Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: The Alternating Paradigm Theory (APT) - Page 17







Post#401 at 02-01-2011 01:45 AM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
02-01-2011, 01:45 AM #401
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Wow, does poetry get brutalized when it's translated out of the original. I've read Chekhov's Вишнёвый Сад -- it's like most everything else he wrote, comfortably-paced and and purely colloquial.

Whoever did the translating you pasted above did the play a great disservice, Chas. Sometimes (hell, usually) the right way to translate is to forget about the actual words used and focus on expressing the point and the emotional and contextual nuance of them. What you seem to have there is the exact opposite -- word-for-word accuracy and damn the meaning.
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch

"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy

"[it]
is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky







Post#402 at 02-01-2011 02:05 AM by Chas'88 [at In between Pennsylvania & Pennsyltucky joined Nov 2008 #posts 9,432]
---
02-01-2011, 02:05 AM #402
Join Date
Nov 2008
Location
In between Pennsylvania & Pennsyltucky
Posts
9,432

Quote Originally Posted by Justin '77 View Post
Wow, does poetry get brutalized when it's translated out of the original. I've read Chekhov's Вишнёвый Сад -- it's like most everything else he wrote, comfortably-paced and and purely colloquial.

Whoever did the translating you pasted above did the play a great disservice, Chas. Sometimes (hell, usually) the right way to translate is to forget about the actual words used and focus on expressing the point and the emotional and contextual nuance of them. What you seem to have there is the exact opposite -- word-for-word accuracy and damn the meaning.
Yes, I know the problems with the Schmidt translation, but my director seems enamored of it, believing that since Schmidt lived in Russia he knew how to translate it "best".

It's what I have to work with. Though I should say that that isn't the best example of the translation because Yepikhodov is written differently from the other characters to emphasize his trouble connecting with the rest of the characters.

Here's a better example of the translation, from Liubov's character in Act II & III:

All of my sins... I've always wasted money, just thrown it away like a madwoman, and I married a man who never paid a bill in his life. He was an alcoholic; he drank himself to death--on champagne. And I was so unhappy I fell in love with another man, unfortunately, and had an affair with him and that was when--that was the first thing, my first punishment, right down there, in the river, my little boy drowned, and I left, I went to France, I left and never wanted to come back, I never wanted to see that river again, I just closed my eyes and ran, forgot about everything, and that man followed me. He just wouldn't let up. He was so mean to me, so cruel! I bought a villa in Menton because he got sick while we were there, and for the next three years I nursed him without a moment's peace, day or night. He tormented me from his sickbed. I could feel my soul dry up. And last year I couldn't afford the villa anymore, so I sold it and we moved to Paris, and once we were in Paris he took everything I had and left and ran off with another woman, and I tried to poison myself. It was so stupid and so shameful! Finally all I wanted was to come back home, to where I was born, to my daughter. Oh, dear God, dear God, forgive me! Forgive me my sins! Don't punish me again! This came today from Paris... He says he's sorry, he wants me back...
The telegram's from Paris. I get a new one every day. One yesterday, now again today. That madman is sick again and in trouble... He wants me to forgive him. Now see Petya, you're giving me that superior look, but darling, what am I supposed to do? He's sick, he's alone, he's unhappy, and who has he got to look after him? To give him his medicine and keep him out of trouble? And I love him--why do I have to pretend I don't, or not talk about it? I love him. That's just the way it is: I love him. I love him! He's a millstone around my neck, and he'll drown me with him, but he's my millstone! I love him and I can't live without him! Don't judge me Petya, don't think badly of me, just don't say anything, please just don't way anything...
~Chas'88
Last edited by Chas'88; 02-01-2011 at 02:20 AM.
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."







Post#403 at 02-01-2011 03:11 AM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
02-01-2011, 03:11 AM #403
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Quote Originally Posted by Chas'88 View Post
Yes, I know the problems with the Schmidt translation, but my director seems enamored of it, believing that since Schmidt lived in Russia he knew how to translate it "best".
Hmm... an interesting argument, to be sure. Indeed, it may be the 'best', in the sense of word-for-word accuracy. But especially when you're talking about Chekhov -- who is best-known for writing with such superb simplicity and realism in the ways of people -- anything so stilted has got to be right out.

Consider: in the vast majority of curriculae, people studying Russian have Chekhov as their first introduction to real literature. He uses simple, easy, comfortable words and phrases... which makes him absolutely the most accessible to students of the language (one might contrast to Pushkin, who, like Billy Shakes in his respective tongue, was terribly fond of a mix of elegant rhetoric on the one hand and a dose of just-making-shit-up-that-sounds-good on the other hand).
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch

"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy

"[it]
is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky







Post#404 at 02-01-2011 09:33 AM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
02-01-2011, 09:33 AM #404
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

