Originally Posted by Mike Alexander '59

Just what do people expect a 4T to bring? Does it make any sense at all that our obviously very fractious nation is going to suddenly forget the culture wars and join together to work on common problems?

We have plenty of problems. Take global warming. One side says this is equivalent to a life and death issue that we must all join together and solve. The other side says it doesn't exist. Take the culture of death. One side says this is literally a life and death situation (in the future, people are going to euthanized en masse when they are not longer wanted by society) and the other says its a private matter and none of our (public) concern. I could go down the list, none of us is ever going to agree on what is and what is not a problem. This disagreement in itself is a crisis issue.

Inch by inch we sink into the quicksand, but since our progress is slow, its still a 3T. Suppose it never speeds up, we just get used to it? When that happens, when we learn to live with a new, more austere life, why then we have entered the austerity period, what 1T's are called in countries that simply muddled through their 4T. The term High, with its positive connotations, is what is experienced by rising nations who successfully deal with the issues of the 4T . This is what makes them rising nations. Those who muddle through have Austerity periods (which is what makes them in decline).

Look at what happened to the UK in their hegemonic crisis in the mid-19th century. They remained a financial power, but the next round of the industrial revolution happened in Germany and America, not in Britain. As a result Britain was replaced by America as the de facto hegemon in WW I.

The Americans did not act the role of hegemon, leaving it to a too-weak Britain. As a result American was hit harder by the next crisis trigger than Britain although the ultimate result of the Crisis was the collapse of the British Empire. The US did a good job of handling the last 4T and part of the next round of industrialization (the information economy) did roll out first in the US. We are having a lot more problems with another part (new energy economy), preferring to employ our hegemonic power to keep the old oil economy going. As is always the case, decline occurs when the nation uses its power to maintain the status of existing elites, rather than allow new ones to emerge. This is what we seem to be doing, "muddling through".

Look at the fate of Spain in their hegemonic Armada crisis: spectacular collapse after the subsequent Awakening. How "High" was the 1594-1621 period for them? They got nine years of peace after 1609, compared to the decades Britain enjoyed after 1603. They saw their Portuguese possessions systematically swallowed by the Dutch juggernaut.

How did the Dutch fare after their hegemonic crisis (the Glorious Revolution). They remained a financal power, but the Industrial Revolution happened in Britain, the new hegemon, not the Netherlands, gaving Britain a new round of hegemony that the Dutch didn't get.

There is also the Assyrians' Hegemonic Crisis of c.627 - 609 BCE, which began as a civil war. The Babylonians took advantage of these internal troubles to revolt - a revolt which Assyria proved no longer able to suppress. The war which resulted went on for ten long, bloody, and inconclusive years. Then, the Medes, Persians and Scythians came into the war on Babylon's side, which rapidly tipped the scales in the allies' favor. Assyria's greatest cities were completely destroyed, and their populations wiped out, as the allies gave full vent to their bitter hatred of the common enemy. Egypt sent a small army to assist the last remnants of Assyria, not out of any great affection for them (they hated Assyria as much as everyone else), but out of self-interest. The assistance proved to be too little, too late. The last Assyrian army was wiped out in 609 BCE, and the Medo - Babylonian alliance divided the depopulated wreck of Assyria, while the Scythians went home to south Russia, while the Persians had to wait another 50 years to make their mark on history.

Might something like this be our fate?

Originally Posted by Blue Stater

Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate

that not even a "living will" can stop the trains headed to the twenty-first century version of Bergen-Belsen.

You watch the History channel too much.

His "news" link is very suspect. It looks to be brought to us by the American Taliban themselves. I really enjoyed the Hal Lindsey advert on their homepage (among other inane things). But I am disappointed that there are no tractor-pull contests or cousin-on-cousin marriage counseling advertized.

But assuming the "news" is true (and not contrived or distorted) what's happening sounds illegal. What are Georgia's laws on this?

As for what channel he watches too much . . . :wink:

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

As for what channel he watches too much . . . :wink:

The guy spouts off more Nazi references than the Sex Pistols.

"Belsen was a gasser!"

What scares me the most about today is the insane need to be on top. I've argued against this being a 4T but the article above andthe all too obvious similarites of the Neocons and the Nazi's are starting to make me think twice. In the Project for a New American Century There is mention of a need for a 'Pearl Harbor' type event to unite the country. They mention that states require an enemy to survive and should manufacture them if none exist. There is enough doubt as to whether the 2004 election was tampered to produce the final product that I'm wondering if this is a 4T. Only this time we're the bad guys. :cry:

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

His "news" link is very suspect... But assuming the "news" is true (and not contrived or distorted) what's happening sounds illegal.

