Originally Posted by KaiserD2

That's right. I'd say 1951 for the UK, because rationing was over, the Conservatives came back, and it became clear the Labour reforms were there to stay (at least until 1980 or so!) And for Germany I'd say 1955 when they joined NATO. And for France I'd say 1958 but they had a new regime that year, the 5th Republic, after a military revolt.

IMO 1955 is to late. Just look at the 1954 soccer world cup. The public atmosphere in (West) Germany was already 100% 1T (mixed High/Austerity) at that point. And the late 1940's cohorts are nothing but pure Boomers IMO. Even compared to the early and mid 40's cohorts there is a strong difference.

And our Boomer/Silent cuspers, as another European poster on this board, Tussilago, will attest you, lean very strongly in the Boomer direction, the only distinctive Silent characteristic they have being somewhat nicer manners than the core Boomers.

IMO the Turnings in West Germany since the mid-20th century were as follows:

- Downfall 4T: 1929 - 1948
- Wirtschaftswunder 1T (mixed High/Austerity): 1949 - 1965
- 68er 2T: 1966 - 1984
- Reunification 3T: 1985 - present

East Germany was largely the same, except that the 2T lasted until 1989 there.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

Queen Elizabeth II, a 1926 cohort, shows all the attributes of being a Civic. Compare her stoic dedication to Duty to the ultimately aimless life of her classically adaptive younger sister, Princess Margaret, who IIRC, was a 1929 cohort.

True that the rationing of the late 1940s wasn't the Blitz, but that doesn't mean that they weren't still in Crisis. David Kaiser and Dave Krein have both done some reasearch on British turnings and they place the start of the UK 1T at about 1950, IIRC.

This is all pretty unscientific. Choose a bunch of celebrities/public figures, and see how well they resemble certain "archtypes"? I honestly can't say when Europe's last crisis began. In Estonia, it was perhaps in 1933, when the currency was devalued. That set into play a chain of events that saw the country become a soft dictatorship in 1934, occupied and annexed by the Soviets, 1939-1940, occupied and annexed by Nazi Germany, 1941-44, and the return of the Soviets, 1944 onwards. The "crisis" was certainly not over by 1945 because the guerilla war went on into the 1950s, and there was a mass deportation (during collectivization) in 1949. So, the crisis didn't really end until Stalin died (1953). You would have a 1933-1953 crisis.

The former president Lennart Meri (1929-2006) is revered as a civic colossus. He already has the airport named after him.

But the UK? It was clearly in an Awakening in 1967. And which generation was Pete Townshend singing about when he wrote the tune in 1965? It's clear to me that Townshend was a postwar youth. The war looms large in British consciousness. And it would have been rather daft of a guy like Townshend to portray himself has some poor overlooked "war baby" when he was born in May 1945.

But what implications does that have for Roger Daltrey? Like, I said, very unscientific.

Originally Posted by Uzi

This is all pretty unscientific. Choose a bunch of celebrities/public figures, and see how well they resemble certain "archtypes"? I honestly can't say when Europe's last crisis began. In Estonia, it was perhaps in 1933, when the currency was devalued. That set into play a chain of events that saw the country become a soft dictatorship in 1934, occupied and annexed by the Soviets, 1939-1940, occupied and annexed by Nazi Germany, 1941-44, and the return of the Soviets, 1944 onwards. The "crisis" was certainly not over by 1945 because the guerilla war went on into the 1950s, and there was a mass deportation (during collectivization) in 1949. So, the crisis didn't really end until Stalin died (1953). You would have a 1933-1953 crisis.

The former president Lennart Meri (1929-2006) is revered as a civic colossus. He already has the airport named after him.

But the UK? It was clearly in an Awakening in 1967. And which generation was Pete Townshend singing about when he wrote the tune in 1965? It's clear to me that Townshend was a postwar youth. The war looms large in British consciousness. And it would have been rather daft of a guy like Townshend to portray himself has some poor overlooked "war baby" when he was born in May 1945.

But what implications does that have for Roger Daltrey? Like, I said, very unscientific.

Looking at certain celebrities and determining what archetype "fits" them is unscientific indeed. One needs to look at the larger societal picture of a specific period, then one can determine the turning and only then one can guess which archetype the people born during that period most likely are. But even then there are oddities, and the "archetype X starts getting born three years before the turning changes" rule does not always apply. And I think that apart from using "real" scientific means, simply observing people you know is the best method to determine generational boundaries.

And it is very important to remember that the countries of Europe did not enter their turnings all at once. Russia even is on a completely different timeline, so to speak, as they generally are one complete turning ahead of the US and Western Europe.

As far as mainstream singers/bands are concerned, they rarely appeal to their same age peers, but to those born slightly later. So the music made by early-to-mid 40's cohorts was mainly listened to by late 40's / early 50's cohorts, i. e. Aquarian Boomers.

As I have pointed out before, there is in fact another scientific way to answer this question--birth rates--and it supports a late date for the crisis in Europe.

