploded over Palestine, Texas. Is God trying to tell us something?"

In considering interpretations, it helps to consider which God is being invoked. Some in the Middle East called the shuttle tragedy "divine retribution" for our country's stance against Iraq. God as a rhetorical device is like the sea -- owned by no one, claimed by everyone.

There are also the conspiracy theories. The desire to make sense of the inexplicable, combined with a generalized anxiety, is why some people immediately thought terrorists were at fault in the Columbia explosion.

Then there is the wholesale assigning of blame. Rena Gorlin, a copy writer at a Washington legal and business publishing company, says, "I'm one of those people who actually saw the end of the world when Bush was installed." Within that framework, everything fits: 9/11 (Bush didn't pay enough attention to bin Laden), the tension with Iraq (Bush's aggression), and the Columbia disaster (Bush could have anticipated it because of warnings about NASA's aging fleet). When Gorlin went into work last Monday, she spoke with a colleague of like mind.

Their thinking was, "Well, there goes another one," she says. "How can you cry anymore? . . . The world is going to [expletive] because of George Bush."

There are also superstitious explanations for why the shuttle tragedy happened now. "I think I'm aware on an intellectual level that it's just a bunch of coincidences, but now I think a part of me worries that it's karma," says Amy Keyishian, a freelance journalist in Brooklyn, N.Y. Perhaps, she speculates, "we've had it too easy . . . we don't deserve the blessings we've had."

As for Andy Solomon, he says that while he was upset by the news of the Columbia, he wonders if he would have been more emotional had the tragedy not come on the heels of the last two years.

"In some way, maybe that all girds you for additional bad news that comes along," he says.

This pessimism about the way the world is heading is out of keeping with his normally upbeat nature. He wonders and worries that this change in mind-set might be permanent. He thinks of older relatives who lived through the Depression, and the fact that no matter how financially secure they became in later years, they always live as if "the next depression is around the corner . . . wrapping up the two bites on their plate in the restaurant" to take home.

If the world suddenly went back to the way it was, Solomon wonders, would he, too?


? 2003 The Washington Post Company







Post#5953 at 02-09-2003 02:32 PM by zilch [at joined Nov 2001 #posts 3,491]
---
02-09-2003, 02:32 PM #5953
Join Date
Nov 2001
Posts
3,491

Methinks the Washington Post may be feeling a little uneasy about their firm support of the Republican Bush's war with Iraq. So they offer a little puff piece for their many liberal friends in Washington:

Quote Originally Posted by [i
The Washington Post[/i]]
Then there is the wholesale assigning of blame. Rena Gorlin, a copy writer at a Washington legal and business publishing company, says, "I'm one of those people who actually saw the end of the world when Bush was installed." Within that framework, everything fits: 9/11 (Bush didn't pay enough attention to bin Laden), the tension with Iraq (Bush's aggression), and the Columbia disaster (Bush could have anticipated it because of warnings about NASA's aging fleet). When Gorlin went into work last Monday, she spoke with a colleague of like mind.

Their thinking was, "Well, there goes another one," she says. "How can you cry anymore? . . . The world is going to [expletive] because of George Bush."
Had Washington Post stepped out here in fly-over country...
perhaps the story would have been written with a little different spin? :wink:

Quote Originally Posted by [i
The Washington Post[/i] should have]
Then there is the attempt to get over the many failures of the past. Marc Lamb, a Telly Award-winning video producer, says, "I'm one of those people who, like most Americans, actually thought the Supreme Court did the right thing in the E2K recount debacle." Within that framework, everything fits: 9/11 (Clinton's failure to deal effectively with Osama bin Laden, after the terrorist attack on the WTO in 1993, the bombing U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 and the U.S. Cole in 2000), the tension with Iraq (Hussein's emboldened defiance after Clinton failed to stop his weapons programs in 1998), and the Columbia disaster (Bush now has the opportunity to create a new vision for NASA). When Lamb went into work last Monday, he spoke with a colleague of like mind.

