Hello.

This thread is going to be a continuation of the discussion that took place in the 'Objections to Generational Dynamics' thread. The discussion of the map project really gets going on page 70, and continues through page 91 (top link). We feel that this project no longer pertains to the objective of the old thread (that is, Objections to Generational Dynamics) and we feel that people might miss useful information that actually pertains to the thread.

The project consists of making a World Map that details which turning a country is in. You can find the current versions (if slightly different) in my signature, 1990's signature, and Odin's signature. As I've said many times before, any help would be appreciated and all objections to our decisions are welcome, so long as you can back your differences up.

Thanks!

1990, my vacation is basically over so there is going to be a slowdown in my ability to get things done. I will continue looking over Africa, slowly.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

1990, my vacation is basically over so there is going to be a slowdown in my ability to get things done. I will continue looking over Africa, slowly.

I totally understand.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Hello.

This thread is going to be a continuation of the discussion that took place in the 'Objections to Generational Dynamics' thread. The discussion of the map project really gets going on page 70, and continues through page 91 (top link). We feel that this project no longer pertains to the objective of the old thread (that is, Objections to Generational Dynamics) and we feel that people might miss useful information that actually pertains to the thread.

The project consists of making a World Map that details which turning a country is in. You can find the current versions (if slightly different) in my signature, 1990's signature, and Odin's signature. As I've said many times before, any help would be appreciated and all objections to our decisions are welcome, so long as you can back your differences up.

Thanks!

May I voice objections to your map.

1. The Nations in the Middle East, including North Africa are in a early 3T, not a late 3T/early 4T. Events that occurred after the Iranian revolution can be seen as a massive awakening.

2. I am not sure if USA/Canada has entered a 4T yet, I am sure that places like Sub-Saharan Africa, Europe (including former Yugoslavia), China, The Indian Sub-Continent, Sub-Saharan Africa and Australasia have not entered a 4T yet, still in a late 3T until around 2008 to 2010 at the earliest.

3. Japan and Korea are most likely on a different saeculum to us, Many say it is currently at the beginning of a 3T there.

Originally Posted by Tristan

May I voice objections to your map.

1. The Nations in the Middle East, including North Africa are in a early 3T, not a late 3T/early 4T. Events that occurred after the Iranian revolution can be seen as a massive awakening.

2. I am not sure if USA/Canada has entered a 4T yet, I am sure that places like Sub-Saharan Africa, Europe (including former Yugoslavia), China, The Indian Sub-Continent, Sub-Saharan Africa and Australasia have not entered a 4T yet, still in a late 3T until around 2008 to 2010 at the earliest.

3. Japan and Korea are most likely on a different saeculum to us, Many say it is currently at the beginning of a 3T there.

1. The Iranian Revolution was not a student movement, it was a mass uprising by the people. The events surrounding it were shocking, violent, and realigning. Also, the current state of affairs in Iran is pure early 2T: student protests abound, and the youth is already pushing back against the elder Heroes. This is not the transition to 3T. I don't see any Middle Eastern countries transitioning to 3T right now. If you have further evidence, though, I'd love to hear it.

2. All of Sub-Saharan Africa on the same timeline? So you're saying the Rwandan genocide and the Congo Wars (the second most violent conflict in human history, after WWII) were not 4Ts? And how were the Yugoslav Wars not a 4T?

3. So WWII was not a 4T in Japan or Korea?

Originally Posted by Tristan

May I voice objections to your map.

1. The Nations in the Middle East, including North Africa are in a early 3T, not a late 3T/early 4T. Events that occurred after the Iranian revolution can be seen as a massive awakening.

2. I am not sure if USA/Canada has entered a 4T yet, I am sure that places like Sub-Saharan Africa, Europe (including former Yugoslavia), China, The Indian Sub-Continent, Sub-Saharan Africa and Australasia have not entered a 4T yet, still in a late 3T until around 2008 to 2010 at the earliest.

3. Japan and Korea are most likely on a different saeculum to us, Many say it is currently at the beginning of a 3T there.

Originally Posted by 1990

1. The Iranian Revolution was not a student movement, it was a mass uprising by the people. The events surrounding it were shocking, violent, and realigning. Also, the current state of affairs in Iran is pure early 2T: student protests abound, and the youth is already pushing back against the elder Heroes. This is not the transition to 3T. I don't see any Middle Eastern countries transitioning to 3T right now. If you have further evidence, though, I'd love to hear it.

2. All of Sub-Saharan Africa on the same timeline? So you're saying the Rwandan genocide and the Congo Wars (the second most violent conflict in human history, after WWII) were not 4Ts? And how were the Yugoslav Wars not a 4T?