Here's the same story direct from the hometown newspaper. And you are correct, even though Georgia law stipulates "A living will states that nourishment should be withheld only if she were in a coma or vegetative state with no hope of recovery" should be honored ("Grandmama" Magouirk has not been so diagnosed), the law of the land is whatever a judge says it stipulates. And in this case it means Grandmama must be starved to death because the judge says to do it, despite Grandmama's "living will" wishes.

What this all means is that taxpayers are paying a bunch of local, state, and federal legislators big bucks to write meaningless laws. Perhaps we should send all these lawmakers home, thus saving taxpayers money, social security outlays while reducing healthcare costs.

I generally refer back to the Generations definitions of generational periods, because frankly they make more sense to me. T4T, I consider somewhat more tailored for mass consumption while Generations is the more comprehensive text.

That said, the crisis generational period can not be defined by what occurs during it. True, crises tend to be shitstorm magnets, and the most social upheaval tends to occur during secular crises, but in the end, the specific events do not define the secular crisis. It must be definined by two things: people's reactions to social problems, and a percieved breakdown/buildup of secular order.

That is, society will react by circling the wagons. Wars are an easy indicator of the current turning, because the social mood is most obvious in such times. Vietnam, for instance, in the awakening, was a vehicle for awakening battles over ideals. Korea got a different reaction than WWII, because we were in the high period. Unravelling wars are different than awakening wars, etc. Would the American public accept WWII-esque rationing of goods for the war effort in Iraq: Part II? No.

Second, the old order has to fall and a new built up. That doesn't really mean the New Deal has to be gutted; just that the civic conditions of the previous cycle have to appear to have failed. The most obvious trait there for our times is the building of the oil-based economy in the previous cycle being percieved to have run its' course.

As of yet, the two indicators I use have not conclusively said that society is at the 4T mindset. Shared sacrifice is still beyond the masses, and the old way of life is still around.

Originally Posted by spudzill

What scares me the most about today is the insane need to be on top. I've argued against this being a 4T but the article above andthe all too obvious similarites of the Neocons and the Nazi's are starting to make me think twice. In the Project for a New American Century There is mention of a need for a 'Pearl Harbor' type event to unite the country. They mention that states require an enemy to survive and should manufacture them if none exist. There is enough doubt as to whether the 2004 election was tampered to produce the final product that I'm wondering if this is a 4T. Only this time we're the bad guys. :cry:

I'd almost be happy enough to see the 4T end with America much like Britain...powerful enough for no one to dare fuck with us, but not so all-mighty that we attract the worst sort of envy. One problem, however: A Britainized America would open the door for another hegemon such as the likes of China (whom I'd rather see nuked off the planet than dominating the world).

Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59

I'd almost be happy enough to see the 4T end with America much like Britain...powerful enough for no one to dare fuck with us, but not so all-mighty that we attract the worst sort of envy. One problem, however: A Britainized America would open the door for another hegemon such as the likes of China (whom I'd rather see nuked off the planet than dominating the world).

I still think China's current situation unstable. Attempting modern economy while sticking with autocratic government is problematic. Still, China has had a very traumatic recent past. The notion that social upheaval is really really bad might keep the capitalist communists going a while longer. On the other hand, generationally, the time will soon be right for change.

Originally Posted by Mr. Gary North

Am I exaggerating? Not really. Call around for tour ships. See what a two-week cruise costs with a discount package. You will find that it?s not much more expensive than living in a non-assisted care facility. The food is better, the service is terrific, there are things to do, new people to meet, and you can enjoy true leisure.

There are downsides. Your cabin is small. You don?t establish long-term friendships. You must go to a new ship every two weeks. But maybe not. Sequential tourists are now becoming common on cruise ships. These people provide steady income in the off-season. They are easy money for the cruise ship companies. You can negotiate deals.

You can rent cheap cabins or fancy ones. There is no stigma to a small one. Who else knows? And people landside think you?re in fat city, which in fact you are. They don?t call it "The Love Bloat" for nothing. All you can eat: steak, chops, all sorts of choices. Just stay away from the slot machines.

I had heard about this strategy 20 years ago, but it did not register mentally. It was a Wall Street Journal center column story about some dissipated wealthy man who had lived for decades on cruise ships. He would gain too much weight and then have to go to a fat farm to take it off. Then he would go back to the ships.

CRUISING THROUGH RETIREMENT


Our Mr. Strauss wrote of Floridian flotillas of the aged who had gone to the sea in ships in an yet unpublished novel. Perhaps, this is a market to watch. :arrow: :arrow: :arrow:

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59

I'd almost be happy enough to see the 4T end with America much like Britain...powerful enough for no one to dare fuck with us, but not so all-mighty that we attract the worst sort of envy. One problem, however: A Britainized America would open the door for another hegemon such as the likes of China (whom I'd rather see nuked off the planet than dominating the world).

I still think China's current situation unstable. Attempting modern economy while sticking with autocratic government is problematic. Still, China has had a very traumatic recent past. The notion that social upheaval is really really bad might keep the capitalist communists going a while longer. On the other hand, generationally, the time will soon be right for change.

Maybe we should have a lottery, with the winner coming closest to the inevitable day when China forcefully declares "Formosa" to be rightfully Chinese. I like the sound of December 7, 2012, it's got yin-yangy ring to it.

--Croakmore

Originally Posted by MillinnealJim

I generally refer back to the Generations definitions of generational periods, because frankly they make more sense to me. T4T, I consider somewhat more tailored for mass consumption while Generations is the more comprehensive text.

That said, the crisis generational period can not be defined by what occurs during it. True, crises tend to be shitstorm magnets, and the most social upheaval tends to occur during secular crises, but in the end, the specific events do not define the secular crisis. It must be definined by two things: people's reactions to social problems, and a percieved breakdown/buildup of secular order.

That is, society will react by circling the wagons. Wars are an easy indicator of the current turning, because the social mood is most obvious in such times. Vietnam, for instance, in the awakening, was a vehicle for awakening battles over ideals. Korea got a different reaction than WWII, because we were in the high period. Unravelling wars are different than awakening wars, etc. Would the American public accept WWII-esque rationing of goods for the war effort in Iraq: Part II? No.

Second, the old order has to fall and a new built up. That doesn't really mean the New Deal has to be gutted; just that the civic conditions of the previous cycle have to appear to have failed. The most obvious trait there for our times is the building of the oil-based economy in the previous cycle being percieved to have run its' course.

As of yet, the two indicators I use have not conclusively said that society is at the 4T mindset. Shared sacrifice is still beyond the masses, and the old way of life is still around.

Well said. I tend to prefer the T4T boundaries, but I otherwise totally concur with your post.

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59

I'd almost be happy enough to see the 4T end with America much like Britain...powerful enough for no one to dare fuck with us, but not so all-mighty that we attract the worst sort of envy. One problem, however: A Britainized America would open the door for another hegemon such as the likes of China (whom I'd rather see nuked off the planet than dominating the world).

I still think China's current situation unstable. Attempting modern economy while sticking with autocratic government is problematic. Still, China has had a very traumatic recent past. The notion that social upheaval is really really bad might keep the capitalist communists going a while longer. On the other hand, generationally, the time will soon be right for change.

Hey Bob! Back from hibernation? Good to see ya.

Originally Posted by Croakmore

Hmmm... Are we talking about a 4T here or are we talking about the Crisis? During the last saeculum America shifted into a 4T when Wall Street collapsed in 1929, but the Crisis didn't come until 1939-1941 when Hitler invaded Poland and Japan attacked Pearl Hbr. So, I think we're in a 4T, awaiting the shock of the coming Crisis. And I, too, think it is close at hand. You can almost see everybody maneuvering their plastic stairs for a grander view from the deck of this Good Ship Lollipop.

--Croakmore

Surely you mean the Good Ship Titanic?

Would we know if we're the new Nazi's? What could ordinary people do if we are? How would we find out?

Originally Posted by Idiot Girl

Originally Posted by Croakmore

Hmmm... Are we talking about a 4T here or are we talking about the Crisis? During the last saeculum America shifted into a 4T when Wall Street collapsed in 1929, but the Crisis didn't come until 1939-1941 when Hitler invaded Poland and Japan attacked Pearl Hbr. So, I think we're in a 4T, awaiting the shock of the coming Crisis. And I, too, think it is close at hand. You can almost see everybody maneuvering their plastic stairs for a grander view from the deck of this Good Ship Lollipop.

--Croakmore

Surely you mean the Good Ship Titanic?

Yes, I meant that, too. But G. S. Lollipop was what came out.

Originally Posted by Croakmore

Originally Posted by Idiot Girl

Originally Posted by Croakmore

And I, too, think it is close at hand. You can almost see everybody maneuvering their plastic stairs for a grander view from the deck of this Good Ship Lollipop.

Surely you mean the Good Ship Titanic?

Yes, I meant that, too. But G. S. Lollipop was what came out.

Right, the Titanic seemed to lift itself off the bottom of the Atlantic floor... while metamorphosing itself, crew and all, into "this Good Ship Lollipop"?

Sheesh, is this a new version of the Bladerunner, or what?

Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59

I'd almost be happy enough to see the 4T end with America much like Britain...powerful enough for no one to dare fuck with us, but not so all-mighty that we attract the worst sort of envy. One problem, however: A Britainized America would open the door for another hegemon such as the likes of China (whom I'd rather see nuked off the planet than dominating the world).

Sounds to me like one of my more optimistic 4T outcome scenarios - with our response to such a dominant China being ultra-intense isolationism. (Talk about the shoe being on the other foot!)

Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

His "news" link is very suspect... But assuming the "news" is true (and not contrived or distorted) what's happening sounds illegal.

Here's the same story direct from the hometown newspaper. And you are correct, even though Georgia law stipulates "A living will states that nourishment should be withheld only if she were in a coma or vegetative state with no hope of recovery" should be honored ("Grandmama" Magouirk has not been so diagnosed), the law of the land is whatever a judge says it stipulates. And in this case it means Grandmama must be starved to death because the judge says to do it, despite Grandmama's "living will" wishes.

What this all means is that taxpayers are paying a bunch of local, state, and federal legislators big bucks to write meaningless laws. Perhaps we should send all these lawmakers home, thus saving taxpayers money, social security outlays while reducing healthcare costs.

It appears that the Nazis might win this one. After two weeks without food and water, "Grandmama" Magourik is now being treated at a hospital.

What a waste of good food and water, huh?

Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus

Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59

I'd almost be happy enough to see the 4T end with America much like Britain...powerful enough for no one to dare fuck with us, but not so all-mighty that we attract the worst sort of envy. One problem, however: A Britainized America would open the door for another hegemon such as the likes of China (whom I'd rather see nuked off the planet than dominating the world).

Sounds to me like one of my more optimistic 4T outcome scenarios - with our response to such a dominant China being ultra-intense isolationism. (Talk about the shoe being on the other foot!)

In times of need you have to worry about your own countrymen selling yours out for an incoming hegemon. I suspect representatives from the Gap, Abercrombie and Fitch, Banana Republic and other manufacturers of cheap consumables may benefit by selling out America to keep their Chinese market interests afloat.
As a sidenote, I like the Chinese people, and while their government are assholes, I wouldn't like to "nuke them off the face of the Earth."
I think Chinese kids and American kids have much in common, and I see no need to senselessly destroy their existence due to unbridled paranoia.

Originally Posted by Blue Stater

In times of need you have to worry about your own countrymen selling you out for an incoming hegemon.

For once, I agree, though my list of likely suspects is rather different from yours, and motivated not by greed, but by a belief that in so doing, they are simply seeing that their country gets what they feel it deserves, for the crime of existing.

Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus

Originally Posted by Blue Stater

In times of need you have to worry about your own countrymen selling you out for an incoming hegemon.

For once, I agree, though my list of likely suspects is rather different from yours, and motivated not by greed, but by a belief that in so doing, they are simply seeing that their country gets what they feel it deserves, for the crime of existing.

Here's where you are wrong. Other than George Soros and Barbara Streisand, there are no 'liberals' with enough capital to sell America out.
It will be self-interested scoundrels that sell America out. Like Prescott Bush in the last turning, they will find it more to their own self interest to invest in a foreign country's weaponry than worry about silly things like devotion to ones own country.

By 'sell out' I mean 'gleefully betray', by whatever means they can.

But I'm sure you would be glad to posit our choices as being between those who would sell us out for greed, and those who see our very existence as an ongoing crime that needs to be stamped out - with the latter as being preferable.

Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus

By 'sell out' I mean 'gleefully betray', by whatever means they can.

But I'm sure you would be glad to posit our choices as being between those who would sell us out for greed, and those who see our very existence as an ongoing crime that needs to be stamped out - with the latter as being preferable.

The only people that would do that are some vengeful professors at liberal arts colleges. They have no power. They cannot "gleefully betray." At best, they'd make good heads of a puppet regime.
Keep your eye on the Prescott Bushes of today, because when it comes down to their money, or America, they'll choose their money, everytime.

Originally Posted by Blue Stater

The only people that would do that are some vengeful professors at liberal arts colleges. They have no power. They cannot "gleefully betray." At best, they'd make good heads of a puppet regime.

Once the Democrats are back in office, said professors will expect to have at least the same degree of political influence that the theocons have now - and will not hesitate to use it, if they do get it.

Originally Posted by Sabinus Invictus

By 'sell out' I mean 'gleefully betray', by whatever means they can.

But I'm sure you would be glad to posit our choices as being between those who would sell us out for greed, and those who see our very existence as an ongoing crime that needs to be stamped out - with the latter as being preferable.

Real known traitors who have spied for our enemies have overwhelming done so for the money. It is statements like this that make me think you want the US to decline. You believe the nation has become so corrupt that it cannot be saved and so it is better that it fall.

So you give support those who, out of greed, surrender our nation's future to foreign powers, like our current adminstration who is beholden to foreigners to fund our department of defense.