Their thinking was, "We, like most of America, really believe in the direction Bush is headed." he says. "But we really worry about our Democrat neighbors, who can't seem to get over the fact that they [expletive] lost the 2000 election."


Notes:
1. Within a month of 9/11, a Zogby poll revealed that only 20% of Americans regretted the Clinton was no longer president. A firm 72% said they believed "Bush Best Man For Crisis."

2. Al Gore's book, Joined at the Heart: The Transformation of the American Family, meant to launch his bid to undo E2K languishes is ranked 625,874 at amazon.com. After a media-hyped boor tour fizzeled, Gore took the hint and dropped out of the race. David Frum's book about Bush, The Right Man: The Surprise Presidency of George W. Bush, is currently ranked 91 at amazon.com.







Post#5954 at 02-09-2003 05:24 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
02-09-2003, 05:24 PM #5954
Guest

Quote Originally Posted by Jenny Genser
A terrible tragedy occurred, plain and simple.

Or, a terrible tragedy occurred, which served as yet more confirmation that life, the world order and the onward march of progress are disintegrating.

Call this the Uh-Oh Decade. The television, like a unlucky friend, seems to bring only bad news. The superstitious wonder what tyrannical force has it in for us. Those of a certain religious ilk hear the rumblings of Armageddon. Yesterday, the national terror alert was raised from yellow to orange, but perhaps it's more fitting that Congress has declared this the Year of the Blues (music, of course, but music of tragedy). Anxiety has become fatalism...
Sounds like late Unravelling as usual to me :-)







Post#5955 at 02-09-2003 05:32 PM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
02-09-2003, 05:32 PM #5955
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by Suz X
I'm back, but having a very hard time interpreting what any of what you are all blah blah blahing about has to do with anything.
This forum is the antithesis of ANYONE'S experience of real life.
Not for me it isn't. Or is. :-?

Or...well, it's as real to me as anything else is in this thing I call life. :-)


This discussion seems to me to be an overly complex 3T- boomer-fueled, battle of ultimately meaningless personal self-aggrandisement, regularly fortified with the supposedly essential vitamins of very entrenched politcal prejudices and erudite, yet still Trivial Pursuit-type knowledge, without any of the minerals of actual how-to experience.
Yeah, as you were saying....?

Do you just peel off your regular skin and don "HIGHLY SMART PERSON WHO KNOWS EVERYTHING AND DOES NOTHING" spacesuits when you log on here, or what?
I'm smart and I do stuff. {shrug} I have a real job, a marriage, and kids. How normal can you get?

Is it just me, or does anyone else here actually ENGAGE the world you all so scientifically dissect as if it were a debate team assignment given to a class of economists? Am I the only one who percieves the dissonance?
It's just you. What the hell is so wrong about having a little curiosity about the world or having a little debate once in a while?


Reading through all the posts since I logged off a mere week ago, I found myself thinking over and over and over: GET TO THE BOTTON LINE, ALREADY. And everybody here seems very much invested in showing off how much they know, and very little invested in doing anything at all to put that vast body of supposed smartness to a litmus test of "Let's roll" "Just do it" policy-making. Y'all just wanna talk talk talk about it.
How do you know we don't practice what we preach? Many of us are teachers, parents, volunteers, political activists, scientists, and students. Who's to say we don't actually do real things to try and change the world?

{snip most of the rant}


You, my friends and foes on this particular thread, are out of touch to a degree I cannot even quantify. I know you are really just here to show off how much you know; and that is useless to nearly everyone. But, damn, let me say that you are all really, really smart. Hope it makes you all feel good.

But I'm sure you can find a way to intellectualize your way out of that accusation, too. :o
How's this: You don't know us here, and you don't know what you're talking about. Why don't you get off your own high horse and engage us here? Start a thread or a poll. Ask a question. Honestly, this catch-all condemnation isn't justified, Suz.