I'm a true product of the educational system; I read all the time. All the right books too, but I have no chosen directive in life. For me, strictly speaking, it's live or shoot myself. That's why I always carry a loaded pistol. See? [Takes out a revolver] I should explain, by the way for the sake of expressivity, that fate has been, ah, rigorous to me. I am, strictly speaking, tempest-tossed. Always have been. Now, you may say to me, Oh, you're just imagining things, but then why when I wake up this morning--here's an example--and I look down, why is there this spider on my stomach? Detrimentally large too. [Makes a circle with his two hands] Big as that. Or take a beer, let's say. I go to drink it, what do I see floating around in it? Something highly unappreciative, like a cockroach. [Pause] Have you ever read Henry Thomas Buckle? [Pause] May I design to disturb you Dunyasha, with something I have to say?
LULZ!!! That's definitely Emo. Almost sounds like something an agnsty Millie teen would write!
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







Post#405 at 02-01-2011 07:07 PM by princeofcats67 [at joined Jan 2010 #posts 1,995]
---
02-01-2011, 07:07 PM #405
Join Date
Jan 2010
Posts
1,995

Kellogg-Briand Pact(1928)

What have we been taught, and what research do we do on our own?

Personally, I look for Patterns, but they often can lead to dead-end rabbit-holes. Still, while I'm researching, I come-upon very interesting Info/Data/Events that seem to have played a significant role in the Run-up AND Resolution of what we describe as a Crisis.

Some Documents and Concepts that I have found.

1)1764-Divine Providence-Emmanuel Swedenborg
Description:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_providence
Text-"Divine Providence"
http://www.newcenturyedition.org/DP.pdf

2)1845-Manifest Destiny-John O'Sullivan
Description:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_Destiny
Text-"Annexation"
http://web.grinnell.edu/courses/HIS/...OSullivan.html

Well, both of these Documents occured roughly 20 years before the Resolution of the ARC(1785ish)/CWC(1865). They both deal with Concepts of which both Crises were based i/r/t Self-Defense/Expansionism.

So, we move-up to the GPC which was Resolved in 1945 with the defeat of the Axis Powers by the Allies. I went back roughly 20 years and started looking.

I offer the Kellogg-Briand Pact(1928).
Description:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kellogg...%93Briand_Pact
Text:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/kbpact.htm


Anyone here ever studied how the Kellogg-Briand Pact came-about? The importance of the Dawes Plan i/r/t Germany's adherence to the Treaty of Versaillies following WWI? How these two pieces of Data conjoined the USA with the Fortunes of Europe/the World?
Dawes Plan(1924):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawes_Plan

Yes, I know the Kellogg-Briand Pact was/is seen as ineffective; That's not at all the point. Also, I understand that my first two examples involved Colonists becoming Americans(Independence), The North expanding into The South for the purpose of re-establishing the Union. Since the Monroe Doctrine was a statement concerning Non-Intervention(didn't link the USA with World Powers), I believe a next-step "outward" was Kellogg-Briand.

My context/interest is around the Idea/Concept(s) of:

Just as in my first two examples of Divine Providence and Manifest Destiny, what under-lying Concept was used i/r/t the Kellogg-Briand Pact? Then President Calvin Coolidge's desire for the USA: to remain "Isolationist", or maybe better put, to defend the USA's Right to Freedom of Action(as opposed to FreeWill)?

Something that involves both the Run-up AND Resolution to a Crisis. I find these interesting.

PoC67

PS: If the current Crisis started around 2005(as I suspect), is there something around that time that One could correlate with the above 3 pieces of Data?

When and How is a Soverign Nation required to participate in "The Global Community" as far as The Law is concerned?
Last edited by princeofcats67; 02-12-2011 at 07:38 PM.
I Am A Child of God/Nature/The Universe
I Think Globally and Act Individually(and possibly, voluntarily join-together with Others)
I Pray for World Peace & I Choose Less-Just Say: "NO!, Thank You."







Post#406 at 02-01-2011 08:46 PM by David Krein [at Gainesville, Florida joined Jul 2001 #posts 604]
---
02-01-2011, 08:46 PM #406
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Gainesville, Florida
Posts
604

"Anyone here ever studied how the Kellogg-Briand Pact came-about? The importance of the Dawes Plan i/r/t Germany's adherence to the Treaty of Versaillies following WWI? How these two pieces of Data conjoined the USA with the Fortunes of Europe/the World?" - PoC.

As a matter of fact, my master's thesis (Duke, 1965) dealt with Herriot's foreign policy in 1924-5 and was focused on the Geneva Protocol of 1924 and the Dawes Plan in 1925, and I always told my students that the financing of the Dawes Plan tied Germany to Wall Street (it was primarily JP Morgan's baby) and the collapse of Wall Street in 1929 led directly to Germany's financial problems in the early 1930s.

Pax,

Dave Krein '42
"The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on; nor all your Piety nor Wit shall lure it back to cancel half a line, Nor all your Tears wash out a word of it." - Omar Khayyam.







Post#407 at 02-05-2011 10:15 AM by JDW [at joined Jul 2001 #posts 753]
---
02-05-2011, 10:15 AM #407
Join Date
Jul 2001
Posts
753

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
Boomers have no second choice for Comfort. We are prophets = the opposite of that. Boomers will not guide the Millennials to comfort, and the Millennials don't want to go there. They are heroes, and will demand action. Xers are the ones who want comfort. However, your conclusion is correct anyway.
[Anyone just joining the discussion will have to read more than the quote above to understand the context.]

