Originally Posted by herbal tee

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

It's often been my thought that Rush Limbaugh was the Republican's version of Bill Clinton - both being effective for their parties (during a 3T, at least) but personally disgusting. What makes all of this uncharted is that we seem have Boomer fatigue an entire turning too early. This makes the case, IMHOP, that Obama is more Nomad than Prophet - back to the old ideas of tax, spend and grow government, and away from any type of true reform.

Originally Posted by JDW

It's often been my thought that Rush Limbaugh was the Republican's version of Bill Clinton - both being effective for their parties (during a 3T, at least) but personally disgusting. What makes all of this uncharted is that we seem have Boomer fatigue an entire turning too early. This makes the case, IMHOP, that Obama is more Nomad than Prophet - back to the old ideas of tax, spend and grow government, and away from any type of true reform.

I doubt Obama will finish what he starts, but he is certainly moving in a new direction. That this new direction look a lot like an update of the old direction from the last 4T shouldn't be surprising. It's a response to the GOP 'reforms' that aimed to send us back to the pre-New Deal era, and succeeded all too well.

In 1964, the Chad Mitchell Trio launched the response to all this, with a song called "Barry's Boys":

We're the bright young men
Who want to go back to nineteen-ten
We're Barry's boys.
We're the kids with a cause
Yes a government like grandmama's
We're Barry's boys.
We're the new kind of youth at your Alma Mater
Back to silver standards and solid Goldwater
Back to when the poor were poor and rich were rich
And you felt so damn secure just knowing which were which.

We're the kids who agree
To be social without security
We're Barry's boys
'Cause his hat's in the ring
Where Westbrook Pegler once was king
Now he's too left wing
So if you don't recognize any old Red China
Or Canada, or Britain, or South Carolina
You too can join the crew
Tippecanoe and Nixon too
Back to Barry
Back to cash and carry
Back to Barry's boys.

(spoken)
Why did the chicken cross the road?
To get from the left to the right.

Roses are red, violets are blue
Walter Lippmann's a pinko, too.

A-na-ka-nee, ka-nah, ka-nay
Let's investigate the PTA.

Barry, Barry, make your bid
I love John Birch, but oh you kid.

Mother, mother, wear a grin
And don't complain, or we'll turn you in.

Hold the presses, stop the mail
The Pentagon's having a one-cent sale.

What's the latest news statistic?
Hootenannies are socialistic.

Shut the door and lock and latch it
Here comes Lizzie with a brand new hatchet

(sung)

We're the kids full of nerve
As long as it's conserv-
ative we're Barry's boys
And we can't comprehend
Why our parents aren't friend-
lier to Barry's boys
Why Dad once crusaded for Sacco/Vanzetti
Now all we're doing is doing the same for John Paul Getty
Our parents emulated Roosevelt and Farley
But we just want to grow up to be like Ev and Charley

No college days with Socrates and Plato
When you're Barry's boys
You just organize parades for the abolishment of NATO
And the rest
The entire West
So let's go back to the days when men were men
And start the First World War all over again
That's right you tell 'em son
Isolationism can be fun
Back to Barry
Back to cash and carry
Back to Barry

And remember, "An American first, and a politician second."
Spoken like a true American politician

Back with Barry
Not with Lyndon, Ike or Harry
Back with Barry's boys.

Copyright Mills Music Inc (ASCAP)
recorded by The Chad Mitchell Trio
on Reflecting, Mercury SR 60891 / MG 20891

Sound familiar? Reagan was one of those "Boys".

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

In 1964, the Chad Mitchell Trio launched the response to all this, with a song called "Barry's Boys":

We're the bright young men
Who want to go back to nineteen-ten
We're Barry's boys.
We're the kids with a cause
Yes a government like grandmama's
We're Barry's boys.
We're the new kind of youth at your Alma Mater
Back to silver standards and solid Goldwater
Back to when the poor were poor and rich were rich
And you felt so damn secure just knowing which were which.

We're the kids who agree
To be social without security
We're Barry's boys
'Cause his hat's in the ring
Where Westbrook Pegler once was king
Now he's too left wing
So if you don't recognize any old Red China
Or Canada, or Britain, or South Carolina
You too can join the crew
Tippecanoe and Nixon too
Back to Barry
Back to cash and carry
Back to Barry's boys.

......

Sound familiar? Reagan was one of those "Boys".

Hey, thanks for posting that. I never knew that Silent generation folk music produced lyrics with such satirical bite! I would have thought they were from a late 70's punk band like Gang of Four.