I don't have the data handy but I looked it up some time ago and I remember the gist. The British birth rate did increase in the late 1940s although nowhere near as much as ours. But then--it fell again! It didn't begin to pick up again until the early 1960s. On the continent birth rates were generally very low until the mid-1950s or even later.

If you believe that a 1T is associated with some degree of political consensus, you could find it in West Germany under Adenauer in the early 1950s. The 1954 World Cup is an interesting marker because it was probably almost as important as NATO membership in making West Germany a more normal country again. You could, as I said, find it in UK after 1951. But you couldn't possibly find it in France until 1958, which is why I'm going to hold out for that one.

I think there was a qualitative difference between US and European protests in the late 1960s. I met an interesting German historian some years ago who was writing about German anti-Vietnam protests, and he thought the kids were actually revolting against what their parents had done, or not done, under Hitler. We were revolting against what our parents were doing right now. The same could have been true in France in 1968. I visited Britain frequently 1965-8--my parents lived there--and it was still a very socially conservative place. Soccer hooliganism may have been a good marker for the UK Awakening and it started in the early 1970s.

Isn't Maggie Thatcher the same age was the Queen? She certainly seems more like a Hero than an Artist. Tony Blair, not Major, certainly seemed like the first Prophet PM.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

As I have pointed out before, there is in fact another scientific way to answer this question--birth rates--and it supports a late date for the crisis in Europe.

I don't have the data handy but I looked it up some time ago and I remember the gist. The British birth rate did increase in the late 1940s although nowhere near as much as ours. But then--it fell again! It didn't begin to pick up again until the early 1960s. On the continent birth rates were generally very low until the mid-1950s or even later.

This graph shows the birth rate for both parts of Germany:




As a remark, I think the easiest explanation for the lower birth rate during the fifties is not a later-than-1950 1T, but the fact that WWII killed off an exceptionally large number of young people here in Germany, or in the UK or (to a lesser degree) France for that matter, than in the US. The US suffered almost no civilian casualties, Germany and the UK did.

My grandfather ('22 cohort) told me that exactly two members of his high school graduating class, himself included, survived the war. Therefore not every woman of fertile age could find a partner. On top of that, some women who were widowed simply were traumatized enough to never remarry.

If you believe that a 1T is associated with some degree of political consensus, you could find it in West Germany under Adenauer in the early 1950s. The 1954 World Cup is an interesting marker because it was probably almost as important as NATO membership in making West Germany a more normal country again. You could, as I said, find it in UK after 1951. But you couldn't possibly find it in France until 1958, which is why I'm going to hold out for that one.

Indeed I do think that political consensus, along with a general consensus in society, is the key hallmark of a 1T. Once the two German states existed, that consensus was there. When I talked with my '19 and '22 cohort grandparents about that time, they told me that the late forties were a difficult time indeed, but once the fifties came along, almost everything was alright again. Prosperity was raising, the Crisis issues were all swept under the carpet, hopefully soon to be forgotten, everybody was forgiven for what he did during the war. It's not called "Wirtschaftswunder", i.e. "economic miracle" without a reason, since to many it appeared that prosperity simply returned overnight when the currency reform happened.

I think there was a qualitative difference between US and European protests in the late 1960s. I met an interesting German historian some years ago who was writing about German anti-Vietnam protests, and he thought the kids were actually revolting against what their parents had done, or not done, under Hitler. We were revolting against what our parents were doing right now. The same could have been true in France in 1968. I visited Britain frequently 1965-8--my parents lived there--and it was still a very socially conservative place. Soccer hooliganism may have been a good marker for the UK Awakening and it started in the early 1970s.

As far as I can tell, they revolted against both, what their parents did under Hitler, and what they were still doing at the time. Adenauerian Germany was still highly repressive, and the way the past was handled pissed the 68'ers, who were born during the 40's, not the 50's off a lot. One of the rallying cries of the 68'ers against 60's university professors was something along the line of "Under their gowns they still carry the stench of the 1000 years", 1000 years of course referring to the Third Reich. To them, the FRG was just the Third Reich in disguise.

And Soccer Hooliganism, at least in Germany, strikes me as a profoundly Nomad thing and I don't associate it with the 70's, but the 80's - mid 2000's.

Isn't Maggie Thatcher the same age was the Queen? She certainly seems more like a Hero than an Artist. Tony Blair, not Major, certainly seemed like the first Prophet PM.

Thatcher indeed seems Civic, as did Helmut Schmidt in Germany. John Major's time in office was relatively short (and unremarkable beyond the UK), so I don't know enough about him to even make a guess. Helmut Kohl's a Silent (1930 cohort), that's for sure, although he was surprisingly strong-willed about reunification (as opposed to everything else but European Integration). Gerhard Schroeder, a '43 cohort, OTOH does not seem very Silent to me, but something like 95% Boomer.

Soccer hooliganism was already a huge problem in Britain in the early 1970s. I saw it.

We are arguing about a fairly narrow range in West Germany and your grandparents' testimony is important. I am not convinced about Schroeder, however, who went through several metamorphoses in his life.