Post#5956 at 02-09-2003 07:29 PM by Croakmore [at The hazardous reefs of Silentium joined Nov 2001 #posts 2,426]
---
02-09-2003, 07:29 PM #5956
Join Date
Nov 2001
Location
The hazardous reefs of Silentium
Posts
2,426

What's the point of trying to reason with a 12-year old, Kiff? She's a larval version of Lamb's wool.







Post#5957 at 02-09-2003 07:36 PM by Roadbldr '59 [at Vancouver, Washington joined Jul 2001 #posts 8,275]
---
02-09-2003, 07:36 PM #5957
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Vancouver, Washington
Posts
8,275

Quote Originally Posted by Croaker'39
What's the point of trying to reason with a 12-year old, Kiff? She's a larval version of Lamb's wool.
Suz X is only TWELVE?????!!!!!







Post#5958 at 02-09-2003 07:40 PM by Katie '85 [at joined Sep 2002 #posts 306]
---
02-09-2003, 07:40 PM #5958
Join Date
Sep 2002
Posts
306

Quote Originally Posted by Suz X
I'm back, but having a very hard time interpreting what any of what you are all blah blah blahing about has to do with anything.
This forum is the antithesis of ANYONE'S experience of real life.
Since when do internet discussion forums reflect everyone's experience of real life? For the vast majority of people who use them, internet forums are a form of recreation, a way to debate and discuss issues that interest them. I enjoy this forum because of the mental stimulation it gives. I certainly don't read every topic, nor do I always agree with the other posters, but it's still fun to learn what everyone has to say. (It's a mental workout, like William said.) It's also a way I can be exposed to the opinions and beliefs of people who are different from me, in age, politics, religion or whatever - people that I otherwise might not understand or be exposed to.

This discussion seems to me to be an overly complex 3T- boomer-fueled, battle of ultimately meaningless personal self-aggrandisement, regularly fortified with the supposedly essential vitamins of very entrenched politcal prejudices and erudite, yet still Trivial Pursuit-type knowledge, without any of the minerals of actual how-to experience. Do you just peel off your regular skin and don "HIGHLY SMART PERSON WHO KNOWS EVERYTHING AND DOES NOTHING" spacesuits when you log on here, or what? Is it just me, or does anyone else here actually ENGAGE the world you all so scientifically dissect as if it were a debate team assignment given to a class of economists? Am I the only one who percieves the dissonance?
How do you know the people who post here don't "engage" the world? I think it's kind of presumptuous to make a judgement about someone's lifestyle based on what they post on a forum. I'm sure most of the posters here lead generally normal lives, with jobs and families like everybody else.

Reading through all the posts since I logged off a mere week ago, I found myself thinking over and over and over: GET TO THE BOTTON LINE, ALREADY. And everybody here seems very much invested in showing off how much they know, and very little invested in doing anything at all to put that vast body of supposed smartness to a litmus test of "Let's roll" "Just do it" policy-making. Y'all just wanna talk talk talk about it.
Well, that's usually what happens when people discuss things they feel strongly about. Also, the internet tends to attract people who like to talk, discuss, argue and debate for fun. If they didn't enjoy it they wouldn't be here. The people here aren't politicians, so it's not exactly pressing that they convert all their ideas to "policy". (Even though you seem to think they should.)

And meanwhile all of you here will continue to argue the finer points of theory and hypothesis while the whole world goes on without you. You seem to be so throwing yourselves under the bus to me. Saying that you can't see the forest for the trees is a huge understatement. You can't seem to see life for your dissertations about it.

And, because I am really looking for answers, your inability to answer anything without a million-man survey conducted over 20 years pisses me off. Your constant one-up-manship and "Oh, but have you heard that the latest economic model includes this or that" pisses me off. You people seem so damned isolated and so damned stupid, as if anyone in the real world gives a damn what label you apply to them economically.

You, my friends and foes on this particular thread, are out of touch to a degree I cannot even quantify. I know you are really just here to show off how much you know; and that is useless to nearly everyone. But, damn, let me say that you are all really, really smart. Hope it makes you all feel good.

