Originally Posted by JDW

Another way of looking at it - the catylist for a Cold Crisis tends be circumstances (e.g., the American Revolution had to do with England needing money), while that of a Hot Crisis tends to be ideology. This time around, I am suggesting that it could be a mixture of both - a Lukewarm Crisis. The result could be an economic meltdown with a blame game, rather than a solution.

Or the solution may come later than expected and be more or less by default. Some events are irrepresable. For example, a gallon of gas is likely to cost over $20 by 2020-and that's assuming that there's no great currency meltdown. At that price we will have a solution for peak oil. The solution will be that either we will have made serious progress towards alternitive energy or else most Americans will gradually be priced out of moterized transportation as the 4T progresses and America will use a lot less oil but the American standard of living at the dawn of the austre recovery to follow this will be undisputively third worldish for most living here.

Originally Posted by JDW

I see there being too much moderation this time around. That can be just as bad as too little, as was the case of the ACW. It's kind of like global warming. Nature needs to take its course.

I don't think that the deadlock is going to last for the whole 4T. I think that there will be a regeneracy. Nature will take its course as it does everyday in amongst other things, actuarial tables.

Originally Posted by 1990

Could one argue that "too much moderation" was why the Glorious Revolution 4T unfolded as it did? Certainly that was an emotionally-driven more than intellectual Crisis, but it was not the saecular temper tantrum seen in the Civil War. I could see this 4T unfolding similarly -- as a turning of stark emotion and ideology, but without the rapid escalation seen in the 1860s.

We are $10 trillion in debt! (And that's doesn't even count Social Security and other entitlements.) Russia and China are well on their way to overtaking us as superpowers! War is about to break out between Isael and Iraq! These issues will have to be dealt with sooner or later, and Hilter already demonstrated the disturbing possibilities coming from disproportionate Nomad leadership during a Crisis. I'm afraid I don't understand the optimism.

Originally Posted by JDW

Another way of looking at it - the catylist for a Cold Crisis tends be circumstances (e.g., the American Revolution had to do with England needing money), while that of a Hot Crisis tends to be ideology. This time around, I am suggesting that it could be a mixture of both - a Lukewarm Crisis. The result could be an economic meltdown with a blame game, rather than a solution.



You really think that's typical???? What exactly did he mean?

Lukewarm, perhaps.... Circumstances (financial melt down? war?) may be what finally push us over the edge.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

Would the Xer/Millie alliance focuse on Doctrine, while Boomers focus on hot button Moral issues?

If too many boomers insist on carrying the culture wars past the 3T/4T cusp, they won't really have a choice. We are facing so many economic problems like peak oil, medicare spending and our double-trade and budget deficets amongst others that have to be attended to or else the non elite Xers and every younger generation is facing a third world future.

I can imagine the youth alliance reviving the economic Doctrine (see New Deal & Great Society) of the past, while Boomers divide into regional factions.

It may turn out a bit like 1868 in that many leading boomers may become irrelivant to younger adults. They may get voted out in primaries and in general elections, both the reds and the blues, en masse accordingly. In 1868 the guilded and progressives saw the broken bodies of the civil war that 4T "hot" passion brought about. The idea that identity politics of an older generation and its symbolism matters more than the loss of a viable future for the younger generations is just not going to be saleable. One current example of this is how higher education has been made finiancially harder to obtain as the 3T went along. In many ways that was a "punishment" inflicted on the X'ers for boom era protests. It's not unusual for reactives to be punished for idealist deeds, but we are now punishing civics with this policy. Of course there are interested parties profiting from its continuation, such as the private market for student loans. I could name other parties such as both sides in the abortion fight that have a vested interest in keeping the unraveling era deadlock in place.
But given the organizing abilities and outer world focus of thday's young, I can't see this current set of policies remaining in force long term. The emotional-"hot"-reason for their being are long gone but the policies remain benefitting the speical interests that have learned to game the system as if we were still early in the 3T.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

Lukewarm, perhaps.... Circumstances (financial melt down? war?) may be what finally push us over the edge.

I think we're seeing it now. My take on it is that we have been in 3-1/2T since 9/11, but we are now fully in 4T.

To review the terms of this anomalous saeculum:

2T (Moral Awakening) - 1964-1981

2-1/2T (Doctrinal Resurgence/Moral Recession) - 1981-1991

3T-(Doctrinal/Moral Unraveling) -1991-2001

3-1/2T (Moral Crisis/Doctrinal Unraveling) - 2001-2008

4T (Doctrinal/Moral Crisis) 2008-

2T (Moral Awakening) - 1964-1981

Although it came too early, this was completely a moral awakening, first on the civil rights front, secondly on the anti-war front and finally on the pro-family front.

2-1/2T (Doctrinal Resurgence/Moral Recession) - 1981-1991

GIs, Reagan and Bush, were allowed to leave a doctrinal imprint on the new saeculum. The anti-war movement gave way to nihilism. Civil Rights idealism gave way to the rap culture. The pro-family movement became complacent. Meanwhile, the Cold War was in its final phase and a functioning UN, punctuated by the shock and awe of US military might, became a momentary reality.

3T-(Doctrinal/Moral Unraveling) -1991-2001

The GIs having had their final moment of glory, the unraveling became full-fledged.

3-1/2T (Moral Crisis/Doctrinal Unraveling) - 2001-2008

Following the terrorist attacks, Americans were resigned to the fact that something must be done to protect the country. However, artist leadership behind the scenes replaced urgency with strategery. The international moral conflict was handled without any regard to the economic consequences, allowing participation in the crisis to seem somewhat optional.

4T (Doctrinal/Moral Crisis) 2008-

The anomaly is best illustrated by white champion John McCain offering to work with Democrats to fix the economic crisis, while black champion Barack Obama emerges as a referendum on racial equality. Gray champions Bill and Hillary are forced sit on the sidelines.

Interesting how we are seeing the emergence of a coalition government reminiscent of Lincoln. We are clearly in a 4T of a "moral" nature (where the morality being pushed is inclusiveness). If these half turnings continue (due to an anomalous doctrinal component) then this full 4T should last eight to ten years.

What I see as a possibility is that we may see some sort of moral resolution before the Boomers have retired from influence. I don't know whether to call the next phase a 1/2 T or a 4-1/2 T, but I could imagine it being something similar to reconstruction - Moral High, Doctrinal Crisis. That is, there would be moral resolution, but the economic consequences would still be the issue.

For the record, I'm not suggesting that there was a doctrinal component related to Civil War Crisis, as there is in the current one. However, there is a very real possibility that we will suffer once again from post-Crisis Prophets.

I have thought about how a hybrid Moral/Doctrinal 4T might play out.

Concievably, Xers and Millenials might accept Prophet-driven issues that are of outer-world significance. Environmentalism comes to mind. That was a big Awakening issue, and might bite us on the ass during the 4T

The state of the economy was not an Awakening issue. It obviously is a 4T issue. I can imagine this issue being pushed by Xers and Millenials as a (recycled) doctrinal issue.

A large, big tent party like the Democrats aggregates the interests of the different groups making it up. The 4T platform might end up with a mix of Moral (Prophet driven) issues and Doctrinal (driven by Xers and Millenials) issues.

I just read the entire thread!

I think this discussion is just ... neat!

The Reagan anomaly aside, I've long wondered about the impact of the unusually long-lived and politically active GI generation on the current saeculum. They were still a considerable political force as late as the 2000 election. I remember interviewing a bunch of GIs in South Carolina just after 9/11 making an effort to educate young Millies about the prospect of Total War and what that would mean in their lives! That has to be *way* late!

And there was always something about the 80s that just seemed ... off!

Also the description of the 1980s and the Shadow Turning it contained makes absolute sense to me. The end of the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall was a very Hero-style political moment and seemed atypical of the textbook description of the Unraveling. (Tienanmen Square was more Unraveling-like, as were Gulf War I, the Balkans, Chechnya, Rwanda and other small scale regional conflicts of the 90s.)

Some of that was explained by Russia being on a different Turning of course, but it had such a profound impact on the US that it really couldn't be totally ignored.

Besides ... AIDS.

I also like the way this neatly fixes the question of when did this 4T start -- was it 9/11 or at some later point between Katrina and the 2008 election? Because this last decade has been a bit off the way the 1980s was. It seems obvious that you can't ignore 9/11 as a Crisis point, there was certainly a *moral* rallying and a lot of Crisis Era rhetoric and total war thinking ... and yet you have this weird and post-seasonal doctrinal response to 9/11 that muddies the issue.

