Originally Posted by Mr. Reed

Sorry about that.

No problem. I'm glad you found the article worth it.

It *is* funny as hell when a more respected poster than I, publishes something that is admired, that they have denigrated me for spamposting earlier...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/200...politico/16515

I may be one of the only people on this board to still have doubts about whether we have entered the 4T. My doubts stem from the fact that despite the damage the economy is both taking and dishing out and despite the obvious peril we are in, it seems that we have been in that state that S&H described (I'll include the precise reference in a later edit) where things are gradually getting seriously but not quite catastrophically worse, akin to the "chain of worsening battles" that preceded the start of the Wars of the Roses Crisis. Then I saw the above article. The Republicans openly at odds with themselves, the Senate as embodied by Mitch McConnell unable to rising above useless arguing to be be effective in the face of the possible collapse of a huge sector of the economy, hell, Cheney himself invoking Hoover, all lead me to think that the Spark and ensuing Cascade are truly imminent. And that absolutely terrifies me because that means that as bad as everthing has gotten so far, what is going to follow must be several orders of magnitude worse.

God help us all.

You just beat me to it, Bookworm. While I have no doubt that we are in 4T, the 3T will die slowly and some people will still be keeping it alive in 2023. In addition to the Republican move (and isn't it fascinating to see Dick Cheney standing up for civic virtue?), I was struck that the Illinois Governor story totally dominated today's New York Times, with at least three separate articles, including one about how Obama is clearly not involved but of course we have to use a whole column of page 1 to explain that. . .I also saw CNN break into its coverage during the day yesterday to report in gruesome detail the body of a Homelander in a Florida wood. Pathetic.

I don't expect, and I'm not going to dig through my SnH (which I've all loaned out anyway), but my sense is that things can get pretty bad for a long time in a 4T before unity and regeneracy.

On another note, I am thinking of related economic revolutions that are exacerbated by the current climate. I am thinking of the internet and it's repercussions. I think the internet revolution itself is still in early stages (not infancy though) and the changes it is going to force are going to take years.

On NPR this morning they spoke about how the economic crisis is hammering the newspapers, and how they still haven't figured out a net-centered business model. So the papers are hit hard and grovelling for investment, loaning their buildings, no one knows how to make money. We all knew this was coming, but this crisis is forcing it. Google news scoops up the wires for nothing, delivering it all to me for free. Blogging has only made the problem worse, although the content is of a lesser quality.

mp3s have done this to the record industry, as another thread discusses. Basically, any Long John Silver can cruise the torrent sites and download whatever they like. Older stuff and small stuff is harder to find though. But the big label, big money artists are all their for free. At the same time, there are thousands of artists out there who are happy to post their material for free, or on one of the creative commons license sites.

And now, I've heard the same thing of PORN! On a thread over at Peakoil.com, there was a posted article where a porn studio boss is trying to buy a site called youporn.com. Apparently, post-it yourself sites are destroying big studio porn profitability. I did some investigative reporting for you guys, and I will say that I can't tell if it's regular ppl posting stuff or clips serving as ads for pay sites.

But in all these content-oriented media, we are seeing this financial crisis accelerate the paradigmatic changes the internet is forcing upon the world. In a world where the big budget product distribution cannot be controlled on the one hand, and where there are thousands, or millions of other content creators who would happily give their work away for free just to see it in the world, old media is toast.

We already knew that, but this is making it happen faster, and while I shouldn't be surprised, the inclusion of porn on that list only makes it more certain.

The one thing that is surprising, or I'm not seeing how it is happening, is books. Kindle is part of the search for a consistent platform for pdfs. But it could simply be that reading is changing, in which case books may just age out with their demographic. I just don't know.

Originally Posted by antichrist

I don't expect, and I'm not going to dig through my SnH (which I've all loaned out anyway), but my sense is that things can get pretty bad for a long time in a 4T before unity and regeneracy.

Where does this idea come from that the regeneracy phase of a 4T always involves unity? Tell that one to the New York Draft Rioters and Copperheads (and the pro-Union southerners - yes, there were some. In fact, roughly 1/3 of Tennessee's Civil War soldiers wore Union Blue, even though Tennessee was one of the seceded states.) during the Civil War, or the Tories and Patriots who tarred and feathered or lynched each other during the Revolution. And a lot of heads were busted during the labor vs. capital fights during the Depression, even with FDR taking labor's side.

Originally Posted by antichrist

The one thing that is surprising, or I'm not seeing how it is happening, is books. Kindle is part of the search for a consistent platform for pdfs. But it could simply be that reading is changing, in which case books may just age out with their demographic. I just don't know.

Oh, book publishing is changing all right, but not so much because of electronic distribution. That actually tends to work for authors because it makes it possible for a writer to self-promote by making some or all of a work available online.

And the thing about hand-held electronic book readers is that they are awkward, they tend to have teeeny print, and generally the added value for the consumer has not made itself apparent ... unlike the way mp3 files replaced CDs (because, among other things, mp3 players are smaller than CD players, storage issues are eliminated and so on.)

No, the real squeeze on books comes from big publishing houses swallowing little ones and big box retailers like Borders wiping out the small mom-and-pop run bookstore. It means they publish fewer works, they tend to go for more mass-market sales, and if a particular chain doesn't pick up a book for it can wipe out that author's sales.

The other thing, and this mostly hits SF&F, is fanfic and fan-created materials. There is a huge audience out there creating, swapping and enjoying their own work for free, and it wipes out the mid-list authors. Yet nobody in their right mind is going after this practice because it can turn your fan base against you in a heartbeat.

But lines are drawn sort of arbitrarily. A relatively famous example of this was the Harry Potter Index lawsuit about two years back.

And don't forget television. I thought I was clever zapping all the ads with a DVR and freeing myself from the program schedule, but this summer I learned that none of the law students owned a TV. They all watched on their laptops through Hulu and You Tube.

Originally Posted by Neisha '67

And don't forget television. I thought I was clever zapping all the ads with a DVR and freeing myself from the program schedule, but this summer I learned that none of the law students owned a TV. They all watched on their laptops through Hulu and You Tube.

I own a tv but I only use it for watching dvd's and vhs tapes. Any kinda sitcom type thing I watch, I watch on Hulu, and I use YouTube for things like music video's and stuff. I don't really know what's on in regular syndication these days... and Im not even a law student

Originally Posted by angeli

Oh, book publishing is changing all right, but not so much because of electronic distribution. That actually tends to work for authors because it makes it possible for a writer to self-promote by making some or all of a work available online.

And the thing about hand-held electronic book readers is that they are awkward, they tend to have teeeny print, and generally the added value for the consumer has not made itself apparent ... unlike the way mp3 files replaced CDs (because, among other things, mp3 players are smaller than CD players, storage issues are eliminated and so on.)

No, the real squeeze on books comes from big publishing houses swallowing little ones and big box retailers like Borders wiping out the small mom-and-pop run bookstore. It means they publish fewer works, they tend to go for more mass-market sales, and if a particular chain doesn't pick up a book for it can wipe out that author's sales.

The other thing, and this mostly hits SF&F, is fanfic and fan-created materials. There is a huge audience out there creating, swapping and enjoying their own work for free, and it wipes out the mid-list authors. Yet nobody in their right mind is going after this practice because it can turn your fan base against you in a heartbeat.

But lines are drawn sort of arbitrarily. A relatively famous example of this was the Harry Potter Index lawsuit about two years back.

Nice analysis.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

You just beat me to it, Bookworm. While I have no doubt that we are in 4T, the 3T will die slowly and some people will still be keeping it alive in 2023. In addition to the Republican move (and isn't it fascinating to see Dick Cheney standing up for civic virtue?), I was struck that the Illinois Governor story totally dominated today's New York Times, with at least three separate articles, including one about how Obama is clearly not involved but of course we have to use a whole column of page 1 to explain that. . .I also saw CNN break into its coverage during the day yesterday to report in gruesome detail the body of a Homelander in a Florida wood. Pathetic.

This is why I'm thinking the traditional MSM will have a pathetic demise in this 4T. Born in one Crisis, committed suicide in the next...

Originally Posted by Neisha '67

And don't forget television. I thought I was clever zapping all the ads with a DVR and freeing myself from the program schedule, but this summer I learned that none of the law students owned a TV. They all watched on their laptops through Hulu and You Tube.

I download movies from here:

http://quicksilverscreen.com

I've just been going through the forums, and I'm struck by just how much of our lives we've spent waiting for this election and turning. I joined in April 2005, just before Bush started melting down.

Look at all that has happened since then.

I've also gone through all the old arguments and flamewars. Very few have changed their opinions/worldviews.

What has changed is the world. Now, one side has taken over political control in the US, due to that change.

The rest is just shouting into the wind.

Originally Posted by Pink Splice

I've also gone through all the old arguments and flamewars. Very few have changed their opinions/worldviews.

What has changed is the world. Now, one side has taken over political control in the US, due to that change.

The rest is just shouting into the wind.

Some might think that what's left of the other side is due some degree of punishment, now that they've lost. Especially since we now have the object lesson from the last saeculum of what happens when the Progressives (FDR administration) spare the Reactionaries and leave them in marginalized peace. Two or three turnings later, the Reactionaries come back like a bad rash. Are the Progressives willing to chance that happening again, or do they crush the Reactionaries once and for all this time?

Originally Posted by SVE-KRD

Some might think that what's left of the other side is due some degree of punishment, now that they've lost. Especially since we now have the object lesson from the last saeculum of what happens when the Progressives (FDR administration) spare the Reactionaries and leave them in marginalized peace. Two or three turnings later, the Reactionaries come back like a bad rash. Are the Progressives willing to chance that happening again, or do they crush the Reactionaries once and for all this time?

Note that of the some 4,000 members of this board, only 100 or so are active. I doubt that any crushing will occur. It's simply not worth the effort.

Originally Posted by stab1969

I own a tv but I only use it for watching dvd's and vhs tapes. Any kinda sitcom type thing I watch, I watch on Hulu, and I use YouTube for things like music video's and stuff. I don't really know what's on in regular syndication these days... and Im not even a law student

No worries! Law student interns and relatives are my main link to the world of early and core Millies. (My kid and his friends are late Millie cuspers.) Not exactly a representative sampling.

Originally Posted by Neisha '67

No worries! Law student interns and relatives are my main link to the world of early and core Millies. (My kid and his friends are late Millie cuspers.) Not exactly a representative sampling.

Being one of said law students, I can agree that law students should not be considered representative samples of anything.

As to Pink Splice's comment, I think you can go back as far as 2002 and your comment would probably still hold true. I think I originally started reading these forums in 2002-2003 or thereabouts, and it was pretty much the same, except perhaps more arguing about whether the 4T actually happened or not.

Those arguments have died down quite a bit in the last year.

Originally Posted by SVE-KRD

Some might think that what's left of the other side is due some degree of punishment, now that they've lost. Especially since we now have the object lesson from the last saeculum of what happens when the Progressives (FDR administration) spare the Reactionaries and leave them in marginalized peace. Two or three turnings later, the Reactionaries come back like a bad rash. Are the Progressives willing to chance that happening again, or do they crush the Reactionaries once and for all this time?

For most, shame should be enough as their idols who deserve the real punishment for betraying the gullible get exposed. Imprisonment and financial ruin will be more than enough to ensure that the culpable live in infamy. We stand to see one scandal after another from the Dubya era unfold. The people involved in the Rove/Cheney/Bush administration will all be off the scene two turnings (that is, roughly fifty years) from now. By 2010 many people who voted for Dubya will scratch their heads when they realize that they actually voted for him and his fellow travelers. Not until 2060 or so will we have a majority of an electorate that has no first-hand knowledge of the George Worthless Bush administration, It won't be a bad rash coming back to those who have it now or who recently had it; it will be a bad rash on different people. The political equivalent of syphilis can't maintain its virulence by afflicting only those who first got it.

You of course assume the success of the Progressive tendency in an Obama administration. You rush history by doing so. I must remind you that the editorial cartoons praising Herbert Hoover were very effusive early in 1929. I think that Obama isn't the new Herbert Hoover, but my thought on that means nothing right now.

Originally Posted by angeli

...
No, the real squeeze on books comes from big publishing houses swallowing little ones and big box retailers like Borders wiping out the small mom-and-pop run bookstore. It means they publish fewer works, they tend to go for more mass-market sales, and if a particular chain doesn't pick up a book for it can wipe out that author's sales.

I would point out thought, that this is still the same old concentration that has been happening in these industries anyway. This is not a chance in kind, just in degree

The other thing, and this mostly hits SF&F, is fanfic and fan-created materials. There is a huge audience out there creating, swapping and enjoying their own work for free, and it wipes out the mid-list authors. Yet nobody in their right mind is going after this practice because it can turn your fan base against you in a heartbeat.

This however is exactly the kind of paradigmatic change I am thikning about.

I know that BnN for instance owns some of the game stores (gamestop being one of them) - which may be their strategic move into the future, if they are expecting stores like theirs to age out more than move through that particular change.

I don't know.

Originally Posted by SVE-KRD

Some might think that what's left of the other side is due some degree of punishment, now that they've lost. Especially since we now have the object lesson from the last saeculum of what happens when the Progressives (FDR administration) spare the Reactionaries and leave them in marginalized peace. Two or three turnings later, the Reactionaries come back like a bad rash. Are the Progressives willing to chance that happening again, or do they crush the Reactionaries once and for all this time?

This cycle is obvoiusly part of the saeculum, especially in a democracy like the United States. It's Bill James's law of competitive balance: losers try harder next time out than winners. In fact the now-defeated Republican coalition was made up of the losers in the Civil War Crisis (the white South) and the losers in the Great Power crisis (corporate America.) Nothing lasts forever!

Originally Posted by SVE-KRD

Some might think that what's left of the other side is due some degree of punishment, now that they've lost. Especially since we now have the object lesson from the last saeculum of what happens when the Progressives (FDR administration) spare the Reactionaries and leave them in marginalized peace. Two or three turnings later, the Reactionaries come back like a bad rash. Are the Progressives willing to chance that happening again, or do they crush the Reactionaries once and for all this time?

A system of checks and balances requires an opposition. The way to maintain power wouldn't be to eliminate opposition, but to learn lessons such that the opposition can't accumulate a collection of ideas that better resonate with the People.

This is hard to do in the cyclical environment. The Republicans have done well in the last two unravelings. Might this be a trend?

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

... The Republicans have done well in the last two unravelings. Might this be a trend?

Unravelings fit their style. They like the gambling,but aren't opposed to playing with loaded dice. They hate getting caught, though. We'll see if they change to avoid the latter or still wallow in the game. I'm betting on the game.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

We'll see if they change to avoid the latter or still wallow in the game. I'm betting on the game.

I'm not betting against you. I need my money, and thus far your bet (that the Repubs will keep on acting 3T indefinitely) looks like a sure thing.

America is in Crisis, but now, it seems as if the Crisis is spreading globally. 2008 was truly an exceptional year, unlike any that I have experienced. I am doing a search for perspectives on 2008. Perhaps, it deserves its own thread.

Protectionist dominoes are beginning to tumble across the world


The riots have begun. Civil protest is breaking out in cities across Russia, China, and beyond.


By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
Last Updated: 10:30AM GMT 22 Dec 2008

Greece has been in turmoil for 11 days. The mood seems to have turned "pre-insurrectionary" in parts of Athens - to borrow from the Marxist handbook.

This is a foretaste of what the world may face as the "crisis of capitalism" - another Marxist phase making a comeback - starts to turn two hundred million lives upside down.

We are advancing to the political stage of this global train wreck. Regimes are being tested. Those relying on perma-boom to mask a lack of democratic or ancestral legitimacy may try to gain time by the usual methods: trade barriers, sabre-rattling, and barbed wire.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the head of the International Monetary Fund, is worried enough to ditch a half-century of IMF orthodoxy, calling for a fiscal boost worth 2pc of world GDP to "prevent global depression".

"If we are not able to do that, then social unrest may happen in many countries, including advanced economies. We are facing an unprecedented decline in output. All around the planet, the people have reacted with feelings going from surprise to anger, and from anger to fear," he said.

Russia has begun to shut down trade as it adjusts to the shock of Urals oil below $40 a barrel. It has imposed import tariffs of 30pc on cars, 15pc on farm kit, and 95pc on poultry (above quota levels). "It is possible during the financial crisis to support domestic producers by raising customs duties," said Premier Vladimir Putin.

Russia is not alone. India and Vietnam have imposed steel tariffs. Indonesia is resorting to special "licences" to choke off imports.

The Kremlin is alarmed by a 13pc fall in industrial output over the last five months. There have been street protests in Moscow, St Petersburg, Kaliningrad, Vladivostok and Barnaul. Police crushed "Dissent Marchers" holding copies of Russia's constitution above their heads in Moscow's Triumfalnaya Square.

"Russia has not seen anything like these nationwide protests before," said Boris Kagarlitsky from Moscow's Globalization Institute.

The Duma is widening the treason law to catch most forms of political dissent, and unwelcome forms of journalism. Jury trials for state crimes are to be abolished.

Yevgeny Kiseloyov at the Moscow Times said it feels eerily like December 1 1934 when Stalin unveiled his "Enemies of the People" law, kicking off the Great Terror.

The omens are not good in China either. Taxis are being bugged by state police. The great unknown is how Beijing will respond as its state-directed export strategy hits a brick wall, leaving exposed a vast eyesore of concrete and excess plant.

Exports fell 2.2pc in November. Toy, textile, footwear, and furniture plants are being closed across Guangdong, now the riot hub of South China. Some 40m Chinese workers are expected to lose their jobs. Party officials have warned of "mass-scale social turmoil".

The Politburo is giving mixed signals. We don't yet know how much of the country's plan to boost domestic demand through a $586bn stimulus package is real, and how much is a wish-list sent to party bosses in the hinterland without funding.

Shortly after President Hu Jintao said China is "losing competitive edge in the world market", we saw a move towards export subsidies for the steel industry and a dip in the yuan peg - even though China already has the world's biggest reserves ($2 trillion) and the biggest trade surplus ($40bn a month).

So is the Communist Party mulling a 1930s "beggar-thy-neighbour" strategy of devaluation to export its way out of trouble? Such raw mercantilism can only draw a sharp retort from Washington and Brussels in this climate.

"During a global slowdown, you can't have countries trying to take advantage of others by manipulating their currencies," said Frank Vargo from the US National Association of Manufacturers.

It is a view shared entirely by President-elect Barack Obama. "China must change its currency practices. Because it pegs its currency at an artificially low rate, China is running massive current account surpluses. This is not good for American firms and workers, not good for the world," he said in October. The new intake of radical Democrats on Capitol Hill will hold him to it.

There has been much talk lately of America's Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which set off the protectionist dominoes in 1930. It is usually invoked by free traders to make the wrong point. The relevant message of Smoot-Hawley is that America was then the big exporter, playing the China role. By resorting to tariffs, it set off retaliation, and was the biggest victim of its own folly.

Britain and the Dominions retreated into Imperial Preference. Other countries joined. This became the "growth bloc" of the 1930s, free from the deflation constraints of the Gold Standard. High tariffs stopped the stimulus leaking out.

It was a successful strategy - given the awful alternatives - and was the key reason why Britain's economy contracted by just 5pc during the Depression, against 15pc for France, and 30pc for the US.

Could we see such a closed "growth bloc" emerging now, this time led by the US, entailing a massive rupture of world's trading system? Perhaps.

This crisis has already brought us a monetary revolution as interest rates approach zero across the G10. It may overturn the "New World Order" as well, unless we move with great care in grim months ahead. This is where events turn dangerous.

The last great era of globalisation peaked just before 1914. You know the rest of the story.

Originally Posted by Mr. Reed

It is a view shared entirely by President-elect Barack Obama. "China must change its currency practices. Because it pegs its currency at an artificially low rate, China is running massive current account surpluses. This is not good for American firms and workers, not good for the world," he said in October. The new intake of radical Democrats on Capitol Hill will hold him to it.

Of course, China can do no such thing. It's politically impossible; the outcome would be revolution and/or civil war, which could easily claim several hundred million lives.

Originally Posted by Arkham '80

Of course, China can do no such thing. It's politically impossible; the outcome would be revolution and/or civil war, which could easily claim several hundred million lives.

China can depend upon its own workers to be an adequate market for its own industrial output. Its leadership may have no viable alternative. It may also have to offer democracy to save its own skins, much as most countries in central and Balkan Europe did between 1988 and 1990. Such change would be a genuine Crisis in China as it wasn't in 1989, but it would still not be a calamity. Chinese leadership can choose that the direction at the least of an independent judiciary is an appropriate course.

It may be the supreme irony, but the best allies of the Chinese Communists include the most reactionary interests in America -- our own cheap-labor, resource-grabbing, anti-intellectual cliques. My advice to the American proletariat -- and after eight years of Hard Right, corrupt, reactionary government in America, what used to be a prosperous working class and middle class is again a proletariat in the Marxist sense -- is that your cause is rightly with the common man in China and not with either the Chinese Communists or with our American ruling elite that have become all too similar and have found common cause.

I interpret the term Crisis Era to imply that significant events will be defined as Crisis even without insurrections, purges, persecutions, international war, and genocide. A society can have a Crisis culture even without calamity. Consider the labor strife of the 1930s in America; it could have easily turned extremely violent -- especially had the government chosen to take the side of either Big Business as unqualified authority (fascism) or of strikers as revolutionaries (Marxism).