But I'm sure you can find a way to intellectualize your way out of that accusation, too. :o
I really don't understand why you're so worked up. Most of the people on this board belong to it because they enjoy the mental stimulation of debating and discussing each other's ideas. But that doesn't mean that discussing and debating is all they ever do. Outside this forum their lives are pretty much the same as everyone else's. So, the bottom line is, if you like it here, stay and join in on the discussions. If this forum really pisses you off, as you said it did, then you don't have to stay. Nobody's making you.
Much madness is divinest sense. -- Emily Dickinson







Post#5959 at 02-09-2003 07:41 PM by HopefulCynic68 [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 9,412]
---
02-09-2003, 07:41 PM #5959
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
9,412

Re: On Boomers

Quote Originally Posted by Tristan Jones
Quote Originally Posted by Marc S. Lamb
When the [Silent] Surgeon General Joslyn Elders declared "every child, a wanted child," she epitomized a generational shift so profound as to be very recognizable to a generation that, more likely than not, was wanted. In her famous "they have a love affair with the fetus" speech, she was in effect preaching the New Left gospel, a gospel wherein the salvation of society lay in the genesis of a new "wanted" generation, a generation who's surviving members were only those that were truly "wanted," while the remaining unwanted members were discarded.
I think Joyce Elders was making a general observation about society during the Unraveling that the anti-child attuide of the awakening has disappeared and society became more pro-child in policy. Regardless of the political persuasion of people, they generally feel that every child born is an invaluable resource and a blessing, as opposed to a waste of resources and a curse that was so common during the awakening.
She was being disparaging of people who don't regard destroying unborn people as morally trivial.

And in fact, much the leadership of several institutions of society, particularly such outfits as NARAL, NOW, the ZPG movement, and some branches of the greens (NOT all) do indeed regard every birth as a tragedy.







Post#5960 at 02-09-2003 07:48 PM by Katie '85 [at joined Sep 2002 #posts 306]
---
02-09-2003, 07:48 PM #5960
Join Date
Sep 2002
Posts
306

Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Parker '59
Quote Originally Posted by Croaker'39
What's the point of trying to reason with a 12-year old, Kiff? She's a larval version of Lamb's wool.
Suz X is only TWELVE?????!!!!!
LOL! I checked, and she's said in other posts that she was born in 1962.
Much madness is divinest sense. -- Emily Dickinson







Post#5961 at 02-09-2003 07:50 PM by HopefulCynic68 [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 9,412]
---
02-09-2003, 07:50 PM #5961
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
9,412

Quote Originally Posted by monoghan
One of the characteristics of a 4T is that leaders exacerbate problems rather than papering over the problems.

While I have enjoyed the delicious digs that Rumsfeld has made at the french and germans, I must admit that I am surprised at the war of words we have gotten into with the North Koreans. Given the North Korean talent for hot rhetoric, I admit that I am surprised that we are going toe to toe with them. It cannot be anything but deliberate on the part of this administration. It certainly confirms the prediction of the authors.
Though it is not yet 4T, as far as I can tell, I think we are getting a foretaste of 4T thinking in the current Iraq run-up. One of the markers of 4T is that in the previous time, Adaptives build up huge and complex edifices of custom and law designed to restrain things from getting out of hand, only to see their Idealist successors ignore or destroy them when they become inconvenient.

Bush is simply not going to let the UN or anything else prevent him from doing what he intends to do, for good or ill. He's not doing it very intensely, in a 3Tish sort of way, but this is almost certainly a mild preview of what's ahead with future Boomer leaders.







Post#5962 at 02-09-2003 08:13 PM by monoghan [at Ohio joined Jun 2002 #posts 1,189]
---
02-09-2003, 08:13 PM #5962
Join Date
Jun 2002
Location
Ohio
Posts
1,189

Quote Originally Posted by Katie '85
I'm sure most of the posters here lead generally normal lives, with jobs and families like everybody else.
Reminds me of the quote reported by John Podoretz when he addressed a group of 12 peace activists in the early sixties in Union Square that "everyone here is a tragedy to a family somewhere."