I have to concede a point, here, that Prophets do not directly bring resolution to a 4T. It is the Nomads and Heroes that do. As the Artists retire, they leave the Prophets unrestrained. The Prophets then stir things up even more, creating an urgency among the Nomads and Heroes to do the hard work that brings about the 1T.







Post#408 at 02-12-2011 04:32 PM by Rose1992 [at Syracuse joined Sep 2008 #posts 1,833]
---
02-12-2011, 04:32 PM #408
Join Date
Sep 2008
Location
Syracuse
Posts
1,833

I am an Atoner

I was completely off base when I was constantly bashing Atonement previously, and completely wrong about myself. I now think that I have a better understanding of what atonement is, and how it relates to myself.

To use an analogy:
Both Advancement and Atonement Civics are in pursuit of the future.
Advancement Civics look ahead and run faster.
Atonement Civics look behind and run faster.

An Advancement Civic wants change during a 4T because he or she imagines a future where everything is totally awesome and wants to reach it.

An Atonement Civic wants change during a 4T primarily out of fear of what the country will look like if past or present policies are continued.

Guess which one I am?

Hint: When JPT said that the changes to our social fabric that came as a result of our 2T needed to be undone my response was not "but those changes will create a better future" but "I DO NOT WANT TO GO BACK THERE AND YOU CAN'T MAKE ME DAMNIT!"

To elaborate, the reason why Obama seems off base with the rest of the country is because he assumes that advancement rhetoric will work on an atonement based society.

People compare Obama to Jimmy Carter and say that he is too much like him but I would argue that he actually is not like him enough. Imagine if, instead of all the talk of "a future of American innovation," Obama had given this speech? Pundits would not have considered it a politically viable move, but I think it would've struck a chord with everyone else, and we would've believed that he was telling it like it is, and speaking truth to power.
Last edited by Rose1992; 02-12-2011 at 04:40 PM.







Post#409 at 02-12-2011 05:38 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
02-12-2011, 05:38 PM #409
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

Quote Originally Posted by Rose1992 View Post
I was completely off base when I was constantly bashing Atonement previously, and completely wrong about myself. I now think that I have a better understanding of what atonement is, and how it relates to myself.

To use an analogy:
Both Advancement and Atonement Civics are in pursuit of the future.
Advancement Civics look ahead and run faster.
Atonement Civics look behind and run faster.

An Advancement Civic wants change during a 4T because he or she imagines a future where everything is totally awesome and wants to reach it.

An Atonement Civic wants change during a 4T primarily out of fear of what the country will look like if past or present policies are continued.

Guess which one I am?

Hint: When JPT said that the changes to our social fabric that came as a result of our 2T needed to be undone my response was not "but those changes will create a better future" but "I DO NOT WANT TO GO BACK THERE AND YOU CAN'T MAKE ME DAMNIT!"

To elaborate, the reason why Obama seems off base with the rest of the country is because he assumes that advancement rhetoric will work on an atonement based society.

People compare Obama to Jimmy Carter and say that he is too much like him but I would argue that he actually is not like him enough. Imagine if, instead of all the talk of "a future of American innovation," Obama had given this speech? Pundits would not have considered it a politically viable move, but I think it would've struck a chord with everyone else, and we would've believed that he was telling it like it is, and speaking truth to power.
Exactly. We need a 4T Carter. No wonder the Xers HATE Carter so much, he represents Atonement while Xers and Advancers.
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







Post#410 at 02-12-2011 06:57 PM by Xer H [at Chicago and Indiana joined Dec 2009 #posts 1,212]
---
02-12-2011, 06:57 PM #410
Join Date
Dec 2009
Location
Chicago and Indiana
Posts
1,212

Quote Originally Posted by Rose1992 View Post
I was completely off base when I was constantly bashing Atonement previously, and completely wrong about myself. I now think that I have a better understanding of what atonement is, and how it relates to myself.

To use an analogy:
Both Advancement and Atonement Civics are in pursuit of the future.
Advancement Civics look ahead and run faster.
Atonement Civics look behind and run faster.

An Advancement Civic wants change during a 4T because he or she imagines a future where everything is totally awesome and wants to reach it.

An Atonement Civic wants change during a 4T primarily out of fear of what the country will look like if past or present policies are continued.

Guess which one I am?

Hint: When JPT said that the changes to our social fabric that came as a result of our 2T needed to be undone my response was not "but those changes will create a better future" but "I DO NOT WANT TO GO BACK THERE AND YOU CAN'T MAKE ME DAMNIT!"

To elaborate, the reason why Obama seems off base with the rest of the country is because he assumes that advancement rhetoric will work on an atonement based society.

People compare Obama to Jimmy Carter and say that he is too much like him but I would argue that he actually is not like him enough. Imagine if, instead of all the talk of "a future of American innovation," Obama had given this speech? