The massive peasant uprising (Ahmad revolt) was short-lived and appears to be fairly insignificant. The nature with which it was dealt indicates no-nonsense 1T.
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,018
The massive peasant uprising (Ahmad revolt) was short-lived and appears to be fairly insignificant. The nature with which it was dealt indicates no-nonsense 1T.
Last edited by Matt1989; 07-14-2007 at 02:31 PM.
Dear Matt,
That's fine, but this "meta-information" should be part of the textOriginally Posted by MichaelEaston
of the Egypt Country Study. Just take this material (that I quoted),
and add it to the study, either interspersed with the main
paragraphs, or in a separate section called "Research Notes."
That way, anyone reading the Study for the first time and wants to
contribute can understand your reasoning and where you left off.
Incidentally, I do that sort of thing all the time on my web site.
It took me a while of playing around with words to figure out the
best way to say "I don't know."
Sincerely,
John
John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Last edited by John J. Xenakis; 07-14-2007 at 02:53 PM.
Dear Matt,
If the reason that you can't edit is because you're having the same
sporadic problem that I have, then I'll tell you what I do to get
around it.
There's apparently something wrong with the web site database, since
I occasional get database errors. That happens rarely.
But what happens more frequently is that I'm posting something, or
editing and old posting, and I press "Preview" or "Submit," and it
tells me that I have to log in again. Apparently the web server has
simply lost track of my session.
When you log in again, it takes you to the original page, and you've
lost all your edits.
But what you can do at that point is just press "Back" two times, to
get to the page you were editing, and press the "Submit" button
again. That's always worked for me, although occasional it loses
track of the session again, and I have to go through the same
two-step process again.
Sincerely,
John
John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
My problem is that when I edit and click save, it just loads and loads forever without actually posting. Weird.
OK will do!
Figured out how to edit!
I solved my problem by clicking advanced options and saving the edits from there.
Egypt is re-edited. It should be a little clearer now. One more thing, Lord Cromer was replaced in 1907, not 1901. So my 1901 date is actually an educated guess.
Dear Matt,
It does make the case a lot better now. I do think in general it
would be stronger if you said right in the text that you're making an
educated guess about something, rather than posting it in a separate
message.
There's just one more thing I'd like to ask -- posting a list of
sources at the end. We're going to need those anyway when we edit
the text for Wikipedia.
Sincerely,
John
John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
??? Umm.. it reverted back to an earlier edit???
*Edit* Fixed.
Last edited by Matt1989; 07-15-2007 at 12:23 AM.
Okay, I'd like to keep the narrative smooth, so I'll tack something on at the end for all of these in the future.
From my standpoint, I don't see how it would be appropriate for Wikipedia. It's a database, but an encyclopedic one. An actual website seems more suitable. But maybe you're thinking about something else? What are your plans?There's just one more thing I'd like to ask -- posting a list of
sources at the end. We're going to need those anyway when we edit
the text for Wikipedia.
I don't disagree much there, but I think you're assuming pro-Republican sentiment is 3T and pro-Democratic sentiment (or whatever you want the 4T to be) is 4T. I've seen it all over this board.
I really don't see how this is possible. You even admit 9/11 was a change in direction and dialogue. It just doesn't revert back to 3T. What is the difference between 3T bickering and 4T bickering? I don't agree that 4T bickering is any more meaningful, which you seem to be implying. I think it's the tone. America has been borderline hysterical (and its especially true today) at various points since the attacks.9/11 (outside the brief initial response) and the first couple years of the Iraq war didn't really seem to have changed the fundamental 3T mood, it just exacerbating it (we went into the "jittery stage of the 3T" as some posters have labeled it). Indeed, the reaction of people of different political stripes to the initial invasion of Iraq reminds me of how people of various political stripes reacted to WW1.
The 2002 election expressed the temporary mood shift following 9/11, but by the 2004 election the mood had slipped back to 3T-style bickering (and the Electoral College map wasn't that different from 2000).
Are you so sure about that? The biggest deal has been foreign policy. Moralistic issues asserted themselves in the Presidential election (big surprise there). The mood shift in 2005 went from a mixture of pessimism and optimism to more pessimism.Then, in 2005 there was this shift in the public mood that expressed themselves in the results of the 2006 election. Economic issues seem to becoming more important then the pet issues of the Culture Wars.
So people got "serious." I really don't see what this has to do with everything.We have socially-conservative Evangelical Christians concerned about the environment and the economy suddenly coming out of the woodwork. Virginia elected to the Senate Jim Webb, a member of the Reagan Administration that now is an economic uber-populist. The Republican Party looks like it's splintering into Libertarian/Paleo-Con, Religious Right, and War Hawk factions. People have turned against the Iraq War with vengeance and now want out.
