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 447







Post#11151 at 04-07-2007 01:38 PM by zilch [at joined Nov 2001 #posts 3,491]
---
04-07-2007, 01:38 PM #11151
Join Date
Nov 2001
Posts
3,491

Cool Egg on the face taste like...

Quote Originally Posted by Mikebert View Post
No leaflets were dropped on Hiroshima before the attack:

This site says that leaflets were dropped after the bombs were dropped:
The Smithsonian's (not to mention a far, far lefty site like Commons Dreams) bias against Truman's use of "the bomb" on Japan (they apologized a number of years ago) notwithstanding, there were pretty good reasons as to why the U.S. would not wish to issue an offical warning: had Fat Boy turned out to be a dud... well, you can fill-in-the-blanks.
Last edited by zilch; 04-07-2007 at 01:40 PM.







Post#11152 at 04-07-2007 01:39 PM by Zarathustra [at Where the Northwest meets the Southwest joined Mar 2003 #posts 9,198]
---
04-07-2007, 01:39 PM #11152
Join Date
Mar 2003
Location
Where the Northwest meets the Southwest
Posts
9,198

Quote Originally Posted by Arkham '80 View Post
What I look forward to is the inevitable supersession of this decrepit civilization by something unprecedented. Hopefully that something will be a technically-sophisticated, mutualistic anarchy. Whatever it eventually is, however, it will not come about by any deliberate program of transformation, but by a (probably punctuated) evolutionary process. I don't even expect to live to see it, though I might witness the first.
I largely agree with this. IMO, we have been using basically the same vehicle for community bonding since the fourth millennium BC. It is the use of myth to emotionally and politically bind a large group together that is larger than a genetic family. This myth binds this community together by positing an unlikely absolute familial relation ("we are all descended from Jacob"), claiming common adherence to a divine figurehead ("we all follow the emperor, the direct descendent of the sun goddess), or declaring a common ideal ("We the People . . ."). Things of this nature.

Another aspect of this demotic level is often the phenomenon of moral enforcement via divine authority. E.g., "If I steal my neighbor's goat and eat it, he may never know it was me, but Yaweh will". This creation of a self-policing aspect to society helps large numbers of people live together in an urban environment -- a people-dense environment our paleolithic evolution never designed us for. Otherwise, civilization ("the building and maintaining of cities") would not have been possible.

Up that point, an actual reality of relatedness was usually involved with clans and smallish tribes often with no more than a few degrees of consanguinity encompassed. In short, the previous level of community bonding, the human family, had reached the furthest extent of it's use as a leading-edge basic mode of existence.

That in turn replaced the Hominin troop by expanding intimate family bonding from simply mother and child to include a father/male-mate to the equation. The inclusion of a second parent was necessary to support the development of children in the prolonged childhood necessary for the species' new strategy of employing cultural/technological intelligence to thrive in its niche. This new family and its proximate consanguine relatives, which probably developed with the start of Homo erectus, formed the basis for a new level of community that served us well until high population densities developed in certain ecumenes like Mesopotamia.

The most advanced expression today of the narrative-bound Demos is the nation-state. But it is becoming clear that this expression is dysfunctional for the tasks of our developing global reality. Certain limitations, such as language and unreconcilable myths, prevent it from solving our current pressing problems.

So it seems likely a crisis, or series of crises, will push us to evolve (mostly unconsciously) a new platform for human community. This new community will not eliminate the nation-state (or at least certain forms of mythic Demos) but transcend and include it, negating mostly just the aspects not conducive to allowing the larger entity.

Neither is it likely that this new community will come to be based on international (or even transnational) action, but rather something that transcends the nation-state altogether.

Demos did not replace the family (or even in some cases the tribe), nor did it come about by a federation of families -- perhaps in some cases, but then the new entity quickly became something more than a union of tribes in and of itself). Also, what passed for "tribe" in many societies after the advent of civilization often utilized this new mythic tool to breach consanguinity in some cases. The Mongol and Amerind "tribes", for example, were to a large extent arguably just nomadic Demos.

And the new paternally-inclusive human family did not replace the mother-child bond by any stretch of the imagination.

I agree with Akham that something new must, and will be, coming. I don't necessarily agree that civilization is "decrepit". Just not up to the task now before it.

That all said, I see nothing immediately developing or available to become this new mode or vehicle of community. I have a few candidates in mind, but nothing available now. And whatever it is will probably surprise the hell out of us anyway.

So in the meantime I contend that the nation-state, and a community of nation-states, is all we have to work with at the moment, and we might as well make the best of it. That is one reason why I am so against postmodern and multicultural prescriptions -- they would damage or destroy all we have to work with at the moment while nothing is yet available to replace it. And what they would replace it with is worse than what we have now.
Americans have had enough of glitz and roar . . Foreboding has deepened, and spiritual currents have darkened . . .
THE FOURTH TURNING IS AT HAND.
See T4T, p. 253.







