Originally Posted by sean '90

Odin and I still pwn you! Ask Her Imperial Highness Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaievna of Russia, she'll correct your wayward impressions of flappers.

You didn't respond..?

Originally Posted by sean '90

Odin and I still pwn you!

I'm actually undecided as of now whether Iran (and maybe Iraq) is 2T and thus on it's own saeculum or if it's 3T along with the rest of the ME minus Turkey, I can see evidence for both. Maybe the cultural differences are screwing me up...

Originally Posted by Odin

I'm actually undecided as of now whether Iran (and maybe Iraq) is 2T and thus on it's own saeculum or if it's 3T along with the rest of the ME minus Turkey, I can see evidence for both. Maybe the cultural differences are screwing me up...

Odin, you have to analyze each country individually. Events that happened in one corner of the ME may have had negligible effects in another part. The main reason for citing the ME is 3T is that the Islamic Resurgence that began in the 1970s and lasted to the Millenium is a 2T event.

The Islamic resurgence wasn't anything too new. It was just a shift in goals from more social and economic oriented stuff (from 1940) to political stuff. The reason for the hype is that this shift got hold of the attention of western media. I believe the change in goals was manifested differently in each country. For a country like Iran, it was manifested in upheaval, violence, and human wave attacks.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

You didn't respond..?

Que es el definicion de tu post?

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

The Soviet Union and Iraq are completely different in terms of regime toppling. Iraq was invaded and the regime was toppled by the U.S. They did not bring it on themselves (and probably wouldn't have), which is key.

It would be "key" if the US invasion had toppled a generally accepted civic order that the Iraqis wanted to restore. That obviously is not what happened. They are rebuilding from the ground up, which is the definition of a Fourth Turning.

Things might have been different if we had signed on to Ba'athism without Saddam--but we didn't.

Meanwhile, if you measure things from the time Iraq was created, it IS 4T time.

Originally Posted by sean '90

Que es el definicion de tu post?

I tried to explain to you that the flappers/flaming youth stuff, when taken in context, is nothing like the Iranian awakening and then you went off in a different direction.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

It would be "key" if the US invasion had toppled a generally accepted civic order that the Iraqis wanted to restore.

Kind of strange...

The civic order was largely unpopular because Iraq was led by Saddam Hussein, not because of generational alignment.

That obviously is not what happened. They are rebuilding from the ground up, which is the definition of a Fourth Turning.

That is way too simple a definition. When you begin to apply it to dozens of countries it falls through.

Things might have been different if we had signed on to Ba'athism without Saddam--but we didn't.

Meanwhile, if you measure things from the time Iraq was created, it IS 4T time.

I have the Iraqi Crisis running from ~1908-1920 (climax). Add 60 to the last number and you get a probable starting date. Go figure.

Originally Posted by 1990

Ahmadinejad will not last. He's handling this 2T worse than LBJ did. Worse than Nixon did. Iran has another presidential election in 2009. Watch carefully.

I'll be very happy if you are right. Of course, Nixon was reelected in 1972.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Kind of strange...

The civic order was largely unpopular because Iraq was led by Saddam Hussein, not because of generational alignment.



That is way too simple a definition. When you begin to apply it to dozens of countries it falls through.



I have the Iraqi Crisis running from ~1908-1920 (climax). Add 60 to the last number and you get a probable starting date. Go figure.

Oddly I see Iraq's previous Crisis in the political consequences of the regime of Rashid Ali al-Gailani, who played with fire (Nazi "tourists" intent on turning Iraq into a partner in crime) in 1941 and was overthrown by the British, who didn't want their oil supplies and a significant transport link to the Soviet Union cut off.

I almost see a three-wave Crisis Era in Iraq, one that began with the meatgrinder war between Iran and Iraq, the invasion of Kuwait that had unforeseen consequences, and finally the US invasion of Iraq and subsequent anarchy. Thus Iraq has had about a quarter-century of Crisis, with devastating effects (as I interpret the Soviet Union from the Bolshevik coup to the end of the Second World War).

Iraqi independence in 1932 seems like a ho-hum transition (from a protectorate to a puppet state) with little violence.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

I'll be very happy if you are right. Of course, Nixon was reelected in 1972.

With Boomer support.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

Oddly I see Iraq's previous Crisis in the political consequences of the regime of Rashid Ali al-Gailani, who played with fire (Nazi "tourists" intent on turning Iraq into a partner in crime) in 1941 and was overthrown by the British, who didn't want their oil supplies and a significant transport link to the Soviet Union cut off.

I almost see a three-wave Crisis Era in Iraq, one that began with the meatgrinder war between Iran and Iraq, the invasion of Kuwait that had unforeseen consequences, and finally the US invasion of Iraq and subsequent anarchy. Thus Iraq has had about a quarter-century of Crisis, with devastating effects (as I interpret the Soviet Union from the Bolshevik coup to the end of the Second World War).

Iraqi independence in 1932 seems like a ho-hum transition (from a protectorate to a puppet state) with little violence.

I'm vacillating between thinking thinking Iraq's last 4T was WW2, Israeli Independence, and the Suez Crisis, like the rest of the Arab world, or, as Matt, 1990, and Xenakis are thinking, the rise of the Baathists and the Iran-Iraq War. Whatever turning Iraq is in, it's definitely NOT 4T. Please don't transfer you nonsense views on Russia's saeculum to Iraq.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

Oddly I see Iraq's previous Crisis in the political consequences of the regime of Rashid Ali al-Gailani, who played with fire (Nazi "tourists" intent on turning Iraq into a partner in crime) in 1941 and was overthrown by the British, who didn't want their oil supplies and a significant transport link to the Soviet Union cut off.

I almost see a three-wave Crisis Era in Iraq, one that began with the meatgrinder war between Iran and Iraq, the invasion of Kuwait that had unforeseen consequences, and finally the US invasion of Iraq and subsequent anarchy. Thus Iraq has had about a quarter-century of Crisis, with devastating effects (as I interpret the Soviet Union from the Bolshevik coup to the end of the Second World War).

Iraqi independence in 1932 seems like a ho-hum transition (from a protectorate to a puppet state) with little violence.

pbrower, as has been discussed, you and I hold completely different views on generational theory, so I really can't respond.

Originally Posted by Odin

I'm vacillating between thinking thinking Iraq's last 4T was WW2, Israeli Independence, and the Suez Crisis

This doesn't make much sense from an Iraqi perspective, to me at least. Read a few histories and try to explain. I don't see any signs of an Iraqi 4T during this time period.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

This doesn't make much sense from an Iraqi perspective, to me at least. Read a few histories and try to explain. I don't see any signs of an Iraqi 4T during this time period.

This why I find the whole thing so damn confusing, because Iraq, IIRC, participated in the same 4T-ish/1T-ish secular Arab Nationalism/Socialism as the rest of the Arab world.

Originally Posted by Odin

This why I find the whole thing so damn confusing, because Iraq, IIRC, participated in the same 4T-ish/1T-ish secular Arab Nationalism/Socialism as the rest of the Arab world.

They did it later than everyone else.

Iraq didn't participate in the Arab-Israeli conflict in the 50s and 60s to anywhere near the extent of the countries which held a border with Israel. Their involvement in that war was limited and didn't require a full commitment.

Arab Nationalism didn't take hold in Iraq until the 1968 revolution where the Baathists overthrew the old republic, which is what really signals the crisis.

Originally Posted by Odin

This why I find the whole thing so damn confusing, because Iraq, IIRC, participated in the same 4T-ish/1T-ish secular Arab Nationalism/Socialism as the rest of the Arab world.

Arab Socialism was an Egyptian institution, and taken in context, makes perfect sense. Egyptians had just gotten out of the clutches of the British and thus instituted a secular Arab system to promote unity.

So I suspect that the Egyptians main concern was security, while Iraq's main concern was economics. This could use more research, but my findings so far support this.

Originally Posted by Silifi

Arab Nationalism didn't take hold in Iraq until the 1968 revolution where the Baathists overthrew the old republic, which is what really signals the crisis.

Probably not a 4T, considering the Great Iraqi Revolution was in 1920.

Using exact dates to say that it wasn't a 4T isn't a good idea. Anamolies can happen, and the period of 1968-1988 fits the 4T paradigm perfectly:

-It started out with a drastic shift in political leadership
-It ended with a prolonged conflict in which every civil institution was dedicated towards a single cause.
-In the years following it, Iraq had a great amount of stability and fairly good civic institutions, especially for a third world country. Classic high.

1968 might not be the start date for the 4T, but 1988 was definately it's end, and the fact that the old republic ended 20 years earlier makes perfect sense.

Originally Posted by Silifi

1968 might not be the start date for the 4T, but 1988 was definately it's end, and the fact that the old republic ended 20 years earlier makes perfect sense.

Fine, but 1968 couldn't have been the start date, as the 1970s were certainly not a 4T. I'd go with 1980-1988.

(I'm an advocate of highly variable crisis lengths ftr)

Greece be 4T? In yesterday's election, the two main parties (center-left PASOK and center-right New Democracy) together lost 28 seats to more extreme parties - the Communists, the Radical Leftists, and the right-nationalist Popular Orthodox Rally. Historically radical ideologies have soared in popularity during 4Ts. New Democracy and PASOK are still the top two, but the other three parties went from a combined total of 18 to a combined total of 46.

Originally Posted by 1990

Greece be 4T?

Yes. I have no idea why they aren't included on my crisis list since I recall studying them.

Climax 1922, which puts them in the 85th year of the mid-cycle period. They are 5T.

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Yes. I have no idea why they aren't included on my crisis list since I recall studying them.

Climax 1922, which puts them in the 85th year of the mid-cycle period. They are 5T.

There is no such thing as a 5T. Xenakis just has "issues".

Originally Posted by 1990

Greece be 4T? In yesterday's election, the two main parties (center-left PASOK and center-right New Democracy) together lost 28 seats to more extreme parties - the Communists, the Radical Leftists, and the right-nationalist Popular Orthodox Rally. Historically radical ideologies have soared in popularity during 4Ts. New Democracy and PASOK are still the top two, but the other three parties went from a combined total of 18 to a combined total of 46.

Long live the King of the Hellenes, Konstantinos II!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by MichaelEaston

Yes. I have no idea why they aren't included on my crisis list since I recall studying them.

Climax 1922, which puts them in the 85th year of the mid-cycle period. They are 5T.

That's an interesting interpretation. I had thought Greece, like Italy, was on the WWII timeline. They did have a bad civil war right after WWII which climaxed in 1949.

Originally Posted by sean '90

There is no such thing as a 5T. Xenakis just has "issues".

Pretty funny, considering in your last post you indicated that you had no idea what a 5th turning is. I wouldn't suspect anything has changed.

Of course, I'd assume you've done the research to prove that a 5th turning does not exist...