Reminds me, that is, in a nice sort of way.







Post#5963 at 02-09-2003 09:09 PM by zilch [at joined Nov 2001 #posts 3,491]
---
02-09-2003, 09:09 PM #5963
Join Date
Nov 2001
Posts
3,491

Quote Originally Posted by Katie '85
Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Parker '59
Quote Originally Posted by Croaker'39
What's the point of trying to reason with a 12-year old, Kiff? She's a larval version of Lamb's wool.
Suz X is only TWELVE?????!!!!!
LOL! I checked, and she's said in other posts that she was born in 1962.
Suz X once said, during a debate on the environment, that my take on the issue did not cause her to basically hate herself for being such a burden on earth merely because she was a human being.

What Croaker was trying to say here was that in his opinion, as in the opinion of most environmentalists, this sort of reasoning is that of a "12-year old," and that in effect Suz X is indeed something less than a human being (a "larval version of Lamb's wool").

Thus Suz X and I, in the world of Joslyn Elders and Croaker, amount to something akin to a oopsy unwanted "fetus" that sadly fell through the cracks and was actually birthed. In a fourth turn, accordingly, we shall be earmarked for premature death, much like the "final solution."

Got that? :o







Post#5964 at 02-09-2003 10:41 PM by Stonewall Patton [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 3,857]
---
02-09-2003, 10:41 PM #5964
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
3,857

Rumsfeld's German relatives have disowned him on account of his ludicrous warmongering for the Bush administration. The global alliance structure we have known for so long is rapidly a-changing.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...questid=130272

(Usual disclaimers)



Rumsfeld family tie is first victim of war
By Tony Paterson
(Filed: 09/02/2003)

The American defence chief Donald Rumsfeld has
been disowned by his anti-war relatives in north Germany, reports Tony Paterson


The Rumsfelds of Weyhe-Sudweyhe, an
unremarkable red-brick suburb of Bremen, were once proud of their long-lost cousin, America's secretary of state for defence - but no longer.

Like many Germans, they are appalled by Donald Rumsfeld's hawkish attitude to military action against Saddam Hussein. About 18,000 anti-war demonstrators marched through Munich yesterday to protest at his presence at an international security conference - chanting slogans such as "No room for Rumsfeld!"

"We think it is dreadful that Donald Rumsfeld is out there pushing for a war against Iraq," Karin Cecere (nee Rumsfeld), 59, said from her two-up, two-down home last week. "We are embarrassed to be related to him," she told The Telegraph.

Margarete Rumsfeld, her 85-year-old mother, was equally dismissive: "We don't have much to do with him anymore. Nowadays he's just the American defence secretary to us, but for God's sake, he'd better not start a war," she added.

They used to feel differently. Twenty-five years ago, the German Rumsfelds were thrilled to welcome Mr Rumsfeld - then the United States ambassador to Nato stationed in Brussels - into their extended family.

Like many Americans keen to trace their European antecedents, Mr Rumsfeld had made contact with the Weyhe-Sudweyhe Rumsfelds, a branch of the family with whom his near relations had lost touch since his great-great-grandfather, Heinrich, emigrated to America during the 19th century.

Mr Rumsfeld paid three visits to Dietrich Rumsfeld, a bricklayer, and his wife Margarete in their small artisan's cottage. On the last occasion, they greeted him with chicken soup and roast pork for lunch "It was a really pleasant family gathering, almost like a wedding," said Mrs Cecere last week. "Mr Rumsfeld seemed a genuinely nice man. It is such a shame about his war ambitions."

She had grown up, she said, during the Second World War and her instincts were to search for a solution to the deadlock with Saddam that did not involve military action. "I was born in the war and saw its aftermath, and my mother went through it," she said. "There must be a peaceful way of solving the Iraq problem."

This change of heart over their Rumsfeld cousin reflects the mood in Germany. More than 60 per cent of Germans oppose a war and the US defence secretary has become a hate figure for the country's peace movement.

His desire to topple Saddam by force is at odds with the Social Democrat-led government of Chancellor Gerhard Schr?der, which is directly opposed to war in Iraq.

Even before his arrival in Germany yesterday, Mr Rumsfeld had faced fierce criticism from senior German government officials for describing France and Germany as "old Europe".

Last week he caused further outrage when he told the House Armed Services Committee in Washington that Germany, like "Libya and Cuba", had indicated that it "did not want to help in any way" the international efforts to tackle Iraq.

The German government attempted to play down the criticism. "Mr Rumsfeld is like he is. I can say no more," said Joschka Fischer, the foreign minister. Other senior politicians were more explicit. "Rumsfeld has flipped out - his behaviour is impossible," said Klaus Kinkel, a Free Democrat and former foreign minister.

Some Germans have misgivings, however, that their country's hard line against war with Iraq may backfire - especially if, as widely predicted, France drops its own objections at the last minute and joins in military action.

Angela Merkel, the leader of the Christian Democrats, yesterday became the first opposition figure to call for Germany to become involved. "If it is impossible to solve the situation peacefully then Germany has to take part in a military operation," she said, accusing Mr Schr?der's government of "spreading ill-will and confusion" in Nato.

In Munich Mr Rumsfeld sought to dispel the furore over his own comments by claiming that he had intended the phrase "old Europe" as a term of affection, like that of "old friends".

He admitted that he was sometimes inclined to be blunt - but blamed it on his German roots. "My family originates from northern Germany. People there are well known for their direct and clear manner of speaking."

His explanation did not impress most Germans - least of all his cousins in Weyhe-Sudweyhe. Mrs Cecere said: "We're all in favour of plain-speaking but our relation goes just too far."







Post#5965 at 02-09-2003 10:46 PM by Stonewall Patton [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 3,857]
---
02-09-2003, 10:46 PM #5965
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
3,857

This is worth noting given the propaganda in the American media. 64% of Germans oppose an Iraq war. Schroeder's support is falling, not because he has been opposed to the Bush administration's warmongering, but because he has waffled in his opposition to it since the Bush administration began putting the screws to the German economy in retaliation.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$J45Q1XUJ5XOGVQFIQMFSFFOAVCBQ 0IV0?xml=/news/2003/01/11/wirq111.xml

(Usual disclaimers)



Schr?der steers middle course
By Kate Connolly in Berlin
(Filed: 11/01/2003)

Chancellor Gerhard Schr?der tried to quash
speculation yesterday that his opposition to war with Iraq had softened by saying Germany would do "everything possible" to ensure that the United Nations resolution was applied and that war was avoided.

Mr Schr?der also reaffirmed that Germany, which took a seat on the UN Security Council on Jan 1, would not commit troops to an attack.

He told members of his Social Democratic Party: "We want to do everything possible to make sure this succeeds without military action."

His outspoken anti-war remarks assisted his election victory in September but have put a huge strain on relations with Washington.

He appeared yesterday to be trying to appease critics in his government who have accused him of wobbling on his anti-war stance as well as voters, whose support for the government has been falling at an alarming rate. Sixty-four per cent of Germans are opposed to a war.

Both Mr Schr?der and Joschka Fischer, his foreign minister, have seemed increasingly keen to win back Washington's trust by saying a German vote for a decision to attack Iraq could not be ruled out.

Mr Schr?der seems to have recognised that he gambled too hard during the election campaign. He is now struggling to keep his poker face while being forced to make increasing concessions to the Americans by backtracking on election promises.

Although initially evading the issue, Mr Schr?der has approved American use of German airspace as well as bases on German soil to deploy troops to the Gulf. He is ready to provide 2,000 soldiers to increase security at the barracks.