By the way, have your ever seen the movie Nowhere in Africa?

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

That's right. I'd say 1951 for the UK, because rationing was over, the Conservatives came back, and it became clear the Labour reforms were there to stay (at least until 1980 or so!) And for Germany I'd say 1955 when they joined NATO. And for France I'd say 1958 but they had a new regime that year, the 5th Republic, after a military revolt.

Never heard about the "Wirtschaftswunder"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirtschaftswunder

nomad84 and Davd Krein are correct in this thread. The German High started in 1948. Who cares what year the BRD joined NATO? What has that got to do with anything?

Now consider that in western Europe, Germany was a special case. The infrastructure was totally disintegrated, people were living in potato cellars and starving in the immediate post war years while many POW's perished in Allied controlled camps. It was "Jahre Null" - Year Zero.
This means the High started later in Germany than most everywhere else in western Europe. I'd say the Swedish High for instance started right when the war ended, in May 1945. Since there hadn't been an economic crisis to worry about since the late 30's, the 4T ceased when the war ended.

I read Keith Richards' autobiography. It seems to me that both Keith and Mick (born Dec and Aug 1943, respectively) had kind of classic postwar boyhoods. And they really took the heat for combating establishment values, particularly in the 1967 drug bust.

Richards describes the British establishment in the same way that my parents describe their own alienation from American establishment in the 1960s. This is the so-called "generation gap."

Originally Posted by Uzi

I read Keith Richards' autobiography. It seems to me that both Keith and Mick (born Dec and Aug 1943, respectively) had kind of classic postwar boyhoods. And they really took the heat for combating establishment values, particularly in the 1967 drug bust.

Richards describes the British establishment in the same way that my parents describe their own alienation from American establishment in the 1960s. This is the so-called "generation gap."

That's because it's exactly the same thing, and the generation gap in Europe was also identified as such back then.

It seems many of you believe Europe and the United States somehow inhabit different universes and have to be specifically mapped country by country. I say, with some slight and insignificant variations, this is an illusion. We share the same popular culture and cultural messages have been traveling around the globe seamlessly for at least the entire post war period.
And never was the cultural/counter cultural rapport greater than during the Consciousness Revolution.

Originally Posted by Tussilago

That's because it's exactly the same thing, and the generation gap in Europe was also identified as such back then.

It seems many of you believe Europe and the United States somehow inhabit different universes and have to be specifically mapped country by country. I say, with some slight and insignificant variations, this is an illusion. We share the same popular culture and cultural messages have been traveling around the globe seamlessly for at least the entire post war period.
And never was the cultural/counter cultural rapport greater than during the Consciousness Revolution.

I largely agree with this. The key difference IMO between the US and Europe is the presence of a late Silent/Boomer right-wing, which does not exist here. This showed itself especially during the 2000's, with the US going into Crisis-ready mode, and Europe not doing the same.

The 90's were almost the same in Germany and the US, the 2T being completey over and done with, the 4T still far away, and GenX (and GenY) spending their time partying.

The 2000's however felt completey different. While Germany was still partying like it was 1999 for the better part of the decade, at least until 2007 (the 2006 Soccer World Cup atmosphere being as stereotypically 3T as 1954 and 1974 being 1T and 2T respectively), the US became paranoid, protective and angsty, starting with Columbine in 1999. When a similar event happened in Germany in 2002, the Boomers' reaction was simply to toughen gun laws (nobody cares about those here) and go on as usual. No metal detectors in schools or anything like that.

Only since then (2007) rules have been tightening here, much too late to have any impression on anyone born before 1988. In fact, when I talked to a '91 cohort at a university party a few weeks ago, he told me how much better we (the late 70's to mid 80's cohorts) had it, that we could do whatever we wanted, whenever we wanted, and nobody cared. In fact, while I do think that the last 2T and 3T began roughly at the same time in Germany and the US, I also think that Germany only reached the point the US reached with Columbine in 1999 with the economic crisis in 2007. But I don't know what this entails for the future, whether Germany (and Europe at large) and the US are still in sync or not.

Originally Posted by Tussilago

That's because it's exactly the same thing, and the generation gap in Europe was also identified as such back then.

It seems many of you believe Europe and the United States somehow inhabit different universes and have to be specifically mapped country by country. I say, with some slight and insignificant variations, this is an illusion. We share the same popular culture and cultural messages have been traveling around the globe seamlessly for at least the entire post war period.
And never was the cultural/counter cultural rapport greater than during the Consciousness Revolution.

I think the American narcissism is that we set the trends that the world follows Obviously Europe would have to be behind us!

Originally Posted by nomad84

I largely agree with this. The key difference IMO between the US and Europe is the presence of a late Silent/Boomer right-wing, which does not exist here. This showed itself especially during the 2000's, with the US going into Crisis-ready mode, and Europe not doing the same.

The 90's were almost the same in Germany and the US, the 2T being completey over and done with, the 4T still far away, and GenX (and GenY) spending their time partying.

The 2000's however felt completey different. While Germany was still partying like it was 1999 for the better part of the decade, at least until 2007 (the 2006 Soccer World Cup atmosphere being as stereotypically 3T as 1954 and 1974 being 1T and 2T respectively), the US became paranoid, protective and angsty, starting with Columbine in 1999. When a similar event happened in Germany in 2002, the Boomers' reaction was simply to toughen gun laws (nobody cares about those here) and go on as usual. No metal detectors in schools or anything like that.

Only since then (2007) rules have been tightening here, much too late to have any impression on anyone born before 1988. In fact, when I talked to a '91 cohort at a university party a few weeks ago, he told me how much better we (the late 70's to mid 80's cohorts) had it, that we could do whatever we wanted, whenever we wanted, and nobody cared. In fact, while I do think that the last 2T and 3T began roughly at the same time in Germany and the US, I also think that Germany only reached the point the US reached with Columbine in 1999 with the economic crisis in 2007. But I don't know what this entails for the future, whether Germany (and Europe at large) and the US are still in sync or not.

Sure America in 1999 was different from America in 1994. But America in 1994 was different from America in 1989 or 1984. I honestly don't think Americans changed that much during the 2000s. The trend from the mid 1980s, towards this hypermaterialistic, self-involved, me-above-everyone-else society continued to chug away. Americans may have had little faith in their government to do anything significant, but they didn't care much, because many believed deeply in the Wall Street mystique. That was all ripped away in 2008. Never have I seen people hate Wall Street with such passion. People partied just as hard after September 11th. Sure, it was a painful event, but partying is all people really knew how to do. And only after the crash did people start to talk about the outrageous bonuses and obscenely expensive company getaways of the failed financial management. Only after the crash did it seem grotesque. Before the crash, people would have thought it grand the way they indulged themselves. Society would admire them and say "they've earned it!" After the crash, they looked like self-centered clowns.

Originally Posted by Tussilago

Never heard about the "Wirtschaftswunder"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirtschaftswunder

nomad84 and Davd Krein are correct in this thread. The German High started in 1948. Who cares what year the BRD joined NATO? What has that got to do with anything?

Now consider that in western Europe, Germany was a special case. The infrastructure was totally disintegrated, people were living in potato cellars and starving in the immediate post war years while many POW's perished in Allied controlled camps. It was "Jahre Null" - Year Zero.
This means the High started later in Germany than most everywhere else in western Europe. I'd say the Swedish High for instance started right when the war ended, in May 1945. Since there hadn't been an economic crisis to worry about since the late 30's, the 4T ceased when the war ended.

I think you are overestimating the importance of economics, relative to politics, in defining turnings. A 1T is an era of political consensus. I would suggest that one can't have political consensus if one doesn't even have a state in place.

I have been aware of the Wirtschaftswunder since it was taking place, actually.

Now the movie The Marriage of Maria Braun has an interesting take on this, and could be read as agreement with me that the High started in 1954. As I recall, just before the final scene, we hear a news bulletin announcing that NATO has approved German rearmament, and Adenauer brags that West Germany has earned this right. Then we see Maria's husband, recently released from prison, watching the 1954 World Cup Final. Indeed, the last line of the is the announcer screaming, "Aus! Aus! Deutschland ist Weltmeister!"

For West Germany, totally devastated by the war and found guilty of the greatest crimes against humanity in modern history, to be fully accepted as a member of the western community just 9 years later was a very big deal. It had been the dream of Konrad Adenauer, a Bismarckian-era Prophet born in the late 1870s. He ranks with FDR and de Gaulle among grey champions of that Crisis; Churchill had no domestic impact to speak of.

It seems to me Nomad84's description of Germany in the last decade tends to confirm exactly what I've been saying, that it is about 10 years behind the US, and Merkel's recent attack on multiculturalism could be the start of something very different. The controversy over the Euro is definitely the start of something big.

Originally Posted by Uzi

I think the American narcissism is that we set the trends that the world follows Obviously Europe would have to be behind us!

Cultural imperialism goes a long way, for sure. Especially in the post war period as Europe during the High had accustomed itself to be sort of a colonial outgrowth of the United States. However, that does not mean the pupil cannot at various times prove himself best in the class, outshining and going further than even the teacher (for better or worse).
Moreover, for being such a trend setter, the US also maintains a number of truly atavistic traits, like those exemplified by the Christian Right, for instance. While in Europe God died peacefully sometime in the 19th century, as Nietzsche put it, teaching Darwinism is still controversial in some parts of the US. Here, America seems to trail the rest of the developed world by a century or more.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

I think you are overestimating the importance of economics, relative to politics, in defining turnings. A 1T is an era of political consensus. I would suggest that one can't have political consensus if one doesn't even have a state in place.

I have been aware of the Wirtschaftswunder since it was taking place, actually.

Now the movie The Marriage of Maria Braun has an interesting take on this, and could be read as agreement with me that the High started in 1954. As I recall, just before the final scene, we hear a news bulletin announcing that NATO has approved German rearmament, and Adenauer brags that West Germany has earned this right. Then we see Maria's husband, recently released from prison, watching the 1954 World Cup Final. Indeed, the last line of the is the announcer screaming, "Aus! Aus! Deutschland ist Weltmeister!"

For West Germany, totally devastated by the war and found guilty of the greatest crimes against humanity in modern history, to be fully accepted as a member of the western community just 9 years later was a very big deal. It had been the dream of Konrad Adenauer, a Bismarckian-era Prophet born in the late 1870s. He ranks with FDR and de Gaulle among grey champions of that Crisis; Churchill had no domestic impact to speak of.

It seems to me Nomad84's description of Germany in the last decade tends to confirm exactly what I've been saying, that it is about 10 years behind the US, and Merkel's recent attack on multiculturalism could be the start of something very different. The controversy over the Euro is definitely the start of something big.

No, I don't put too much emphasis on economics. Turnings are a matter of social moods and in that respect, the Crisis mood of Germany was lifted around 1948. In that year the Wirtschaftswunder got underway, the Deutsche Mark was introduced and the Berlin Blockade was successfully resisted, thanks to the USAF. All conspired to nourish a new belief in the future, but that belief was tagged with certain prerequisites. The past had to be buried and never mentioned again, a mandatory requirement to pay homage to the United States as savior and mentor, and to accept with acclaim whatever it deemed in the department of culture, politics and interpretation of German history became a vital condition. In turn, this effectively assured a new conformist state of mind to take hold. The New Look that swept Europe was pretty different in that regard in comparison to the dreariness of forced "denazificaton" meetings. This was the beginning of the 1T, the Wirtschaftswunder High.
Since Turnings are a mood thing, of course you can have a political consensus without a state in place. However, that state formally followed the new currency on November 3rd, 1949.

I've seen The Marriage of Maria Braun as well. If I remember correctly, several years pass between the final scene and the "Trümmer" scenes from earlier in the movie. If so, the movie itself contradicts that a kind of crisis and emergency status prevailed in German society right up to 1955.

And finally, you must excuse me, but I consider "Grey Champions" to be nothing but poetic window dressing and not to be taken seriously in regards to the theory. Had Germany won the war or the NS regime survived, Hitler would have been regarded as the eminent Grey Champion who saved the nation, including by us discussing this subject.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

I think you are overestimating the importance of economics, relative to politics, in defining turnings. A 1T is an era of political consensus. I would suggest that one can't have political consensus if one doesn't even have a state in place.

Once the FRG existed, political consensus was there. In 1949.

I have been aware of the Wirtschaftswunder since it was taking place, actually.

Now the movie The Marriage of Maria Braun has an interesting take on this, and could be read as agreement with me that the High started in 1954. As I recall, just before the final scene, we hear a news bulletin announcing that NATO has approved German rearmament, and Adenauer brags that West Germany has earned this right. Then we see Maria's husband, recently released from prison, watching the 1954 World Cup Final. Indeed, the last line of the is the announcer screaming, "Aus! Aus! Deutschland ist Weltmeister!"

For West Germany, totally devastated by the war and found guilty of the greatest crimes against humanity in modern history, to be fully accepted as a member of the western community just 9 years later was a very big deal. It had been the dream of Konrad Adenauer, a Bismarckian-era Prophet born in the late 1870s. He ranks with FDR and de Gaulle among grey champions of that Crisis; Churchill had no domestic impact to speak of.

NATO membership was, at least as far as I can tell from speaking with my grandparents as well as other people their age, relatively unimportant to the man on the street. The economic miracle and political consensus were, and they became reality in 1948 and 1949 respectively.

It seems to me Nomad84's description of Germany in the last decade tends to confirm exactly what I've been saying, that it is about 10 years behind the US, and Merkel's recent attack on multiculturalism could be the start of something very different. The controversy over the Euro is definitely the start of something big.

The Euro controversy is something big indeed, and the debate about multiculturalism shows that Boomers slowly lose their grip on power.

However, if you believe that the US entered its 4T on 9/11, then the US had its 4T relatively early, after only 17 years of a 3T, 1984 being the universally accepted starting date. OTOH I believe that the US did not enter its 4T before 2007, since I think that the Bush II era was still 3T, a 3T gone bad even for 3T standards, but a 3T nevertheless. And Germany trailing the US by 10 (!) years does not make a lot of sense, especially if you look at the 2T and 3T starting dates.

The US 2T is commonly believed to have started in 1963, with the Kennedy assasination. The German 1T did not last into the 1970's, not a single second, believe me. 1968 was THE defining year of the 2T, for late Silents (and no, and I repeat no 1950's cohort I've ever met shows ANY Silent traits at all. Nada. Nothing. Zero. Even the cusp was over by the 1948 cohorts at the very latest!) as well as for the Boomers. My 1953 cohort mother certainly did not come of age during a 1T, and if she's a Silent, I'm Japanese!

Same goes for the 3T, and since I remember the 1988 - 1994 period myself, I can tell you that the 2T was over by then. Reunification was not a 2T event, at least not for West Germany. (Watch Goodbye Lenin, if you don't believe me. The scene with a young West German couple moving into an East Berlin apartment is especially telling!) The 2T did not last into the 90's at all. You can look at the early 90's however you want. Music. Pop Culture. Politcs. Everything was 3T.

Kohl promised that the East would catch up to the West overnight. If that does not scream of a 3T, nothing does. Boomers were in child-raising mode, their finding-themselves phase being long over. Even the very last Boomerish cuspers, born in the early to mid 60's (the latter ones being overwhelmingly Xers already IMO, with the 50/50 dividing line being 1963 or so) had their peace movement, and when the Cold War ended, it was dead as a dodo. In fact, it died back in 1985 or so, when the final phase of detente started with the rise of Gorbachev. Youth and Young Adult culture was firmly Nomad.

Originally Posted by Tussilago

No, I don't put too much emphasis on economics. Turnings are a matter of social moods and in that respect, the Crisis mood of Germany was lifted around 1948. In that year the Wirtschaftswunder got underway, the Deutsche Mark was introduced and the Berlin Blockade was successfully resisted, thanks to the USAF. All conspired to nourish a new belief in the future, but that belief was tagged with certain prerequisites. The past had to be buried and never mentioned again, a mandatory requirement to pay homage to the United States as savior and mentor, and to accept with acclaim whatever it deemed in the department of culture, politics and interpretation of German history became a vital condition. In turn, this effectively assured a new conformist state of mind to take hold. The New Look that swept Europe was pretty different in that regard in comparison to the dreariness of forced "denazificaton" meetings. This was the beginning of the 1T, the Wirtschaftswunder High.
Since Turnings are a mood thing, of course you can have a political consensus without a state in place. However, that state formally followed the new currency on November 3rd, 1949.

I've seen The Marriage of Maria Braun as well. If I remember correctly, several years pass between the final scene and the "Trümmer" scenes from earlier in the movie. If so, the movie itself contradicts that a kind of crisis and emergency status prevailed in German society right up to 1955.

And finally, you must excuse me, but I consider "Grey Champions" to be nothing but poetic window dressing and not to be taken seriously in regards to the theory. Had Germany won the war or the NS regime survived, Hitler would have been regarded as the eminent Grey Champion who saved the nation, including by us discussing this subject.

I could not have said it better (except that I did not watch The Marriage of Maria Braun).

Originally Posted by nomad84

I could not have said it better (except that I did not watch The Marriage of Maria Braun).

Well, if you like Fassbinder you should watch it. If you detest Fassbinder then you should watch it anyway.

Originally Posted by nomad84

The US 2T is commonly believed to have started in 1963, with the Kennedy assasination. The German 1T did not last into the 1970's, not a single second, believe me. 1968 was THE defining year of the 2T, for late Silents (and no, and I repeat no 1950's cohort I've ever met shows ANY Silent traits at all. Nada. Nothing. Zero. Even the cusp was over by the 1948 cohorts at the very latest!) as well as for the Boomers. My 1953 cohort mother certainly did not come of age during a 1T, and if she's a Silent, I'm Japanese!

1964, not 1963. The Kennedy assasination, while terrible, was still 1Ting. It began a chain of events that eventually led to the Awakening beginning, but it wasn't the cinch pin. I often think the event is over-examined. As my War Baby mother used to say, it was a terrible thing, but life went on.

Same goes for the 3T, and since I remember the 1988 - 1994 period myself, I can tell you that the 2T was over by then. Reunification was not a 2T event, at least not for West Germany. (Watch Goodbye Lenin, if you don't believe me. The scene with a young West German couple moving into an East Berlin apartment is especially telling!) The 2T did not last into the 90's at all. You can look at the early 90's however you want. Music. Pop Culture. Politcs. Everything was 3T.

Quite Agreed. And I love and own that movie.

Kohl promised that the East would catch up to the West overnight. If that does not scream of a 3T, nothing does. Boomers were in child-raising mode, their finding-themselves phase being long over. Even the very last Boomerish cuspers, born in the early to mid 60's (the latter ones being overwhelmingly Xers already IMO, with the 50/50 dividing line being 1963 or so) had their peace movement, and when the Cold War ended, it was dead as a dodo. In fact, it died back in 1985 or so, when the final phase of detente started with the rise of Gorbachev. Youth and Young Adult culture was firmly Nomad.

Originally Posted by Tussilago

Cultural imperialism goes a long way, for sure. Especially in the post war period as Europe during the High had accustomed itself to be sort of a colonial outgrowth of the United States. However, that does not mean the pupil cannot at various times prove himself best in the class, outshining and going further than even the teacher (for better or worse).
Moreover, for being such a trend setter, the US also maintains a number of truly atavistic traits, like those exemplified by the Christian Right, for instance. While in Europe God died peacefully sometime in the 19th century, as Nietzsche put it, teaching Darwinism is still controversial in some parts of the US. Here, America seems to trail the rest of the developed world by a century or more.

I think you're missing the larger picture, as well as throwing in a helping of bias.

First, there are still quite a few Christians in Europe. 63% of Germans identify themselves as Christians, even if their level of observance is debatable. So you are exaggerating in that regard, although what you say is true at the national political/social/cultural/governmental level. The difference there is in the European history of established churches intertwined with government. In the U.S., because of our system, religion is much more likely to act as a critic of government, as opposed to a partner.

Second, there is good reason why there would not appear to be a Prophet right in certain European countries. That is, because the "right" (although I dispute that classification) gave itself such a bad name, in your country in particular, during WWII. There really is no right in much of Europe, regardless of generation, because the socialists seized on the disrepute of conservatism in any form after the war to completely overtake the societal institutions and cement their control over them. In the Allied countries, the fallout was not as extreme. And you should be glad that the right was not wiped out everywhere, otherwise you would probably be ruled by the Soviet Union today.

Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough

First, there are still quite a few Christians in Europe. 63% of Germans identify themselves as Christians, even if their level of observance is debatable.

63% are registered as "Christian", but that does not mean they are Christian in the American sense. Many of them are in fact Agnostic or of the "I don't believe in the Bible but there is a God" variety, the rest is mostly nonpracticising liberal mainstream Lutheran or liberal Catholic.

Second, there is good reason why there would not appear to be a Prophet right in certain European countries. That is, because the "right" (although I dispute that classification) gave itself such a bad name, in your country in particular, during WWII.

This is because the German right before WWII was nationalist, not religious. Religion has been a non-factor here since the mid-to-late 19th century (same goes for almost all of Western, Northern and Central Europe)

There really is no right in much of Europe, regardless of generation, because the socialists seized on the disrepute of conservatism in any form after the war to completely overtake the societal institutions and cement their control over them. In the Allied countries, the fallout was not as extreme. And you should be glad that the right was not wiped out everywhere, otherwise you would probably be ruled by the Soviet Union today.

It depends what you mean with "Allied countries", France and Britain are no less liberal than Germany is, especially the former. Russia is a special case. And as far as the establishment of a welfare state goes, that happened an entire saeculum before WWII here, under Bismarck. Imperial Germany was a welfare state, Weimar Germany was a welfare state, Nazi Germany was a welfare state, the GDR (East Germany) was a welfare state, the FRG is a welfare state.

You are right, however, that American style conservatives don't exist here. Evangelical Christianity is as foreign to Germany as Hindu extremism or Taliban Islamism are. Nevertheless, GenX and GenY are generally to the right of Boomers, especially on immigration issues, which is the one political issue where Germans and Americans are comparable.

Originally Posted by nomad84

63% are registered as "Christian", but that does not mean they are Christian in the American sense.

There is no such thing as "Christian in the American sense". There is nothing unique about American Christianity from a theological or doctrinal point of view. What's different is the historical relationship between religion and government. In Europe, the two have always gone hand in hand, which means the religious leaders are not apt to criticize the government.

Many of them are in fact Agnostic or of the "I don't believe in the Bible but there is a God" variety, the rest is mostly nonpracticising liberal mainstream Lutheran or liberal Catholic.

I'm sure that is largely true, but if it as true as you make it out to be, they would not even call themselves Christians.

This is because the German right before WWII was nationalist, not religious. Religion has been a non-factor here since the mid-to-late 19th century (same goes for almost all of Western, Northern and Central Europe)

"Non-factor" is a vague term. What you mean, I suspect, is what I explained above. You do not have religious figures (at least not Christian ones) speaking out in criticism of government. The mainstream Christian churches are aligned with the government, and therefore the religious leaders are much more circumspect. The number of believing/practicing Christians may be smaller, but you make it sound as if they don't exist, which is not true at all.

It depends what you mean with "Allied countries", France and Britain are no less liberal than Germany is, especially the former. Russia is a special case. And as far as the establishment of a welfare state goes, that happened an entire saeculum before WWII here, under Bismarck. Imperial Germany was a welfare state, Weimar Germany was a welfare state, Nazi Germany was a welfare state, the GDR (East Germany) was a welfare state, the FRG is a welfare state.

The left clearly grew in power throughout Europe after WWII. You would not be talking about "68ers" if that was not the case. The entire establishment of most European countries, and certainly the EU, is ideologically left wing. The "conservatives" (with a few exceptions like Thatcher) are simply pale "me too" parties who offer the same socialism, just in a smaller dose.

In other words, the primary reason why all of these differences appear between Europe and the U.S. is because the political left holds a position of utter dominance of societal institutions in Europe that it does not hold here. They do not merely represent one set of opinions, they are in a position to set the parameters of the entire debate, and define for society what thoughts are acceptable. They try to do the same thing here, but with slightly less success.

You are right, however, that American style conservatives don't exist here. Evangelical Christianity is as foreign to Germany as Hindu extremism or Taliban Islamism are. Nevertheless, GenX and GenY are generally to the right of Boomers, especially on immigration issues, which is the one political issue where Germans and Americans are comparable.

The fact that you equate evangelical Christianity with the Taliban shows how out of whack your understanding of the subject is. I don't entirely blame you, since I think you said most people in Germany get their views of America from people like Michael Moore.

Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough

ISecond, there is good reason why there would not appear to be a Prophet right in certain European countries. That is, because the "right" (although I dispute that classification) gave itself such a bad name, in your country in particular, during WWII. There really is no right in much of Europe, regardless of generation, because the socialists seized on the disrepute of conservatism in any form after the war to completely overtake the societal institutions and cement their control over them. In the Allied countries, the fallout was not as extreme. And you should be glad that the right was not wiped out everywhere, otherwise you would probably be ruled by the Soviet Union today.

FWIW, Tussilago is Swedish, not German. Sweden was neutral during WW II. You may be confusing him with Nomad84, who is German.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

FWIW, Tussilago is Swedish, not German. Sweden was neutral during WW II. You may be confusing him with Nomad84, who is German.

You're right, I thought they were both from Germany. My mistake.

Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough

There is no such thing as "Christian in the American sense". There is nothing unique about American Christianity from a theological or doctrinal point of view. What's different is the historical relationship between religion and government. In Europe, the two have always gone hand in hand, which means the religious leaders are not apt to criticize the government.

What I meant when I said "Christian in the American sense" is evangelical Christianity, exemplified by such denominations as Southern Baptists or Pentecostalists. Those exist only in the US, and are completely foreign to continental Europe. Christianity in continental Europe (and Britain to a lesser degree) is dominated by traditional denominations (Catholicism, Lutheranism and Orthodoxy) who obviously are strongly pro-government.

I'm sure that is largely true, but if it as true as you make it out to be, they would not even call themselves Christians.

Most of those people don't call themselves Christian, they are just registered as such and did not bother yet to officially leave their respective church. The very same Wikipedia article where you got the 63% figure from also states that only 45% of Germans believe in God, which means that there are many people registered as Christian who are in fact Atheist. German society is extremely secular.

Another thing to consider is that the source where the Wiki article got the 63% figure from states that in West Germany 72% are registered as Christian, while in East Germany it's only 25%. Nevertheless, West Germans, no matter whether they live in a rural or urban area, are not any more religious than their eastern counterparts. The difference is that the communists in the former GDR actively encouraged their citizens to declare themselves as Atheists, while in West Germany nobody cared. Churches are empty all over the country, and those that attend services tend to be in their late sixties or older in rural areas, and in their eighties and older in urban areas.

"Non-factor" is a vague term. What you mean, I suspect, is what I explained above. You do not have religious figures (at least not Christian ones) speaking out in criticism of government. The mainstream Christian churches are aligned with the government, and therefore the religious leaders are much more circumspect. The number of believing/practicing Christians may be smaller, but you make it sound as if they don't exist, which is not true at all.

What I meant with the term "non-factor" is that the opinion of either the Catholic church or the Lutheran church (which is extremely liberal here) don't have much weight in public discourse. There are practising Christians, that's true, but as a rule, most of them tend to be center-right on the German political scale, which makes them left-wingers on the American political scale.

The left clearly grew in power throughout Europe after WWII. You would not be talking about "68ers" if that was not the case. The entire establishment of most European countries, and certainly the EU, is ideologically left wing. The "conservatives" (with a few exceptions like Thatcher) are simply pale "me too" parties who offer the same socialism, just in a smaller dose.

As a rule, fiscal conservativism does not exist in Germany, and it did not exist before WWII as well. Once Bismarck created the German welfare state, it was universally accepted, and if any party had tried to change anything about that, it would have meant a death sentence at the polls for them. Germany being a welfare state is even enshrinend in our constitution, and that article is unchangeable on top of that. About social conservativism you are right, however. WWII pretty much killed it off, and the 68ers delivered the coup de grace

In other words, the primary reason why all of these differences appear between Europe and the U.S. is because the political left holds a position of utter dominance of societal institutions in Europe that it does not hold here. They do not merely represent one set of opinions, they are in a position to set the parameters of the entire debate, and define for society what thoughts are acceptable. They try to do the same thing here, but with slightly less success.

That's largely true, but on a few issues, mainly immigration, their hold on power seems to be loosening, since even a few Boomers start to realize that what they called multiculturalism failed. On top of that, GenX'ers, GenY'ers and first-wave Millies are to a large degree no longer willing to atone for Nazi crimes, since with the way left-wing Boomer teachers emphasized them, they reached just the opposite of what they wanted. The white guilt crap no longer works. On most other issues the results of the last Awakening (and the one before, as far as it concerned the establishment of a welfare state) are IMO permanent.

The fact that you equate evangelical Christianity with the Taliban shows how out of whack your understanding of the subject is. I don't entirely blame you, since I think you said most people in Germany get their views of America from people like Michael Moore.

The Taliban comparison was an exaggeration on my part to illustrate how foreign evangelical Christianity seems to the average European. I did not want to equal them. The Taliban are murderous psychopaths, while Evangelicals are "merely" religious fundamentalists. And while I don't like holier-than-thou leftists like Moore, their US rightist counterparts are just as dislikable.