-----

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

I doubt Obama will finish what he starts, but he is certainly moving in a new direction. That this new direction look a lot like an update of the old direction from the last 4T shouldn't be surprising. It's a response to the GOP 'reforms' that aimed to send us back to the pre-New Deal era, and succeeded all too well.

Why do people like to assume that there are only two directions - backwards or forwards? If you take a wrong turn, do you keep going in that directions so you don't seem to lose your "progress"? Yes, I would like to go back to the days when people understood that printing money we didn't have wasn't a legitamate long-term solution. Let's get back to the fundamentals of what made this country great and then we can work toward real progress.

Building upon the thought of Obama being a true Nomad, I don't see anything about him that signifies the moral passion of a Boomer. His approach is counter-moral (counter-Boomer), while he seeks to squelch the doctrinal debate by taking on talk radio and re-establishing the old "New Deal" doctrine.

There would, of course, continue to be a moral debate. That is, until a Boomer takes his place, who would then seek to squelch that debate, making moral judgments from a Biblical perspective taboo. An Obama-Clinton combination would have a devastating effect on conservatism. The average liberal might rejoice in that at first, but the result would be unchecked power, which is never good for anyone but the elites.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

The shortening of turnings and the lengthening of lifespans may have a synergistic effect-an older generation in sufficient health and numbers...to push for completion of its unfinished business. During the cuspy tail-end-Awakening/early-Unraveling decade of transition.

I don't think that Regan/Bush created a new doctrinal imprint on the '80s, they promoted older agendas.

JDW himself has referred to Reagan as an "echo missionary."
I have no qualms with that label.

Will the Millenials, as older Civics, someday promote the completion of an unfinished agenda?

And in the meantime, will younger generations engage in Unraveling type behavior?

If the predictive power of the cycle holds, then at some point the saeculium will be adknowledged as mainstream historical thought. Even if this happens, I suspect that the archtypes will still more or less play the roles that they generally fill.

Multiple Saeculae

Originally Posted by JDW

I realize that my use of the terms morally-driven and doctrinally-driven can be a little confusing. “Moral” to most people implies the Christian Right, but I mean it in a more general sense. Perhaps if I substitute the terms emotionally-driven and intellectually-driven it will be less confusion, although it may (or may not) lose some of its meaning. I also only addressed the last four turnings, as opposed to the complete cycle of eight. This may have been confusing as well. Let’s try again:

1T
Moral High (Reconstruction/Gilded Age) – Continue Closed, Emotionally Driven Society

2T
Doctrinal Awakening (Missionary Age) – Change to Open, Intellectually Driven Society

3T
Moral Unraveling (WWI/Roaring ‘20s) – Continue Open, Emotionally Driven Society

4T
Doctrinal Crisis (Depression/WWII) – Change to Closed, Intellectually Driven Society

1T
Doctrinal High (Baby Boom) – Continue Closed, Intellectually Driven Society

2T
Moral Awakening (Viet Nam/”Stagflation”) - Change to Open, Emotionally Driven Society
Shadow Doctrinal Awakening (Reaganomics) - Change to Open, Intellectually Driven Society

Shadow 3T
Doctrinal “Swan Song” (End of Cold War/”New World Order”) - Continue Open, Intellectually Driven Society

3T
Doctrinal Unraveling (Clinton Era) - Continue Open, Emotionally Driven Society

4T
Moral Crisis (Post-9/11) – Change to Closed, Emotionally Driven Society

Now, let’s list the presidents that span my lifetime:

Kennedy – Doctrinal Left
Johnson - Doctrinal Left
Nixon – Doctrinal Center
Ford - Doctrinal Center
Carter – Doctrinal Left/Moral Center
Reagan – Doctrinal Right
“Poppy” Bush – Doctrinal Center
Clinton – Moral Left
“W” Bush – Moral Right

We can, of course, debate the list. The main thing I want to point out is that 1992 was a very interesting election in light of the available choices.

George H. W. Bush (Doctrinal Center) had showcased GI achievement by overseeing the fall of the Soviet Union and orchestrating a successful UN operation in Kuwait (never mind Panama being a go-it-alone). However, his apparent insensitivity in pushing NAFTA during a painful recession, along with his flippant “Read my hips,” undermined any appetite for a second Bush term. Bill Clinton (Moral Left), on the other hand, struck a chord with his “I feel your pain” speech. The choice in this case, then, was not Right versus Left, but Thinking versus Feeling.

For those who longed for a return to Reagan, the only choice was the enigmatic Ross Perot (Doctrinal Right/Moral Center). The Moral Right ended up throwing its lot in with Bush, and the conservative vote was effectively split. Through Clinton, the Left reestablished the Emotional Paradigm. Clinton, himself, then became the moral issue that brought the Right on board with it. The unraveling of the Doctrinal Paradigm effectively began.

Why was a shadow turning possible?

Quoting David K '47:

"...the softest boundries (and most arguable ones), by far, and between Awakenings and Unravelings; and thus, between Nomads and Heroes."

From print out derived from Paleo 4T site, Western Europe thread, Oct. 31 '97 post.

This is a rather cuspy period, slow to gel into a distinct turning.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

Why was a shadow turning possible?

Quoting David K '47:

"...the softest boundries (and most arguable ones), by far, and between Awakenings and Unravelings; and thus, between Nomads and Heroes."

From print out derived from Paleo 4T site, Western Europe thread, Oct. 31 '97 post.

This is a rather cuspy period, slow to gel into a distinct turning.

Sorry, Tim, I wish I had noticed your post sooner. I'm not sure whether you answered your own, rhetorical, question, or whether you were acually looking to me for an answer.

I can't speak for him but if someone can shed insight onto Awakening/Unraveling boundaries I'd appreciate it.

I can't speak for him but if someone can shed insight onto Awakening/Unraveling boundaries I'd appreciate it.

Originally Posted by aadams1980

I can't speak for him but if someone can shed insight onto Awakening/Unraveling boundaries I'd appreciate it.

I feel like I can spot a Boomer a mile away. Being a boomer consists of a powerful combination of moral certainty and moral arrogance. Us boomers know what is right. No mushy relativistic stuff. There is objective truth out there, and we know what it is.

There may be a few folks at the most recent boundary - Jonesers - who are a little harder to pin down, but basically the S/H boundary of Kennedy assassination is very accurate.

James50

Originally Posted by James50

I feel like I can spot a Boomer a mile away. Being a boomer consists of a powerful combination of moral certainty and moral arrogance. Us boomers know what is right. No mushy relativistic stuff. There is objective truth out there, and we know what it is.

There may be a few folks at the most recent boundary - Jonesers - who are a little harder to pin down, but basically the S/H boundary of Kennedy assassination is very accurate.

James50

Jonesers are easy to spot for me, they still think it's the 70s. Well at least the few Jonesers I know in person do.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by James50

I feel like I can spot a Boomer a mile away. Being a boomer consists of a powerful combination of moral certainty and moral arrogance. Us boomers know what is right. No mushy relativistic stuff. There is objective truth out there, and we know what it is.

There may be a few folks at the most recent boundary - Jonesers - who are a little harder to pin down, but basically the S/H boundary of Kennedy assassination is very accurate.

James50

It was awakening vs. unraveling that we were having trouble with. As far as the boundaries between the two.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

Why was a shadow turning possible?

Probably because we have so many living generations. It is entirely possible, for example, that the Crisis could be resolved by the end of the 20-tens. Could you imagine if Poppy Bush being alive and alert at the beginning of the next High! You could almost see him coming out of retirement in order to take part in it.

Originally Posted by aadams1980

It was awakening vs. unraveling that we were having trouble with. As far as the boundaries between the two.

Whoops - misunderstood. I was thinking boundary between boomers and Xers. You mean between Xers and Millineals. Like you, I don't feel confident of this. I can't easily describe it in generalities, but the events that mark it for me are the the Malaise speech (July 15, 1979) and Desert One Rescue mission (April 24, 1980). Carter's electoral fate was sealed after these, and Reaganism was the antidote.

James50

I can't say that I'm totally satisfied with what I've come up with, but here goes:

We understand the Moral Awakening to have started at the end of the Baby Boom (November 22, 1963 + 9 months), or 1964.
The shadow Doctrinal Awakening (as I have framed it) began in 1980 as Reagan began to get his message out.
I would say that the Moral Awakening ended in 1982, AIDS ending it for the Left, while the death of the Equal Rights Amendment was the last great hurrah for the Right. Normally, the end of a Moral Awakening would begin a Doctrinal Unraveling. However, you can’t have an Awakening and Unraveling of the same paradigm, so… I guess we have to call it a Moral Backsliding.
I would say that the Doctrinal Awakening ended in 1991, with the Gulf War showcasing the New World Order as the ultimate GI triumph, Poppy “read my lips” Bush’s political capital being completely spent. Now the unraveling of both paradigms was in full force.
It is my opinion that the Moral Crisis began in 2001, with the September 11 attacks, accompanied by a continued Doctrinal Backsliding. While W. Bush railed against the Evil Empire, Gore moralized against Global Warming, and war protests became cool again. Meanwhile, Reagan was eulogized as someone whom the Republicans had forgotten.
The Abyss of 2008 started the Doctrinal Crisis, meaning that it is now full blown.

So here we have it:
Moral Awakening – 1964-1982
Moral Backsliding – 1982-2001
Moral Crisis – 2001-?
Doctrinal Awakening – 1980-1991
Doctrinal Backsliding – 1991-2008
Doctrinal Crisis – 2008-?

Combining them:
2T (Moral Awakening or Moral and Doctrinal Awakening) – 1964-1982
2 ½ T (Doctrinal Awakening/Moral Backsliding) – 1982-1991
3T (Moral and Doctrinal Unraveling) – 1991-2001
3 ½ T (Moral Crisis/Doctrinal Backsliding) – 2001-2008
4T (Moral and Doctrinal Crisis) – 2008-?

Additional thoughts:

I don't really know what to make of "Morning in America" as a key event. Although, 1984 was described as the "Year of the Yuppie," there is evidence of this trend beginning as early as 1982.

I'm still a bit uncomfortable describing 1982-1991 as part of an Awakening, Doctrinal or otherwise. I also recognize a parallel between Poppy Bush's "New World Order" and Wilson's "League of Nations." So, I could be out on a limb. The question then becomes whether Bush was behaving like a Silent or like a GI getting his second wind. Any ideas?

Originally Posted by JDW

Additional thoughts:

I don't really know what to make of "Morning in America" as a key event. Although, 1984 was described as the "Year of the Yuppie," there is evidence of this trend beginning as early as 1982.

I'm still a bit uncomfortable describing 1982-1991 as part of an Awakening, Doctrinal or otherwise. I also recognize a parallel between Poppy Bush's "New World Order" and Wilson's "League of Nations." So, I could be out on a limb. The question then becomes whether Bush was behaving like a Silent or like a GI getting his second wind. Any ideas?

Isn't an awakening when one generation takes control from an elder generation. How was the eighties an awakening leading up to the Gulf War?

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Jonesers are easy to spot for me, they still think it's the 70s. Well at least the few Jonesers I know in person do.

~Chas'88

What do you mean by that?

Originally Posted by Adina

What do you mean by that?

I'll get back to you on that... I'm going to go out and take a picture of one.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Theodore Roosevelt

Isn't an awakening when one generation takes control from an elder generation. How was the eighties an awakening leading up to the Gulf War?

Point taken. Nothing after 1982 resembled an awakening of any sort, in my opinion.

The 1980s definitely had a special feel to it. With the advent of the Xers there was a definite feeling of moral decay, but the sense that the GIs knew what they were doing lasted into the middle of Poppy Bush's single term. That does not strike me altogether as an unraveling.

It’s time to take another stab of explaining APT: Instead of “Doctrinal” versus “Moral,” which many have interpreted to refer to religion alone, let’s try “Advancement” versus “Atonement.” Advancement has to do with making society more effective, while atonement has to do with the removal of society’s guilt.

The way that I see it, these are two competing objectives, and society does not possess the ability to focus on both at the same time. Therefore, the mastery of one requires that the other be completely dormant, which is the case during a High.

The Fourth Turning begins its first complete saeculum with the Tudor Renaissance, describing a “mood of cultural sterility.” Authors imply that there was something romantic about this period, by calling the Heroes “Arthurian.” (Henry VII purposely named his son Arthur, out of a desire to restore Camelot.) Furthermore, Humanist Thomas More’s 1516 work,Utopia, indicates an atonement mood. This indicates (to me) that there was an attempt to institutionalizing emotional perfection, while any real thought to workability took a backseat.

Against this backdrop, the Protestant Reformation was an intellectual awakening, which involved reexamination of the Scriptures and of the sovereignty of nations. Reformation engineers introduced the advancement paradigm; Reprisal reactives pushed back against it; Elizabethan organizers instituted it; and Parliamentary adaptives supported it. This introduced an age of advancement, at the expense of righteous examination.