Doctrinal Crisis thinking doesn't really appear until Hurricane Katrina at the very earliest, and is only being implemented, um, two weeks from now?

Thinking it through, once again, it seems to me that the doctrinal paradigm tends to view wealth as a proper reward for hard work and industry, and these being virtues in their own right, which can be combined with sacrifice and charity. The moral paradigm, on the other hand, tends to regard wealth as a vice for which one needs to make an atonement, or at the very least needs to be held accountable toward a higher purpose. Reality is somewhere in between, I'm sure.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

If this 4T should play out as a moral/doctrinal hybrid, how might that affect the next Awakening?

Good question. A moral awakening usually follows a doctrinal high, which is effectively a "moral asleepening." Likewise a doctrinal awakening follows a "doctrinal asleepening." The question then comes down to exactly how awake will you be when your sleeping schedule is totally out of sorts. My suspicion is that it will take several turnings to recover. Perhaps there will be a "jet lag" saeculum in which the archetypes become blurred.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

Or could we have, in effect, two different Crises running simultaneously? One set of issues being dominated by a Moral component, and another set being dominated by a Doctrinal component?

And would the components be championed by two different sets of leaders?

We may solve the moral components before we solve the technological and economic components.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

We may solve the moral components before we solve the technological and economic components.

Hmm... From the standpoint of the Civil Rights movement, the Obama Presidency (following Bush's two African American Secretaries of State) would be part of that moral resolution. Good point!

Originally Posted by JDW

Hmm... From the standpoint of the Civil Rights movement, the Obama Presidency (following Bush's two African American Secretaries of State) would be part of that moral resolution. Good point!

I was thinking of Abu Ghraib and Gitmo.

To defeat the terrorists' cause we must show ourselves unambiguously better by moral standards of the cultural community in which the terrorists operate than the enemy.

That this is a Moral Crisis is becoming really obvious. Everything from economics (Fair trade, not free trade!!!), the environment (The planet is being raped and pillaged by the greedy!!!), to the WOT (Islam is an evil religion that goes again Western values!!!), etc. are being filtered though an emotional, moralistic mindset. And I find myself basing my views on things (my socialism, my enviromentalism, my social liberalism, my defense of Western values again the attacks of the Postmodernists, etc) ultimately on moral axioms that cannot be justified logically

Originally Posted by Odin

That this is a Moral Crisis is becoming really obvious. Everything from economics (Fair trade, not free trade!!!), the environment (The planet is being raped and pillaged by the greedy!!!), to the WOT (Islam is an evil religion that goes again Western values!!!), etc. are being filtered though an emotional, moralistic mindset. And I find myself basing my views on things (my socialism, my enviromentalism, my social liberalism, my defense of Western values again the attacks of the Postmodernists, etc) ultimately on moral axioms that cannot be justified logically

Let's give this some thought. The Reagan Revolution was a doctrinal backlash against the Conscience Revolution, a moral awakening which had overplayed its hand. It may be that we are seeing some of the moral issues that you just mentioned overplaying their hand. Perhaps we should be looking for the doctrinal backlash from that.

I hesitate to make this comparison, but the Bolshevik Revolution rode the Prophet led moral paradigm that arose from Marxist doctrine, while most of the West was in the doctrinal paradigm. Germany, of course, was caught up in the backlash from that, and chose for themselves (or had forced upon them) a doctrinal Nomad "pseudo-prophet."

This is not to compare Boomers and Jonesers to Communists and Nazis, but I think that there is at least something that we might try to learn from those dynamics.

If our 4T has a Doctrinal component, perhaps that will steal some of the thunder of the next Awakening. The next 2T might turn out to be a rather mild Awakening of the Doctrinal type.

Having found it a bit of mental labor to sort through Moral vs Doctrinal, I have privately named them "Hot Awakenings" and "Cool Awakenings." It occurs to me that since we are in the middle of a saeculum I call a Mega-Unraveling, this may influence (or reflect) the temperature of the Awakening. The last Hot Awakening was during a Mega-High. Odd; you'd think the Mega-Saeculum and the Saeculum would reinforce each other, but no. The two Cool Awakenings were during the 18th Century Mega-Crisis and the start of the 20th Century Mega-Awakening. Interesting, isn't it?

For those who are truly interested in the theory and can remain objective in discussing it, I offer an observation that would otherwise get a knee-jerk reaction. That is, Rush Limbaugh has assumed the mantle of Gray Champion on the Right. He has defined the Crisis as unchecked liberalism and the destruction of the free market. He obviously recognizes himself as the defender of conservatism, and apparently so does most of the media. It's interesting that this is happening as Paul Harvey (GI) is being laid to rest and James Dobson (Silent) steps down from being chairman of the board with FOTF. As a Boomer, Limbaugh is following the GC script. Conservatives are looking to him for leadership, and if something were to happen to Rush, it would be a game changer.

I'm not sure that there is a GC that has emerged on the Left. Obama is not that person: 1) He is not a Boomer, and 2) he possesses no unique vision that would make him seem irreplaceable. In that respect, I'm still expecting someone more of the order of Hillary Clinton to fill that role.

Originally Posted by JDW

For those who are truly interested in the theory and can remain objective in discussing it, I offer an observation that would otherwise get a knee-jerk reaction. That is, Rush Limbaugh has assumed the mantle of Gray Champion on the Right. He has defined the Crisis as unchecked liberalism and the destruction of the free market. He obviously recognizes himself as the defender of conservatism, and apparently so does most of the media. It's interesting that this is happening as Paul Harvey (GI) is being laid to rest and James Dobson (Silent) steps down from being chairman of the board with FOTF. As a Boomer, Limbaugh is following the GC script.

Limbaugh certainly plays the role of an uncompromising idealist. But what is his vision? I really can't see one that isn't based on, to put it nicely, recapturing an idealized past.

Originally Posted by JDW

I'm not sure that there is a GC that has emerged on the Left. Obama is not that person: 1) He is not a Boomer, and 2) he possesses no unique vision that would make him seem irreplaceable.

Are we '61ers boomers? More than a few core X'ers on this site have hurled the label as if those of us who are uniquely young enough to remember the "free wheelin' "sixties, that many of our next elders such as the comedian Robin Williams can not remember :: from the seat of a bicycle are supposed to hang our heads in shame.
As to the point of him playing a GC role and are we near a regeneracy I must say that I'm not sure. It looks like to me we are very early in the 4T, and we are searching for answers and there is likely to be a prolonged period of trial and error before we find a cohesive center for the emerging saeculium.
Be advised that a few here are speculating that we may be reaching a point where a sustainable mass culture is no longer possible. However, I will add that I am personally not that pessimistic.

Originally Posted by JDW

In that respect, I'm still expecting someone more of the order of Hillary Clinton to fill that role.

Maybe, but the aquarian wave is running out of time. If Obama ends up playing a mostly pragmatic X'er role don't be surprised if a disco wave boomer emerges over time.

Originally Posted by JDW

I'm not sure that there is a GC that has emerged on the Left. Obama is not that person: 1) He is not a Boomer, and 2) he possesses no unique vision that would make him seem irreplaceable. In that respect, I'm still expecting someone more of the order of Hillary Clinton to fill that role.

I think Queen Elizabeth and George Washington (both Nomads) would be a little peeved at your statement.

As for Obama, he actually has to do something GCish before I can say anything but I don't think anyone in this country like Rush (or even Hillary for that matter) can lead it out of the sinkhole that it's in. This is a matter of legwork, not who can shout their own ideology in the loudest and most childish way.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

Limbaugh certainly plays the role of an uncompromising idealist. But what is his vision? I really can't see one that isn't based on, to put it nicely, recapturing an idealized past.

Searching for an idealized past-- the reactionary dream, and always a failure as public policy. Only the image of the past can be recreated.

Are we '61ers boomers? More than a few core X'ers on this site have hurled the label as if those of us who are uniquely young enough to remember the "free wheelin' "sixties, that many of our next elders such as the comedian Robin Williams can not remember :: from the seat of a bicycle are supposed to hang our heads in shame.

Were people born in 1882 really Missionaries? Sure, there was FDR, and he was about as definitive a Gray Champion as there ever was... but he had plenty of Reactive traits. He was too pragmatic to be a starry-eyed idealist or endorse such causes as Prohibition and eugenics. He was also too optimistic. Those weren't vices. But I can think of some Europeans born in 1882 who don't qualify as Idealists -- Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel, who transformed the General Staff of the German Army into a rubber stamp for Hitler and signed off on major war crimes, and Romanian Generalissimo Ion Antonescu, a vile and vicious leader who made Romania a collaborator in war crimes in the occupied Soviet Union -- including the Holocaust. A more benign figure like Igor Stravinsky seems to have been ahead of his supposed peers (except Bela Bartok) in rejecting the sundry forms of late romanticism in music.