Despite a German law forbidding the export of weapons to crisis regions, the government has allowed the sale of Patriot defence missiles to Israel to protect it from Iraqi attack.

In another gesture towards America, Germany has agreed to ease pressure on American troops by agreeing to take over the international protection force in Afghanistan next month.







Post#5966 at 02-09-2003 11:00 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
02-09-2003, 11:00 PM #5966
Guest

Quote Originally Posted by Stonewall Patton
This is worth noting given the propaganda in the American media. 64% of Germans oppose an Iraq war. Schroeder's support is falling, not because he has been opposed to the Bush administration's warmongering, but because he has waffled in his opposition to it since the Bush administration began putting the screws to the German economy in retaliation.
Yeah, mighty white of the guy, being a big supporter of peace when he KNOWS his next election rides on it. :lol:

Does anyone else find irony in the fact that France and Germany are in bed on this one?

Stonedude - give us a definition of Warmongering please?







Post#5967 at 02-10-2003 12:09 PM by Croakmore [at The hazardous reefs of Silentium joined Nov 2001 #posts 2,426]
---
02-10-2003, 12:09 PM #5967
Join Date
Nov 2001
Location
The hazardous reefs of Silentium
Posts
2,426

Back on the thread topic for a moment.

After watching ?60 Minutes? last night, and seeing what happened to those folks in Montana with their coveted Montana Power Company, I have to ask if this is a 3T or a 4T indicator. I think it?s a 4T blinking red light, because episodes like this will do more to tear America apart than all the terrorists in every rat's nest of the world.

--Croaker







Post#5968 at 02-10-2003 12:26 PM by Katie '85 [at joined Sep 2002 #posts 306]
---
02-10-2003, 12:26 PM #5968
Join Date
Sep 2002
Posts
306

Quote Originally Posted by Croaker'39
Back on the thread topic for a moment.

After watching ?60 Minutes? last night, and seeing what happened to those folks in Montana with their coveted Montana Power Company, I have to ask if this is a 3T or a 4T indicator. I think it?s a 4T blinking red light, because episodes like this will do more to tear America apart than all the terrorists in every rat's nest of the world.
My grandmother grew up in Butte when it was a mining town. She moved away after high school, but alot of her family still lives there and many of them worked for Montana Power. They're out of work (or working at other jobs by now, but those are hard to find in the very economically depressed city of Butte). Some of them have tried moving away, but their houses won't sell.

I'm not sure if the situation signifies 3T or 4T, but either way it's a mess!
Much madness is divinest sense. -- Emily Dickinson







Post#5969 at 02-10-2003 12:54 PM by TrollKing [at Portland, OR -- b. 1968 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,257]
---
02-10-2003, 12:54 PM #5969
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Portland, OR -- b. 1968
Posts
1,257

Quote Originally Posted by Suz X
Let me tell you something right here and right now: My generation is sick to death of the caring, knowing, understanding, cerebral, educated, advantaged, worldy, "with-it" generation preaching to EACH OTHER about all the problems of the world while solving none. My generation is sick of being forced, via university and workplace and media, to become the drones of the idealistic, but ultimately meaningless, mantra of complexity.
aw, c'mon suz.... angst is so 1992.


TK







Post#5970 at 02-10-2003 12:59 PM by TrollKing [at Portland, OR -- b. 1968 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,257]
---
02-10-2003, 12:59 PM #5970
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Portland, OR -- b. 1968
Posts
1,257

Re: On Boomers

Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Parker '59
Back in the 70s and early 80s I was very pro-life, since IMHO at-will-abortion-on-demand-for-whatever-reason tilted the playing field against guys like me who actually wanted to become responsible husbands and fathers.
pardon me for saying so, kevin, but honestly, that seems a rather shallow reason for being pro-life. i would hope its was not your only reason.


TK







Post#5971 at 02-10-2003 01:08 PM by Roadbldr '59 [at Vancouver, Washington joined Jul 2001 #posts 8,275]
---
02-10-2003, 01:08 PM #5971
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Vancouver, Washington
Posts
8,275

Re: On Boomers

Quote Originally Posted by TrollKing
Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Parker '59
Back in the 70s and early 80s I was very pro-life, since IMHO at-will-abortion-on-demand-for-whatever-reason tilted the playing field against guys like me who actually wanted to become responsible husbands and fathers.
pardon me for saying so, kevin, but honestly, that seems a rather shallow reason for being pro-life. i would hope its was not your only reason.


TK
Perhaps. But no more shallow than all those infertile couples who are/were pro-life because abortion reduced the pool of adoptable babies.







Post#5972 at 02-10-2003 01:22 PM by TrollKing [at Portland, OR -- b. 1968 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,257]
---
02-10-2003, 01:22 PM #5972
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Portland, OR -- b. 1968
Posts
1,257

Quote Originally Posted by Marc S. Lamb
What Croaker was trying to say here was that in his opinion, as in the opinion of most environmentalists [nice projection, btw], this sort of reasoning is that of a "12-year old," and that in effect Suz X is indeed something less than a human being (a "larval version of Lamb's wool").

Thus Suz X and I, in the world of Joslyn Elders and Croaker, amount to something akin to a oopsy unwanted "fetus" that sadly fell through the cracks and was actually birthed. In a fourth turn, accordingly, we shall be earmarked for premature death, much like the "final solution."
wow.... and here i thought he was just employing metaphor (and an inaccurate one, at that). instead, you've shown that he clearly means for the two of you to die. thanks for connecting the dots.

perhaps, additionally, you'd like to draw us a picture of croaker as some sort of enormous, fanged, demon frog with blood soaked hands?


TK







Post#5973 at 02-10-2003 01:26 PM by TrollKing [at Portland, OR -- b. 1968 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,257]
---
02-10-2003, 01:26 PM #5973
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Portland, OR -- b. 1968
Posts
1,257

Re: On Boomers

Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Parker '59
Perhaps. But no more shallow than all those infertile couples who are/were pro-life because abortion reduced the pool of adoptable babies.
true. i have to admit, though, that this is the first time i'd heard either of those reasons for being pro-life.


TK







Post#5974 at 02-10-2003 01:30 PM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
02-10-2003, 01:30 PM #5974
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by Katie '85
Quote Originally Posted by Suz X
I'm back, but having a very hard time interpreting what any of what you are all blah blah blahing about has to do with anything.
This forum is the antithesis of ANYONE'S experience of real life.
Since when do internet discussion forums reflect everyone's experience of real life? For the vast majority of people who use them, internet forums are a form of recreation, a way to debate and discuss issues that interest them. I enjoy this forum because of the mental stimulation it gives. I certainly don't read every topic, nor do I always agree with the other posters, but it's still fun to learn what everyone has to say. (It's a mental workout, like William said.) It's also a way I can be exposed to the opinions and beliefs of people who are different from me, in age, politics, religion or whatever - people that I otherwise might not understand or be exposed to.
Yep. What Katie said (in a much nicer way than I did, btw. :oops.

I just wanted to add one other thing. It is fun to hang out at T4T with all of these smart people from Silent, Boom, X, and Millie gens. I learn something from every poster here (even those whom I disagree with -- sometimes I learn even more from them!). I enjoy the intellectual challenge of being here, and I enjoy just chatting, too.







Post#5975 at 02-10-2003 01:51 PM by TrollKing [at Portland, OR -- b. 1968 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,257]
---
02-10-2003, 01:51 PM #5975
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Portland, OR -- b. 1968
Posts
1,257

Quote Originally Posted by Kiff '61
I learn something from every poster here (even those whom I disagree with -- sometimes I learn even more from them!). I enjoy the intellectual challenge of being here, and I enjoy just chatting, too.
in the interest of learning things, i just found this photo, the inset close-up of which explains a lot:







TK
-----------------------------------------