The Puritan response to “Merrie England,” then, was an emotional awakening that took Calvinism at face value, but used it as the basis for spiritual examination of self and society. Puritan advocates introduced the atonement paradigm; Cavalier reactives pushed back against it; Glorious mentors instituted it; and Enlightenment adaptives supported it. Thus those born at the beginning of the eighteenth century have a sense that Puritan morality has always been.

Another intellectual awakening produced John Wesley and Benjamin Franklin, who in return produced Francis Asbury and Thomas Jefferson. This Revolutionary advancement cycle was followed by another atonement cycle, in the form of the Civil War Saeculum, clearly a romantic age. The Missionary awakening introduced another advancement cycle, which on the secular side began with Manifest Destiny and ended with the American High.

So, here’s where we are today: The Boomers (advocates) have reintroduced the atonement paradigm. There are no real new workable ideas for keeping America great. The Boomer/Silent focus has been on making America fair. Now that Xers are coming into power (via the Tea Party), there is some push back to restore American greatness, but it will not have enough staying power to survive the crisis. Millennials (mentors) will ultimately institutionalize what the Boomers have started. The High will be a period of moral consensus, but intellectual suppression. The next wave of prophets will be idea driven and will not be hindered in any way by political correctness. They will likely seem amoral by most everyone’s standards today.

In parallel, here is the 4-stroke Mega-Saeculum:

Late Medieval Saeculum
Mega-Crisis
Rise of the centralized dynastic absolutist state and early Capitalism. Dawn of the printed word and the end of the feudal military tradition.

Reformation Saeculum
Mega-High
Remnants of the High Medieval Mega-Awakening, a united Western Christendom and Scholasticism, fade away. Colonization of the New World begins.

Puritan Saeculum
Mega-Awakening
Birth of the intellectual and religious form of the Modern West. Puritainism, Descartes, Galileo, Spinoza, Locke, Newton. Moral revolt against Royal Absolutism (only succeeds in Britain).

Revolutionary Saeculum
Mega-Unraveling
The revolt against absolutism is intellectualized into the beginnings of Classical Liberalism. The new intellectual form implants into the Western mind. The American and French Revolutions.

Unification Saeculum
Mega-Crisis
Birth of the Industrial Nation State and Industrial Corporate Capitalism. American Civil War, Unification of Germany and Italy.

Great Power Saeculum
Mega-High
The height of relative Western Power. Scramble for Africa. Birth of Consumerism. Corporatism. The Totalitarian Nation-State

Millennial Saeculum
Mega-Awakening
Moral revolt again the Industrial Nation State and Corporate Capitalism. The Modern intellectual form is attacked, as is traditional religion. Environmentalism. Participatory technology information revolution.

Originally Posted by JDW

So, here’s where we are today: The Boomers (advocates) have reintroduced the atonement paradigm. There are no real new workable ideas for keeping America great. The Boomer/Silent focus has been on making America fair. Now that Xers are coming into power (via the Tea Party), there is some push back to restore American greatness, but it will not have enough staying power to survive the crisis. Millennials (mentors) will ultimately institutionalize what the Boomers have started. The High will be a period of moral consensus, but intellectual suppression. The next wave of prophets will be idea driven and will not be hindered in any way by political correctness. They will likely seem amoral by most everyone’s standards today.

It seems to me that awakenings deal with whatever problems were not solved in the previous in the crisis. We gained our independence in the Revolutionary War saeculum, but freedom and equality was not given to all. The awakening in the next saeculum dealt with slavery and the beginnings of women's rights. The civil war gave the slaves their freedom but economic and social inequities as well the fragmented ineffective government was still a problem. The missionaries dealt with that during next saeculum. It wasn't until the our last awakening that women and civil rights were addressed and solved.

I think the next prophets will attack the problems that will go unsolved in this crisis period or they may try to undo some of the things that the boomers advocated for. The boomers moved away from traditional family values with "free love", cohabitation, and divorce. They also moved away from organized religion as new age thinking was explored. We think of prophets as liberal minded people because of our boomers, but whose to say that next prophets will be? They could determine that part of problems with our society could be caused by the breakdown of the family and want to get back to more traditional values.

There is always a clash between the prophets and the older generations. Whatever we find to be acceptable will be challenged by the next prophets. Think about the life style and values you advocate now and expect the next prophets do a 90 degree turn on them. They may not even like technology and want to get back to basics.

It's really hard to say and we won't know until see what problems are still go unaddressed after this crisis.