3. So WWII was not a 4T in Japan or Korea?

1990 said most of what I wanted to say, so I'll just throw out a couple of notes.

1. From what I've found in doing this project, one must tread carefully around student movements. They can occur either in a 2T or a 4T. Of course, the differences between the movement and the students are great during a 4T and 2T. A 4T movement will usually be manifested in the form of a violent revolution or coup while the 2T will be in the form of a generational conflict. "Student Movement" is a buzz word, but one must look into it.

The Middle East is certainly not on one timeline. The Islamic Resurgence could have happened in any turning, but the form that it took should have been indicative of the turning the country was in. So unless this resurgence was in the form of a generational conflict throughout the entire ME, there is no way I can view it as one giant 2T.

2. Well, 1990's map takes place in 2015, and mine takes place a few years into the future, sometime shortly after the regeneracy.

I'd like to discuss Somalia with you!

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

I'd like to discuss Somalia with you!

Easton, I've decided that in my next version of the map -- which, BTW, I can't post yet because my email client crashed and I've lost the old FTP site link!! -- Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, Chad, the C.A.R., and Cote d'Ivoire will all be 5T. The Tuareg Rebellion did not seem sufficient as a 4T, and Chad and the C.A.R. are clearly well behind Sudan (which will be 1T soon). As for "Le Cote", sources describe it as abnormally peaceful until recent years. Sounds like a prolonged between-crises period.

I am sufficiently convinced about both E. Guinea and Guinea being 2T. But Benin and Togo? Not sure about their turnings anymore. And Southern Africa (all 5 countries), which I've had as 3T this whole time, I am unsure about.

So I look forward to your discussion about Somalia, but these are my big question marks right now.

(Oh, and while I know we are prioritizing Africa, this question seems timely: any research on the Solomon Islands?)

Originally Posted by 1990

3. So WWII was not a 4T in Japan or Korea?

He, (and I) is apparently of the school that WW2 was the first half of their 4T and the US occupation and the Korean War was the second half

Somalia seems to be nearing a 4T climax, either the Ethiopian-backed, internationally-recognized "government" (really nothing but a bunch of warlords) will take control or the Islamists will in the next few years IMO. It all depends on what Ethiopia (which is on the 1T/2T cusp) does and how much the Islamists fight back.

Originally Posted by 1990

1. The Iranian Revolution was not a student movement, it was a mass uprising by the people. The events surrounding it were shocking, violent, and realigning. Also, the current state of affairs in Iran is pure early 2T: student protests abound, and the youth is already pushing back against the elder Heroes. This is not the transition to 3T. I don't see any Middle Eastern countries transitioning to 3T right now. If you have further evidence, though, I'd love to hear it.

I disagree, The Iranian Revolution had the white hot anger of youth quality to it that reminds me a lot of the 60's in the USA. May 68 in France was also a mass uprising of sorts as well, that was a 2T event. What happended after the Iranian revolution that a whole generation of youth rose up aganist the established order all across the Middle East, this period of furious revolt lasted a couple of decades.

2. All of Sub-Saharan Africa on the same timeline? So you're saying the Rwandan genocide and the Congo Wars (the second most violent conflict in human history, after WWII) were not 4Ts? And how were the Yugoslav Wars not a 4T?

Wars can happen in any turning, 3T wars (imagine if the culture wars became a real war) are especially brutal and often they do not end the conflict that started it. The commanders are generally Midlife Idealists and soliders Young Adult Reactives.

4T wars are much more final in conculding the conflict which started it. The Spanish civil war, The American War of Independence and the Korean war (for Korea) resulted in the losing side being totally destroyed. After the Spanish civil war thousands of supporters of the Republican cause were killed or fled in exile.

3. So WWII was not a 4T in Japan or Korea?

It depends when the 4T started exactly, However the period after WW2 was a 4T, it saw the Korean war and building of a new order in Japan, along with a lot of political furor (Japan during the 1940's and 1950's had an active left wing activist scene).

An updated version of my map has been posted. You can see it using the same old link in my signature.

EDIT: BTW, as far as Japan and Korea...I still think Japan's 4T ended in August 1945 like most of the great nations of WWII. The Koreas probably continued their 4T until 1953, but even in that case, they should be early 4T in 2015, 62 years after the end of a Crisis. (That would put them in the Cascade phase in 2015)

Originally Posted by 1990

An updated version of my map has been posted. You can see it using the same old link in my signature.

EDIT: BTW, as far as Japan and Korea...I still think Japan's 4T ended in August 1945 like most of the great nations of WWII. The Koreas probably continued their 4T until 1953, but even in that case, they should be early 4T in 2015, 62 years after the end of a Crisis. (That would put them in the Cascade phase in 2015)

No. Why would Korea be any different than other WWII nation? I could see your point if the Korean War started in 1945. It didn't, and was turned into a typical cold war conflict.

Besides the dead and some name changes, what actually changed?

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

No. Why would Korea be any different than other WWII nation? I could see your point if the Korean War started in 1945. It didn't, and was turned into a typical cold war conflict.

Besides the dead and some name changes, what actually changed?

Well, you could ask the same about Vietnam, which was clearly a 4T. But in the end, it's a moot point: Korea will be 4T by 2015.

Originally Posted by 1990

Well, you could ask the same about Vietnam, which was clearly a 4T. But in the end, it's a moot point: Korea will be 4T by 2015.

Vietnam was reunified. I don't think it's a moot point, since it is about what you consider to be a crisis. Crises don't have 5 year breaks after their climax.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Vietnam was reunified. I don't think it's a moot point, since it is about what you consider to be a crisis. Crises don't have 5 year breaks after their climax.

Well, Korea was de-unified. What makes one more 4T than the other?

Anyhoo...

I'd really like to finish West Africa so we can go on to Southern Africa and then be done with Africa!

I am still decently confident about Guinea being 2T, but I'm definitely not 100%. Like the rest of Africa, there seems to have been a 4T revolt in the 1890s, then under Toure from 1966-1984, brutal suppression that could be 4T -- but no obvious rebellion, civil war, genocide, etc.

Benin, Togo, and Gabon are even more mysterious. Gabon is the worst. Did nothing happen in this country before 1960?

Off-topic a little, I thought of Indonesia today. We know the 1966 coup which brought Suharto to power was a 4T. We have had it as the catalyst to a 4T, making the country 2T now. But the problem with that is that while Suharto ruled over an ugly state of affairs in the country, there is no obvious climax to the 4T if it started in 1965-66. There was no bang that ended the saeculum. It could have ended circa 1983-85, but nothing pops out.

What might make more sense is that Indonesia had a 4T beginning after WWII that CLIMAXED in 1966. This 4T would have included the War of Independence during the late 1940s and continued through Sukarno's problematic reign, ending with the rise of Suharto. Then the ~1966-1985 period could be viewed as an austere, tense 1T, with the 1998 beginning of democracy being the "Watergate moment" of their 2T. This would put Indonesia entering a 3T now.

Originally Posted by 1990

Well, Korea was de-unified. What makes one more 4T than the other?

Korea was de-unified following the second World War.

Let's see: Reunifiction, Genocide, Total Victory (as opposed to the status quo remaining). For most of the Korean War, America's main enemy was China.

I'll answer the other stuff when I have more time.

I'd like to discuss Somalia with you!

Hey sorry, i've been away from the boards for a few days ...

But I still stand firm in my belief that Somalia is in the height of their 1T right now (which I suppose could put them in green by 2015). I was recently reading an article about the violence in Mogadishu thats been happening for the last few weeks (cant find the link anymore, but I think it was from AP), and it talked about the plight of the ordinary Somali. These poor people want order so bad they don't care who provides it. Right now they're willing to support whoever has the best chance of providing that order. For a time it was the Islamic Courts Union (and al-Qaeda), but now it is the Somali government and Ethiopia (and the US). It seems to me that this recent spate of violence is the result of an al-Qaeda inspired invasion of foreigners (similar to what Xenakis described with regards to Iraq).

I don't think this will get as bad as Iraq, though, for a few reasons. One, al-Qaeda doesn't have the same ethnic division in Somalia to exploit that they have in Iraq. Also, there is only one enemy to fight in Somalia, the "Crusaders", as opposed to the Crusaders and the "Safavids" (persians) in Iraq. Finally, I think a strong parallel can be drawn to the situation in Afghanistan, which I also strongly believe to be in a 1T right now (ill post on that later). The people genuinely want order, and will work with whomever has the best chance of providing it. There is violence, but its caused by foreigners and a few bad apples.

As an aside, I have changed my mind from my previous post in which I said that Somalia was on 2 timelines. I think I can now define 1 clear 4T for the whole country as being from the late '70's (when the uprisings in the north started) until the late '90's (when somaliland seceded). Black Hawk Down was the climax. This still doesnt answer the question of when the country's last 4T was (still seems to be on 2 timelines).

Originally Posted by Chim Richalds

Hey sorry, i've been away from the boards for a few days ...

But I still stand firm in my belief that Somalia is in the height of their 1T right now (which I suppose could put them in green by 2015). I was recently reading an article about the violence in Mogadishu thats been happening for the last few weeks (cant find the link anymore, but I think it was from AP), and it talked about the plight of the ordinary Somali. These poor people want order so bad they don't care who provides it. Right now they're willing to support whoever has the best chance of providing that order. For a time it was the Islamic Courts Union (and al-Qaeda), but now it is the Somali government and Ethiopia (and the US). It seems to me that this recent spate of violence is the result of an al-Qaeda inspired invasion of foreigners (similar to what Xenakis described with regards to Iraq).

I don't think this will get as bad as Iraq, though, for a few reasons. One, al-Qaeda doesn't have the same ethnic division in Somalia to exploit that they have in Iraq. Also, there is only one enemy to fight in Somalia, the "Crusaders", as opposed to the Crusaders and the "Safavids" (persians) in Iraq. Finally, I think a strong parallel can be drawn to the situation in Afghanistan, which I also strongly believe to be in a 1T right now (ill post on that later). The people genuinely want order, and will work with whomever has the best chance of providing it. There is violence, but its caused by foreigners and a few bad apples.

As an aside, I have changed my mind from my previous post in which I said that Somalia was on 2 timelines. I think I can now define 1 clear 4T for the whole country as being from the late '70's (when the uprisings in the north started) until the late '90's (when somaliland seceded). Black Hawk Down was the climax. This still doesnt answer the question of when the country's last 4T was (still seems to be on 2 timelines).

OK, I can agree with this. Did you look at my response to your post in the Objections thread?

Originally Posted by 1990

Off-topic a little, I thought of Indonesia today. We know the 1966 coup which brought Suharto to power was a 4T. We have had it as the catalyst to a 4T, making the country 2T now. But the problem with that is that while Suharto ruled over an ugly state of affairs in the country, there is no obvious climax to the 4T if it started in 1965-66. There was no bang that ended the saeculum. It could have ended circa 1983-85, but nothing pops out.

What might make more sense is that Indonesia had a 4T beginning after WWII that CLIMAXED in 1966. This 4T would have included the War of Independence during the late 1940s and continued through Sukarno's problematic reign, ending with the rise of Suharto. Then the ~1966-1985 period could be viewed as an austere, tense 1T, with the 1998 beginning of democracy being the "Watergate moment" of their 2T. This would put Indonesia entering a 3T now.

This is definitely possible. What I'd expect is rising action and crisis mood throughout the 1949-1966 interim years until the civil war starts. Do you see this?

What is their last crisis war?

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

This is definitely possible. What I'd expect is rising action and crisis mood throughout the 1949-1966 interim years until the civil war starts. Do you see this?

What is their last crisis war?

The thing to look for is, after the climax, what resolution there was, if any. If none, either the climax was nothing of the sort, or it's still going on (not likely!)

Of course the media generally do not go into details about resolutions unless it's a place we have an interest in.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

This is definitely possible. What I'd expect is rising action and crisis mood throughout the 1949-1966 interim years until the civil war starts. Do you see this?

What is their last crisis war?

They have two wars in the 4T, the National Revolution which won Indonesian independence, and the 1965-66 civil war and coup. In my opinion, the latter was the crisis war, serving as a climax (and/or resolution) to the 4T.

Originally Posted by 1990

They have two wars in the 4T, the National Revolution which won Indonesian independence, and the 1965-66 civil war and coup. In my opinion, the latter was the crisis war, serving as a climax (and/or resolution) to the 4T.

No, no, no. I'm talking about the crisis war before that.

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

The thing to look for is, after the climax, what resolution there was, if any. If none, either the climax was nothing of the sort, or it's still going on (not likely!)

Of course the media generally do not go into details about resolutions unless it's a place we have an interest in.

Yeah. Nearly all crisis wars have a really important transformation. It can be something as innocuous as a major change in policy (this takes years to evaluate though), or something very apparent such as a governmental change.

The climax, as it seems to me, is the time where all the hard work through the crisis is risked through an outpouring of self-sacrifice. The Normandy campaign, to me, always seemed more like a climax than Hiroshima. I think the civil war climax was during the final weeks of the war in the Overland Campaign.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

No, no, no. I'm talking about the crisis war before that.

The only candidate I see is the 30-year Aceh War, beginning in 1873. If it was a crisis war, I would guess that, like modern civil wars in Angola, Guatemala, and Mozambique, the 4T portion was less than the total duration of the war.