Dear Matt,
Keeping the narrative smooth is a good idea. When you say "What are
your plans?" you're giving me a lot more credit than I deserve, since
I don't know how it's going to pan out.
As soon as a few of these are available, I'll start posting them on
my website. As time permits, I'm also working on a way that you and
Nathaniel and others who are interested will be able to edit the
pages right on the web site. Setting up interactive web pages is
always pretty complicated, but I'm doing it as quickly as I can. In
the meantime, I'll just take whatever text you give me and post them
on my web site myself.
In the longer run, I don't know how this is going to pan out, but
there are many possibilities. They'll be on my web site. We'll want
to create a book-like PDF file containing them -- but that requires a
lot of polish. Maybe they'll generate some wider interest, and that
will open up other options. If we go for Wikipedia, it will be down
the road, and only if it makes sense at that time. Also, keep in
mind the "mortality" issue -- I imagine that Wikipedia will be around
a lot longer than I will, and possibly longer than any of us will.
Right now, the main goal is to keep everything as flexible as
possible, so that we'll be able to take advantage of whatever.
That's why I suggest including research notes and sources and
anything else that's relevant. As long as you're going to all of
this trouble, don't lock yourself into anything, and don't lock
yourself out of anything.
Here's another point: We don't have to display all the information in
the country study text. For example, I could set up an option on my
web site that will or won't display the "research notes" section. We
could have that option off by default, and allow a user to turn it on
if he wants. There could be other "secret" sections that will only
be displayed for "privileged" people. This could also apply to notes
within the text. There could be notes within the text, but they
would only be displayed by option, so that the notes wouldn't appear
for most users, and the narrative would be smooth.
Another issue is markup language. I would like you to adopt a VERY
SIMPLE markup language, that I can easily translate into HTML, and
later will be able to translate into some other format as required,
such as a PHP BB or the Wikipedia markup language or into Microsoft
Word format.
One possibility is to use the Phpbb markup language (what you use to
post messages to this BB), perhaps with minor modifications, since
it's actually pretty simple. Another possibility is to adopt some of
the simpler elements of the Wikipedia markup language. I don't care
what it is, as long as it's simple, and only provides for a few things
(headers, lists, links, italics, etc.)
Here's another question. There's a list of country names and
standard country codes below. I'd like to stick to the standard.
However, there may be additional country names that don't exist today
(such as "Roman Empire.") These would have to be added to this list,
with an indication that they're non-standard, such as having a
3-character country-code if it's non-standard. (For example, the
Roman Empire might have a country code of "rme".)
Here's the country list:
Actually, the above list is several years old, and may be out ofCode:us=United States, al=Albania, dz=Algeria, as=American Samoa, ad=Andorra, ai=Anguilla, aq=Antarctica, ag=Antigua and Barbuda, ar=Argentina, am=Armenia, aw=Aruba, au=Australia, at=Austria, az=Azerbaijan, bs=Bahamas, bh=Bahrain, bd=Bangladesh, bb=Barbados, by=Belarus, be=Belgium, bz=Belize, bj=Benin, bm=Bermuda, bt=Bhutan, bo=Bolivia, ba=Bosnia-Herzegovina, bw=Botswana, bv=Bouvet Island, br=Brazil, io=British Indian Ocean Territory, bn=Brunei Darussalam, bf=Burkina Faso, bi=Burundi, kh=Cambodia, cm=Cameroon, ca=Canada, cv=Cape Verde, ky=Cayman Islands, cf=Central African Republic, td=Chad, cl=Chile, cn=China, cx=Christmas Island, cc=Cocos Islands, co=Colombia, km=Comoros, cg=Congo, ck=Cook Islands, cr=Costa Rica, ci=Cote d\Ivoire, hr=Croatia, cy=Cyprus, cz=Czech