Post#11153 at 04-07-2007 01:48 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
04-07-2007, 01:48 PM #11153
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by K-I-A 67 View Post
Yah, well, the Japs killed plenty of innocents before we were ATTACKED. How many innocent globals have the Imperial Japanese killed since? The Japs got their asses kicked one bloody island at a time. Gosh, it's not as if they didn't have plenty of opportunities to re-evaluate accept defeat and surrender before we nuked them. Well, they made a decission to ignore the truth and payed the price.

Hey, until you guys reveal the secret liberal love potion that can dispensed from our war planes, you're gonna have to be satisfied with the time we have to waste going through all the global red tape, presenting our justisfications in front of the UN, waiting for permission or a denial before we drop bombs on peoples heads or invade with force. Once we enter a conflict, you're gonna have to be satisfied with the pieces of paper that inform innocent people to get out of the city, we're gonna be bombing and shelling some buildings followed by an invasion with house to house fighting next week.
Had it not been for the massacres committed by the Japanese government during WWII beginning in 1937, including the Bataan Death March, we Americans might have been less willing to obliterate Hiroshima and Nagasaki with nukes. All that keeps the Japanese Empire of 1937-1945 from achieving the infamy that it so deserves is that the Nazis got more bad publicity for their crimes.

The problem wasn't the lack of a "love potion"; it was instead the hatred that a gangster regime doled out to people who seemed to believe it because of the ferocious fighting of their soldiers. I can understand how American leadership believed the Japanese people guilty much as they had thought the Germans guilty. Some have said that Americans didn't bomb Germany with nukes because the Germans are white (ignoring that the US didn't have The Bomb until Germany had capitulated). Americans had good cause to forget that the Germans were "white".

4Ts can go very well for some countries (United States, Britain) and very badly for others (Axis Powers) and the difference is the moral quality of the leadership. Gangster leadership such as that in Berlin or Tokyo until 1945 ensured that its enemies could not surrender; decent leadership by FDR and Churchill ensured that an Allied victory would result in a lasting peace and an emancipation of humanity. The Japanese, the Italians, and the Germans (at least in the West) got the sorts of governments that would never have starved and beaten POWs, gotten thrills from seeing the effects of aerial bombings upon 'primitive' people (Ethiopia), or consigning people to gas chambers for "Jewish" ancestry.

Don't ask me to jump onto any "I hate Islam" bandwagon. I'll save my harshest judgments for persons whose behavior violates every standard of moral behavior irrespective of nationality or culture. Hokusai did not participate in the massacre of Nanjing, and Goethe was clearly a no-show in Nazi death camps.







Post#11154 at 04-07-2007 02:09 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
04-07-2007, 02:09 PM #11154
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
I largely agree with this. IMO, we have been using basically the same vehicle for community bonding since the fourth millennium BC. It is the use of myth to emotionally and politically bind a large group together that is larger than a genetic family. This myth binds this community together by positing an unlikely absolute familial relation ("we are all descended from Jacob"), claiming common adherence to a divine figurehead ("we all follow the emperor, the direct descendent of the sun goddess), or declaring a common ideal ("We the People . . ."). Things of this nature.

Another aspect of this demotic level is often the phenomenon of moral enforcement via divine authority. E.g., "If I steal my neighbor's goat and eat it, he may never know it was me, but Yaweh will". This creation of a self-policing aspect to society helps large numbers of people live together in an urban environment -- a people-dense environment our paleolithic evolution never designed us for. Otherwise, civilization ("the building and maintaining of cities") would not have been possible.

Up that point, an actual reality of relatedness was usually involved with clans and smallish tribes often with no more than a few degrees of consanguinity encompassed. In short, the previous level of community bonding, the human family, had reached the furthest extent of it's use as a leading-edge basic mode of existence.

That in turn replaced the Hominin troop by expanding intimate family bonding from simply mother and child to include a father/male-mate to the equation. The inclusion of a second parent was necessary to support the development of children in the prolonged childhood necessary for the species' new strategy of employing cultural/technological intelligence to thrive in its niche. This new family and its proximate consanguine relatives, which probably developed with the start of Homo erectus, formed the basis for a new level of community that served us well until high population densities developed in certain ecumenes like Mesopotamia.

The most advanced expression today of the narrative-bound Demos is the nation-state. But it is becoming clear that this expression is dysfunctional for the tasks of our developing global reality. Certain limitations, such as language and unreconcilable myths, prevent it from solving our current pressing problems.

So it seems likely a crisis, or series of crises, will push us to evolve (mostly unconsciously) a new platform for human community. This new community will not eliminate the nation-state (or at least certain forms of mythic Demos) but transcend and include it, negating mostly just the aspects not conducive to allowing the larger entity.