If Obama turns into the Grey Champion, then 1961 might just end up a birth year for Idealists to fit the model. He seems to have some culture, great respect for precedent, and a command of history that a Boomer could relish. He's no rebel, and he doesn't seem particularly money-driven. (Were he especially money-driven, then he could have sold out to the real-estate financing fraud for the usual thirty pieces of silver ... of course, inflation seems to have transformed that into three million dollars).

As to the point of him playing a GC role and are we near a regeneracy I must say that I'm not sure. It looks like to me we are very early in the 4T, and we are searching for answers and there is likely to be a prolonged period of trial and error before we find a cohesive center for the emerging saeculum.

Of course we are still in the early stage of a 4T, and its full pattern is yet to be established. An Adaptive generation still has significant influence; Joe Biden supplanted Dick Cheney as Vice-President, and in view of the average age of the US Senate (63 at the start of the current Congress) and the tendency for democracies to have old leadership that the Silent, even if they have never had the top office and never will, we must see ourselves in the early stages of the Crisis Era.
Be advised that a few here are speculating that we may be reaching a point where a sustainable mass culture is no longer possible. However, I will add that I am personally not that pessimistic.

Maybe, but the aquarian wave is running out of time. If Obama ends up playing a mostly pragmatic X'er role don't be surprised if a disco wave boomer emerges over time.

I am not so sure that the Boom/Thirteenth divide is quite so clear as it seemed.

... Howe and Strauss suggested that the Silent often took on both Civic traits and Idealist traits, forging them into odd melanges of character. Can a Reactive do much the same? Can a Reactive be judgmental and rational? Cultured and optimistic?

Originally Posted by JDW

For those who are truly interested in the theory and can remain objective in discussing it, I offer an observation that would otherwise get a knee-jerk reaction. That is, Rush Limbaugh has assumed the mantle of Gray Champion on the Right. He has defined the Crisis as unchecked liberalism and the destruction of the free market. He obviously recognizes himself as the defender of conservatism, and apparently so does most of the media. It's interesting that this is happening as Paul Harvey (GI) is being laid to rest and James Dobson (Silent) steps down from being chairman of the board with FOTF. As a Boomer, Limbaugh is following the GC script. Conservatives are looking to him for leadership, and if something were to happen to Rush, it would be a game changer.

He's leading them off a cliff. Perfectly OK with me.

Originally Posted by JDW

I'm not sure that there is a GC that has emerged on the Left. Obama is not that person: 1) He is not a Boomer, and 2) he possesses no unique vision that would make him seem irreplaceable. In that respect, I'm still expecting someone more of the order of Hillary Clinton to fill that role.

Al Gore.

Regarding Rush: As a conservative, I find it a little unsettling that Limbaugh is in the GC role. He is a brilliant thinker, but he is unwise in so many ways. Actually, it makes the Left's job very easy, if all they have to do is to go after him.

Regarding Obama: I can't see him as GC, for several reasons. Unlike Lincoln and FDR, his candidacy was not in response to the crisis. He was another liberal Democrat in the steps of Gore and Kerry, who in this case happened to have star appeal, largely because of his race. Once the crisis was clear, it was either Obama or McCain. McCain lost to Bush fatique, just as Gore lost to Clinton fatigue, just as Bush Sr lost to Bush Sr fatigue, Carter lost to Carter fatigue, Ford lost to Nixon fatigue and Humphrey lost to Johnson fatigue. Nothing new here. Also, I don't see the overall crisis period ending in eight years, in which case Obama would not have the opportunity to emerge as a deliverer. A major concern that I have is that blacks could become the scapegoat for things that go wrong during his administration, bringing back memories of Reconstruction and setting race relations back for decades.

I really shouldn't be surprised that the media whores are content to offer a perfectly postseasonal product , but after having perused the cable news channels tonight, I am convinced that Mr. Limbaugh is ROTFLHFAO over this whole thing. We've lost 700k jobs this month, the British prime minister is in Washington discussing the Afghan situation lives are hanging in the balance with both of these issues and almost all the bobbleheads on TV are doing is giving the larded one free publicity for his radio show.

The only thing worse than seasonal 3T culture is postseasonal 3T culture.