Republic, dk=Denmark, dj=Djibouti, dm=Dominica, do=Dominican Republic, tp=East Timor, ec=Ecuador, eg=Egypt, sv=El Salvador, gq=Equatorial Guinea, er=Eritrea, ee=Estonia, et=Ethiopia, fk=Falkland Islands, fo=Faroe Islands, fj=Fiji, fi=Finland, fr=France, gf=French Guiana, pf=French Polynesia, ga=Gabon, gm=Gambia, ge=Georgia, de=Germany, gh=Ghana, gi=Gibraltar, gr=Greece, gl=Greenland, gd=Grenada, gp=Guadeloupe, gu=Guam, gt=Guatemala, gn=Guinea, gw=Guinea-Bissau, gy=Guyana, ht=Haiti, hm=Heard and McDonald Islands, hn=Honduras, hk=Hong Kong, hu=Hungary, is=Iceland, in=India, id=Indonesia, ie=Ireland, il=Israel, jm=Jamaica, jp=Japan, jo=Jordan, kz=Kazakhstan, ke=Kenya, ki=Kiribati, kw=Kuwait, kg=Kyrgyz Republic, la=Lao People\s Democratic Republic, lv=Latvia, lb=Lebanon, ls=Lesotho, lr=Liberia, li=Liechtenstein, lt=Lithuania, lu=Luxembourg, mo=Macau, mg=Madagascar, mw=Malawi, my=Malaysia, mv=Maldives, ml=Mali, mt=Malta, mh=Marshall Islands, mq=Martinique, mr=Mauritania, mu=Mauritius, yt=Mayotte, mx=Mexico, fm=Micronesia, md=Moldova, mc=Monaco, mn=Mongolia, ms=Montserrat, ma=Morocco, mz=Mozambique, mm=Myanmar, na=Namibia, nr=Nauru, np=Nepal, nl=Netherlands, an=Netherlands Antilles, nt=Neutral Zone, nc=New Caledonia, nz=New Zealand, ni=Nicaragua, ne=Niger, ng=Nigeria, nu=Niue, nf=Norfolk Island, mp=Northern Mariana Islands, no=Norway, om=Oman, pk=Pakistan, pw=Palau, pa=Panama, pg=Papua New Guinea, py=Paraguay, pe=Peru, ph=Philippines, pn=Pitcairn, pl=Poland, pt=Portugal, pr=Puerto Rico, qa=Qatar, re=Re\union, ro=Romania, ru=Russian Federation, rw=Rwanda, sh=Saint Helena, kn=Saint Kitts and Nevis, lc=Saint Lucia, pm=Saint Pierre and Miquelon, vc=Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, ws=Samoa, sm=San Marino, st=Sao Tome and Principe, sa=Saudi Arabia, sn=Senegal, sc=Seychelles, sl=Sierra Leone, sg=Singapore, sk=Slovakia, si=Slovenia, sb=Solomon Islands, so=Somalia, za=South Africa, kr=South Korea, es=Spain, lk=Sri Lanka, sr=Suriname, sj=Svalbard and Jan Mayen Islands, sz=Swaziland, se=Sweden, ch=Switzerland, tw=Taiwan, tj=Tajikistan, tz=Tanzania, th=Thailand, tg=Togo, tk=Tokelau, to=Tonga, tt=Trinidad and Tobago, tn=Tunisia, tr=Turkey, tm=Turkmenistan, tc=Turks and Caicos Islands, tv=Tuvalu, ug=Uganda, ua=Ukraine, ae=United Arab Emirates, gb=United Kingdom, um=United States Minor Outlying Islands, uy=Uruguay, uz=Uzbekistan, vu=Vanuatu, va=Vatican City State, ve=Venezuela, vn=Vietnam, vg=British Virgin Islands, vi=US Virgin Islands, wf=Wallis and Futuna Islands, eh=Western Sahara, ye=Yemen, zr=Zaire, zm=Zambia, zw=Zimbabwe
date. At any rate, if there are any issues with the country list, it
would be good to let me know.
A final issue would be copyrights. We may simply want to share
copyrights. I keep it as simple as possible on my web site - I have
a notice that says that anyone can copy any article, as long as they
provide a link back.
So, those are "my plans," insofar as they go. The main plan is to
keep everything as flexible as possible, and that means a very simple
markup language, and pouring as much information as possible into the
text, even if it won't always be displayed. Don't lock anything in,
and don't lock anything out.
Sincerely,
John
John J. Xenakis
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Paging 1990
Helloooo??????/
Currently
I'm currently about 1/2 way done with a categorizing Crises around the world since 1776. It will take a couple more weeks to finish, since it requires a lot of research.
Sorry, I'm out of commission until Friday. I've been on another cross-country trip. Will be back.
Matt,
I really liked your work on Egypt. Very well-done. I just wonder, why a 9-year 4T? You questioned my long (26- and 29-year) Mexican turnings in the 19th century, but not a 9-year turning in the mid-20th century?
I have to think Egypt's 4T was longer than that. If not, why?
When I return to Chicago tonight, I will start to revise Mexico and re-post what I get. Next I'd love to do Cuba or Venezuela. If you'd prefer something in Africa, Ethiopia's good with me.
The Crisis is the most variable in terms of length. I actually have the 1876-1882 Urabi revolt as a Crisis, but it's possible that it began 6 years early.
What drives the Crisis? At first, it's the generational alignment that makes a catalyst possible. This can come as early as the first half of the third turning, but it's extremely difficult for a Crisis to form until the second half of the third turning. It is my belief that a country will descend into 4T mood by the 60 year mark, with or without a Crisis. A catalyst simply gets the ball rolling.
From there, anything can happen. It all depends on the events during the Crisis, and the speed at which it approaches a climax. How quickly this occurs is highly variable, which makes it unlike any other turning. The Wafdist government collapse in 1944, which was 62 years after the last Crisis, probably acted as the catalyst, as it set off a series of events which culminated in an independent Egypt. Events contributed to the acceleration and a climaxed was reached around 1952-1953.
After the climax comes the Resolution, which is really more 1T than 4T. Following the climax, Prophets are born, which leads to a 2T ~18 years later.
Do Cuba and Venezuela/Colombia/Panama first. Ethiopia will be easy for me.When I return to Chicago tonight, I will start to revise Mexico and re-post what I get. Next I'd love to do Cuba or Venezuela. If you'd prefer something in Africa, Ethiopia's good with me.
How's it going?
It ain't. I'm trying, I really am. This has been an insanely busy summer, especially for being one without any classes or programs. Okay, I seem to do better when I establish deadlines, so:
The second draft of Mexico will be ready by Sunday night!
I will begin Cuba Monday morning and finish it by the end of next week.
There.
Matt,
I am finding this dilemma with Mexico: either they had a somewhat prolonged first 1T and 2T, or they had a massively long 3T in the Porfiriato (like, 40 years +). I can't tell which option is less unappetizing. Part of me thinks my original thesis was right, that the 1T (a particularly bad one, more divisive like the Gilded Age and less "end to ideology" like the Era of Good Feelings) was 26 years, followed by a 29-year 2T (and a 27-year 3T). I can't see any justification for a 40-year turning. Unless...that 3T was two turnings long, like Mexico's 3T since 1968. In that case, why is Mexico prone to massively long 3Ts and late 4Ts?
In Europe and the US the turnings were around 27 years long untill the early 1800s, what Zarathustra called "Saeculum I," perhaps Mexico was still on Saeculum I until the Mexican Revolution?
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.
-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism
1990, I think you are looking at this the wrong way. As has been noted by myself and John X. (I will be posting a huge list of Crises sometime shortly), mid-cycle periods can stray easily from the 60 year mark. This is a sharp turn from the S&H theory, since TFT doesn't really allow for turning variance (although I can find exceptions in their list). I actually don't allow for turning variance - except for the Crisis timing. This sort of thing really requires more research, but a Crisis can come early with an unexpected invasion should the generations be only partially aligned with the Crisis setup, or it may be delayed due to failure for the "sparks" to ignite a fire.
This is why I am throwing around the post-Unraveling phrase. In a 4th turning, there can be a Crisis mood without an actual "catastrophe (crisis)." That's the best way I can describe a country like Mexico in the 90s. If the post-Unraveling phase continues without a catastrophe, the country moves into the 5th turning at the 80 year mark.
There really isn't any justification for a 29 or 26-year long or mid-cycle turning as far as I can see. Generational change is the main driver here, and it wouldn't be any different for Mexico.
Perhaps try incorporating my idea and see if the narrative makes a little more sense. Good luck.
I can't say I'm a fan of the Saeculum I idea; it doesn't make any sense to me.In Europe and the US the turnings were around 27 years long untill the early 1800s, what Zarathustra called "Saeculum I," perhaps Mexico was still on Saeculum I until the Mexican Revolution?
Mexico hasn't had a Crisis since the Mexican Revolution and is currently close to the edge.
Mexican saeculiums seem to last about a century, which after all, was the origional meaning of saeculium.The last 4T Mexico had was during the 1910-28 revolutionary period. Mexico had its independence movement start in 1810 and today many Mexicans believe that 2010 will be another revolutionary year. Mexico today has serious sucession movements in both its south and north. hey're about as early 4T as they can be. Ten years from now, it will be a very different country.
And how, saecularly speaking, is Mexico structurally different than the U.S.?
Considering you only have three Crises to use as data points, I can't agree with your conclusion. This is especially true considering the fact that there are plenty of countries that have had 100-year Crisis to Crisis periods and 60-year ones side-by side.
Matt,
I await your "massive Crisis thing" (how ominous), and also some deeper discussion about Mexico. I have been looking into Cuba whenever possible and will post something within the week.