Neither is it likely that this new community will come to be based on international (or even transnational) action, but rather something that transcends the nation-state altogether.

Demos did not replace the family (or even in some cases the tribe), nor did it come about by a federation of families -- perhaps in some cases, but then the new entity quickly became something more than a union of tribes in and of itself). Also, what passed for "tribe" in many societies after the advent of civilization often utilized this new mythic tool to breach consanguinity in some cases. The Mongol and Amerind "tribes", for example, were to a large extent arguably just nomadic Demos.

And the new paternally-inclusive human family did not replace the mother-child bond by any stretch of the imagination.

I agree with Akham that something new must, and will be, coming. I don't necessarily agree that civilization is "decrepit". Just not up to the task now before it.

That all said, I see nothing immediately developing or available to become this new mode or vehicle of community. I have a few candidates in mind, but nothing available now. And whatever it is will probably surprise the hell out of us anyway.

So in the meantime I contend that the nation-state, and a community of nation-states, is all we have to work with at the moment, and we might as well make the best of it. That is one reason why I am so against postmodern and multicultural prescriptions -- they would damage or destroy all we have to work with at the moment while nothing is yet available to replace it. And what they would replace it with is worse than what we have now.
Great post!
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.

-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism







Post#11155 at 04-07-2007 04:18 PM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
04-07-2007, 04:18 PM #11155
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Quote Originally Posted by zilch View Post
The Smithsonian's (not to mention a far, far lefty site like Commons Dreams) bias against Truman's use of "the bomb" on Japan (they apologized a number of years ago) notwithstanding, there were pretty good reasons as to why the U.S. would not wish to issue an offical warning: had Fat Boy turned out to be a dud... well, you can fill-in-the-blanks.
Not just that. American air power was far from invincible back then. A lucky shot from an forewarned AA gunner and the bomb would have been in the hands of the Japanese.

No way were they going to take that chance.







Post#11156 at 04-07-2007 04:21 PM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
04-07-2007, 04:21 PM #11156
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Quote Originally Posted by MichaelEaston View Post
I always figured more Japanese would eventually die had we not dropped the bomb.
Every Japanese person will die, eventually. How many of them will do so as schoolchildren by your hand?







Post#11157 at 04-07-2007 08:45 PM by Bob Butler 54 [at Cove Hold, Carver, MA joined Jul 2001 #posts 6,431]
---
04-07-2007, 08:45 PM #11157
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Cove Hold, Carver, MA
Posts
6,431

Quote Originally Posted by Mikebert View Post
No leaflets were dropped on Hiroshima before the attack:


This site says that leaflets were dropped after the bombs were dropped:
Looking at Wiki's account, it seems there was a general leaflet campaign being dropped on most every city in Japan saying to move out of the cities or face general ruin and death. Hiroshma and Nagasaki did recieve their share of leaflets, but I haven't seen that they were given any special warning, that their leaflets were any different than anyone else got.

Also, note that Nagasaki was the secondary target. Kokura was the primary target. Nagasaki would not have had any special warning leaflets as the bomber crew didn't discover Kokura was clouded over until they got over Kokura.

Also, at that late stage in the war, Japan wasn't intercepting many US overflights. The atom bomb attacks were five plain raids, with two advance scouts, the bomber, and two instrumentation aircraft. There was no fighter escort. If the US had anounced in advance atom bomb raids, the Japanese could and likely would have attempted to intercept, forcing the US to radically change tactics or risk losing bombs.







Post#11158 at 04-08-2007 02:38 AM by Arkham '80 [at joined Oct 2003 #posts 1,402]
---
04-08-2007, 02:38 AM #11158
Join Date
Oct 2003
Posts
1,402

Quote Originally Posted by Semo '75 View Post
No, the only point you've made is that you've spectacularly missed mine.
I didn't miss your point. I get it. You don't like apocalyptic millenarianism. You think it distracts people from positive action that can be taken in the present to affect real change. I agree. But I also think there is a difference between a revenge fantasy, designed to console the downtrodden and terrorize the wicked, and a cautionary tale, designed to alert people to real dangers and mobilize them to action. I can't speak for the others, but when I talk of the inevitability of change, I am simply stating a truism. Change will come. The world will, at some point, be thrown into upheaval -- like a bifurcation event in an otherwise equilibrating system. And when that happens, when all the chips are up in the air, ordinary people will have the power to alter the world forever. If they wish to make a mark, though, they'd best be prepared.

My point was that it's easy to spin words to paint the other guy as an idiot. You can bitch at people for preaching doom and gloom, and they can bitch at you for channeling excerpts from Who Moved My Cheese? What, however, is the object of the pissing contest?

But, no. The reality is that the apocalypse junkies rail about how the system of the world is deficient in some way, and instead of doing something about... well... anything, they instead pray for their own hideous Raptures. One day, the oil will run out, or the war will come home, or technological change will turn the world upside down, or the Seventh Seal will break and the blare of the trumpets will be deafening. And on that day, they will be freed from their unsatisfactory, unfulfilling lives, while their wicked 'enemies' will be punished.
I've said it before in response to similar criticism: no one here has any clue what the others do with their time outside these forums, unless they volunteer that information. You can't safely assume anything about the private lives of anonymous net personas. I've made it known in the past that my work has been with the homeless and at-risk youths. I don't often go into the details, but it is safe to say I do my part, often at great cost (and sometimes risk) to myself. You perform in alternative theater. That's great. I expose myself to sickness, crime, and vice to help people the rest of society would rather forget exist. When I talk about charity and mutual aid, I'm not just spouting platitudes. I practice what I preach.

If such people turned the time and energy they expend on justifying their own lack of engagement doing something, they might find not only that their lives aren't that unfulfilling, and that they have more power than they thought.
See above.

No doubt, you'll still find some way to recast such activities as meaningless, but that's your problem. And to me, at least, it looks a lot less like an indictment of whatever system you're railing against, and more like excuse-making for your own inability to see past the frustrations of daily life -- whether that inability stems from fear, apathy, or old-fashioned laziness.
That's amazing! Quick, what number am I thinking?

So, I'm not upbraiding people here for upbraiding others. I'm calling "bullshit" on the apocalypse-mongering that's so common here, and suggesting that it grows not from defects in the system of the world, but defects in the individuals who sit paralyzed, unable to act in their own defense beyond tapping their fingers on keys as they pray and call for Rapture.
And I'm calling bullshit on your assumption that action isn't taking place off camera.

Do I believe that social clubs are the solution to the problems of modernity? No. I do believe, however, that they are one solution to the alienation that modernity (or post-modernity, or whatever) seems to breed. It's common sense, really -- forging unmediated connections with others is the only certain antidote to alienation. That you write this position off so blithely, especially since you display a marked penchant for mutualism, is kind of intriguing.
I don't write them off. I've joined plenty of clubs in my time and even served as an officer on occasion. Clubs are great. But clubs don't thrive well in an environment full of enervated wage-slaves. (I know. As an officer, I've been involved in recruitment and retention drives, and with each passing year they draw fewer and fewer people. The most common excuse: not enough time/energy, usually due to work.) When you're pulling 60 hour weeks because your wife is on maternity leave and you need the income, or your schedule constantly fluctuates because your employer expects you to be on call for that entry level service-sector job, it's hard to be active in a social club.

What I find intriguing is your seeming inability to acknowledge that power relations contort people's options.

Now, maybe something like a Stitch & Bitch Circle appears unserious to a dedicated revolutionary such as yourself, but nonetheless, young women are manufacturing their own apparel with their own hands, creating gifts (read 'material favors') others, and through conversation and companionship are providing support to people who would otherwise float disconnected and alienated through their day to day lives.
That's a fine idea. But how to make it contagious? One circle is an anomaly; a thousand is a phenomenon.

However, I'm not a hairy-eyed dedicated revolutionary, like yourself.
Cute. What is your aversion to big-picture thinking? Some people have to be architects so that others can be engineers. And vice versa.

I'm the type of guy who sees the words "meaningful" and "activism" as oxymoronic in this context. So I have no problem giving those kinds of voluntary associations an enthusiastic thumbs up. At the very least, the people who participate in them will have relationships more meaningful than the kind that people who bitch and moan in helplessness and frustration tend to form.
Fine, I get your point. "Meaningful" can sound dismissive if used too expansively. I'll be more careful with it in future.

And, as far as my own project goes? I don't see it as "meaningful activism". Nonetheless, the people involved are already exchanging favors with each other to get larger side-projects done (living the mutualist dream, so to speak), and a sense of community is already beginning to form. When we're done, a group of people who've never been involved in putting on a theatrical production will have done so. And I'm fairly certain that the experience will be more fulfilling than praying for apocalypse on a message board.
How long to you intend to flog that charicature?

Sure. When I have the time to weed through your hundreds of posts to these forums for the ones I'm talking about, I'll do that.
I meant, if you were referring to someone else, I would like to see their posts.

For now, you'll get,

Quote Originally Posted by Arkham '80
I'm waiting for the first really big mutinies. There have a few little ones already, but what I'm looking for is a battalion-sized unit or larger to simply stop acknowledging orders. That would be absolutely beautiful.
Yeah, I remember that one too. It was cranky of me, and I underestimated the stamina of the troops, regardless. Still, mutiny ≠ apocalypse.

Even so, you're not one of the worst offenders, and you're far from the most annoying.
Um, thanks. I think.

Now, on the other hand, I've spent a fair amount of time poking at you in particular (both here and during one of our earlier discussions) because you should be doing more than getting into pissing contests on internet forums. You're principled, intelligent, and you have some very good ideas -- and I say that despite the fact that I frequently disagree with you. You could be doing more. But I'm pretty sure you're not, and I'm pretty sure that you're not because a lot of what you put forward as essentially political beliefs are, in fact, projections of the way you see your own life overlaid onto other people.
That is a trap. Any effort on my part to refute you becomes further evidence of "projection". I see the world the way I do because I see the world the way I do. A tautology.
You cannot step twice into the same river, for fresh waters are ever flowing in upon you. -- Heraclitus

It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. -- Jiddu Krishnamurti

Do I contradict myself? Very well, then, I contradict myself. I am large; I contain multitudes." -- Walt Whitman

Arkham's Asylum







Post#11159 at 04-08-2007 06:05 AM by K-I-A 67 [at joined Jan 2005 #posts 3,010]
---
04-08-2007, 06:05 AM #11159
Join Date
Jan 2005
Posts
3,010

Quote Originally Posted by pbrower2a View Post
Don't ask me to jump onto any "I hate Islam" bandwagon. I'll save my harshest judgments for persons whose behavior violates every standard of moral behavior irrespective of nationality or culture. Hokusai did not participate in the massacre of Nanjing, and Goethe was clearly a no-show in Nazi death camps.
Well, I'm on the "I don't love Islam" bandwagon.







Post#11160 at 04-08-2007 08:57 AM by The Grey Badger [at Albuquerque, NM joined Sep 2001 #posts 8,876]
---
04-08-2007, 08:57 AM #11160
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Posts
8,876

Question - not original with me -

Suppose some enemy you detest is accused of hideous atrocities and you find out later the accounts have been exaggerated. What is your first FELT reaction?

1) Relief - "Even they can't stoop that low!"? or

2) Disappointment that they're not, after all, the Devil incarnate?

BTW, I freely confess to flunking this test.
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."

"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.







Post#11161 at 04-08-2007 09:48 AM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
04-08-2007, 09:48 AM #11161
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54 View Post
Looking at Wiki's account, it seems there was a general leaflet campaign being dropped on most every city in Japan saying to move out of the cities or face general ruin and death. Hiroshma and Nagasaki did recieve their share of leaflets, but I haven't seen that they were given any special warning, that their leaflets were any different than anyone else got.

Also, note that Nagasaki was the secondary target. Kokura was the primary target. Nagasaki would not have had any special warning leaflets as the bomber crew didn't discover Kokura was clouded over until they got over Kokura.

Also, at that late stage in the war, Japan wasn't intercepting many US overflights. The atom bomb attacks were five plain raids, with two advance scouts, the bomber, and two instrumentation aircraft. There was no fighter escort. If the US had anounced in advance atom bomb raids, the Japanese could and likely would have attempted to intercept, forcing the US to radically change tactics or risk losing bombs.
The atom bombs upon Japan were the last hateful attacks upon Japan. Soon afterwards, Japanese capacity for waging war was shattered. The country was on the brink of famine and hence industrial collapse. Without munitions, even the most fanatical fighter is no match against well-organized, modern weaponry. The gangsters who had come close to defeating the United States and invading Australia with an unstoppable force had been discredited.

At the start of the occupation of Japan, the young soldiers in the lower ranks increasingly became members of the Silent generation who had never experienced the full ferocity of the war. They saw a different Japan... one of docility and not danger. They were more likely to see the effects of wartime damage and to see the civilian population of Japan instead of the fanatical warriors that GIs had faced. To be sure, older GI officers could adapt to the official line -- but you can be sure that the occupying army wasn't composed of survivors of Japanese atrocities. Those went home.







Post#11162 at 04-08-2007 11:33 AM by Matt1989 [at joined Sep 2005 #posts 3,018]
---
04-08-2007, 11:33 AM #11162
Join Date
Sep 2005
Posts
3,018

Quote Originally Posted by Justin '77 View Post
Every Japanese person will die, eventually. How many of them will do so as schoolchildren by your hand?
Great. Now I'm confused again.







Post#11163 at 04-08-2007 12:48 PM by Roadbldr '59 [at Vancouver, Washington joined Jul 2001 #posts 8,275]
---
04-08-2007, 12:48 PM #11163
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Vancouver, Washington
Posts
8,275

Quote Originally Posted by The Grey Badger View Post
Question - not original with me -

Suppose some enemy you detest is accused of hideous atrocities and you find out later the accounts have been exaggerated. What is your first FELT reaction?

1) Relief - "Even they can't stoop that low!"? or

2) Disappointment that they're not, after all, the Devil incarnate?

BTW, I freely confess to flunking this test.
Probably somewhere between hoping for 1) and wondering...

3) Were the accounts of exaggeration not, in fact, exaggerated? IOW, were the atrocities really blown out of proportion, or is this just revisionist-history b.s.?
"Better hurry. There's a storm coming. His storm!!!" :-O -Abigail Freemantle, "The Stand" by Stephen King







Post#11164 at 04-08-2007 02:53 PM by K-I-A 67 [at joined Jan 2005 #posts 3,010]
---
04-08-2007, 02:53 PM #11164
Join Date
Jan 2005
Posts
3,010

Quote Originally Posted by Justin '77 View Post
Every Japanese person will die, eventually. How many of them will do so as schoolchildren by your hand?
The answer, as many as the Japanese people were willing to sacrifice on behalf of their emperor.







Post#11165 at 04-08-2007 04:55 PM by The Grey Badger [at Albuquerque, NM joined Sep 2001 #posts 8,876]
---
04-08-2007, 04:55 PM #11165
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Posts
8,876

Quote Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59 View Post
Probably somewhere between hoping for 1) and wondering...

3) Were the accounts of exaggeration not, in fact, exaggerated? IOW, were the atrocities really blown out of proportion, or is this just revisionist-history b.s.?
Re: Japan? One of the local parks is Bataan Memorial. The old soldiers will tell you how nasty the Bataan Death March was. Plus the Japanese soldiers' view of being taken prisoner and/or surrendering was that it was so thoroughly dishonorable they would sooner die, and they despised anyone without that particular belief. Not to mention the fact that wherever they occupied a country they treated it as if they were sacking a city - which in some cases was the truth.

Likewise across the sea the Nazi regime's crimes and those of Stalinist Russia are extremely well documented.

Anyone who says otherwise about any of those nationals (or their governments?) or their behavior is peddling revisionist b.s.

How the people behaved - always remembering that on some level people support their governments, but on another if said government is a dictatorship, their choice is less - is another matter.

Oh, yes. My Boomer friends (and enemies!) would kill me for saying so, but dropping The Bomb was probably the right thing to do, even though it let the nuclear cat out of the bag. And remember, we also planned to use it on Germany if they didn't surrender first. Again, barring unforeseen consequences like fallout al over Europe, agreed.

That said, I'm quite glad we didn't get into a nuclear exchange with Stalin, and I sincerely hope not to get sucked into any Three-Minute Hate sessions whether we get into the 4T or not.
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."

"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.







Post#11166 at 04-08-2007 07:59 PM by Uzi [at joined Oct 2005 #posts 2,254]
---
04-08-2007, 07:59 PM #11166
Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
2,254

Quote Originally Posted by The Grey Badger View Post
Oh, yes. My Boomer friends (and enemies!) would kill me for saying so, but dropping The Bomb was probably the right thing to do, even though it let the nuclear cat out of the bag. And remember, we also planned to use it on Germany if they didn't surrender first. Again, barring unforeseen consequences like fallout al over Europe, agreed.

That said, I'm quite glad we didn't get into a nuclear exchange with Stalin, and I sincerely hope not to get sucked into any Three-Minute Hate sessions whether we get into the 4T or not.

Well, I was recently asked about that question by Europeans, to which my response was the non sequitur "Well, why didn't the Japanese surrender after the first bomb?"

I still wonder why Churchill didn't lace Stalin's drink at Yalta with something heart-stopping, but I have a feeling he had a very tiny bit of admiration for Stalin's ability to take land and murder people. Churchill was a man of the Boer War, the Easter Uprising, and so forth.

But honestly, who am I to weigh in here? We are taking about an event 34 years prior to my birth. If I condemn Hiroshima, then let it me known that we indeed cheated our Algonquian neighbors out of their land. And, as an Italian, I'd like to apologize to the Britons for defeating their bitchen queen Boudicca in AD 61. That wasn't very nice at all.

The bottomline is that war is bad and it destroys peoples lives.
"It's easy to grin, when your ship's come in, and you've got the stock market beat. But the man who's worth while is the man who can smile when his pants are too tight in the seat." Judge Smails, Caddyshack.

"Every man with a bellyful of the classics is an enemy of the human race." Henry Miller.

1979 - Generation Perdu







Post#11167 at 04-08-2007 09:50 PM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
04-08-2007, 09:50 PM #11167
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

Right Arrow Rapture in the UK

Quote Originally Posted by Sir Osbert Sitwell
The British Bourgeoisie
Is not born,
And does not die,
But, if it is ill,
It has a frightened look in its eyes.


Quote Originally Posted by the Ministry of Defence (UK)
in the Guardian

Marxism

"The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx," says the report. The thesis is based on a growing gap between the middle classes and the super-rich on one hand and an urban under-class threatening social order: "The world's middle classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest". Marxism could also be revived, it says, because of global inequality. An increased trend towards moral relativism and pragmatic values will encourage people to seek the "sanctuary provided by more rigid belief systems, including religious orthodoxy and doctrinaire political ideologies, such as popularism and Marxism".

...
Terrorism

Casualties and the amount of damage inflicted by terrorism will stay low compared to other forms of coercion and conflict. But acts of extreme violence, supported by elements within Islamist states, with media exploitation to maximise the impact of the "theatre of violence" will persist. A "terrorist coalition", the report says, including a wide range of reactionary and revolutionary rejectionists such as ultra-nationalists, religious groupings and even extreme environmentalists, might conduct a global campaign of greater intensity".


The MoD gets seriously weird.
Last edited by Virgil K. Saari; 04-08-2007 at 09:54 PM.







Post#11168 at 04-08-2007 09:53 PM by Roadbldr '59 [at Vancouver, Washington joined Jul 2001 #posts 8,275]
---
04-08-2007, 09:53 PM #11168
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Vancouver, Washington
Posts
8,275

Quote Originally Posted by The Grey Badger View Post
Re: Japan? One of the local parks is Bataan Memorial. The old soldiers will tell you how nasty the Bataan Death March was. Plus the Japanese soldiers' view of being taken prisoner and/or surrendering was that it was so thoroughly dishonorable they would sooner die, and they despised anyone without that particular belief. Not to mention the fact that wherever they occupied a country they treated it as if they were sacking a city - which in some cases was the truth.

Likewise across the sea the Nazi regime's crimes and those of Stalinist Russia are extremely well documented.

Anyone who says otherwise about any of those nationals (or their governments?) or their behavior is peddling revisionist b.s.

How the people behaved - always remembering that on some level people support their governments, but on another if said government is a dictatorship, their choice is less - is another matter.

Oh, yes. My Boomer friends (and enemies!) would kill me for saying so, but dropping The Bomb was probably the right thing to do, even though it let the nuclear cat out of the bag. And remember, we also planned to use it on Germany if they didn't surrender first. Again, barring unforeseen consequences like fallout al over Europe, agreed.
My thoughts exactly. I can honestly say that I have no Boomer friends (that I know of) who feel that Truman shouldn't have dropped the Bomb. Of the handful of people I've actually met who feel that way, most seem to be GenXers... IOW, people whose parents were mid-to-late-wave Silents and wouldn't have been in harm's way anyhow. How convenient.

Regarding whether we would have dropped the Big One on Hitler, please. Have any of these people read about a little bonfire called Dresden? More people died there than at Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.
"Better hurry. There's a storm coming. His storm!!!" :-O -Abigail Freemantle, "The Stand" by Stephen King







Post#11169 at 04-08-2007 11:12 PM by Bob Butler 54 [at Cove Hold, Carver, MA joined Jul 2001 #posts 6,431]
---
04-08-2007, 11:12 PM #11169
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Cove Hold, Carver, MA
Posts
6,431

Quote Originally Posted by pbrower2a View Post
The atom bombs upon Japan were the last hateful attacks upon Japan. Soon afterwards, Japanese capacity for waging war was shattered. The country was on the brink of famine and hence industrial collapse. Without munitions, even the most fanatical fighter is no match against well-organized, modern weaponry. The gangsters who had come close to defeating the United States and invading Australia with an unstoppable force had been discredited.
This is essentially true. It is true in spirit. I would not neglect the Soviet invasion of Manchuria. The Soviets taught their elementary school children that the Soviet entry into the Asian front was the reason for the Japanese surrender, and not without cause.

But famine and industrial collapse, though near, didn't mean Japan wasn't a formidable foe, still. The US doctrine of island hopping was very well known at that point. The US would not attack without air bases in range to provide ground based air support for any invasion. This pretty well told Japan exactly where the first invasion of the Japanese home islands was going to go. The American plans for said invasion were originally based on the two divisions garrisoning that area. They anticipated it would be very ugly Okinawa / Iwo Jima style fighting. Then, as they were finalizing said plans, Allied intelligence discovered eight divisions had been moved to the planned landing area.

One US response under consideration was to stop bombing Japanese cities, to use A-bombs as tactical devices to clear out the landing beaches. As the radiation hazards were not well understood, this would have involved exposing a lot of GIs to fallout. A quick look at the map suggests that other islands might have been taken, to put a lot more of Japan under an allied air umbrella, to force Japan to disperse their forces. Still, there would have been no pretty options.

All and all, it was just as well that the Allies decided to allow a powerless token emperor to stay on his throne.







Post#11170 at 04-08-2007 11:49 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
04-08-2007, 11:49 PM #11170
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari View Post
An impoverished former middle class is of course amenable to radicalism when 'conservative' interests establish complete hegemony over the economy and politics. It's best that shareholders and managers avoid creating a pre-revolutionary situation.

Let's remember that the middle class culture itself creates much talent for entrepreneurialism and administration. When those two outlets are denied, all Hell can break loose. When forced to live in accordance with proletarian standards and in poverty, some are likely to see themselves as a natural vanguard of people that they recognize as needy, but lacking in intellectual sophistication and imagination.

Almost every revolution (except for the Nazi "revolution" if you want to call it a revolution) that you can think of was started by people well educated, at least by contemporary standards.

The working class can be cowed and it can be diverted with circuses or numbed with irrational religion. The middle class has to be bought off with opportunities.

Let's hope that should the ruling class (financiers and the executive nomenklatura) become destructively rapacious and selfish that the lessons that the disgruntled people whose good educations offer them little material benefit choose revolutionaries like Adams and Bolivar as models instead of Lenin or Mao.







Post#11171 at 04-09-2007 12:34 AM by Bob Butler 54 [at Cove Hold, Carver, MA joined Jul 2001 #posts 6,431]
---
04-09-2007, 12:34 AM #11171
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Cove Hold, Carver, MA
Posts
6,431

Snark

Quote Originally Posted by pbrower2a View Post
An impoverished former middle class is of course amenable to radicalism when 'conservative' interests establish complete hegemony over the economy and politics. It's best that shareholders and managers avoid creating a pre-revolutionary situation.

Let's remember that the middle class culture itself creates much talent for entrepreneurialism and administration. When those two outlets are denied, all Hell can break loose. When forced to live in accordance with proletarian standards and in poverty, some are likely to see themselves as a natural vanguard of people that they recognize as needy, but lacking in intellectual sophistication and imagination.
I have often thought, in a two party system, that one party would lean towards the upper classes, the other to the lower. The balance of power might be determined by whether the middle classes think of themselves as well off or not. Does the middle class perceive of policies that benefit the wealthy as benefitting themselves?

Quote Originally Posted by pbrower2a View Post
The working class can be cowed and it can be diverted with circuses or numbed with irrational religion. The middle class has to be bought off with opportunities.

Let's hope that should the ruling class (financiers and the executive nomenklatura) become destructively rapacious and selfish that the lessons that the disgruntled people whose good educations offer them little material benefit choose revolutionaries like Adams and Bolivar as models instead of Lenin or Mao.
OK. More snark here than anything real... Not sure there is a serious need to respond...

When you speak of 'irrational religion,' would you contend there is another kind of religion? Also, when you suggest that the ruling class might "become destructively rapacious and selfish," do you imply that they are not already sufficiently so to transfer the allegiance of the middle?







Post#11172 at 04-09-2007 12:48 AM by zilch [at joined Nov 2001 #posts 3,491]
---
04-09-2007, 12:48 AM #11172
Join Date
Nov 2001
Posts
3,491

Cool When Truth Becomes A Lie...

Quote Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari View Post
Not so much, mate. Methinks another vote for a silly lefty loser ought to fix things just fine. I mean, things are a bit chilly up in your parts this time of year, no matter what the lefty loser Algore might claim.

Truth is the first victim, well, nay, I might say, Truth is a victim and hence a new class Marx has laid claim to. Imagine, Truth is as meaningless as a vote for a sure lefty loser.

Sounds like a winner to me!







Post#11173 at 04-09-2007 04:32 AM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
04-09-2007, 04:32 AM #11173
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Quote Originally Posted by K-I-A 67 View Post
The answer, as many as the Japanese people were willing to sacrifice on behalf of their emperor.
Man, the whole 'personal responsibility' thing just flies right past you, doesn't it?..







Post#11174 at 04-09-2007 10:39 AM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
04-09-2007, 10:39 AM #11174
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by K-I-A 67 View Post
The answer, as many as the Japanese people were willing to sacrifice on behalf of their emperor.
And I'm sure you could read the minds and determine the intentions of every single one of those folks, couldn't you? They all deserved what they got.








Post#11175 at 04-09-2007 11:30 AM by Brian Beecher [at Downers Grove, IL joined Sep 2001 #posts 2,937]
---
04-09-2007, 11:30 AM #11175
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Downers Grove, IL
Posts
2,937

Mutinies

One poster here mentioned the prospect of big mutinies, although none have really occurred here if you do not count some of the recent anti-war marches. I am currently reading a book about perhaps the biggest domestic mutiny of the last 4T, and that was the Bonus Army march on Washington. This summer happens to mark the 75th anniversary of that event. Does anybody know if any commemorative events are being planned?

It was on July 28 of 1932 that tanks rolled in and forcibly evicted all the bonus marchers. Wouldn't be ironic if some anti-war group happens to plan a march in Washington on that very day? BTW, that day happens to fall on a Saturday this year. Perfect timing?
-----------------------------------------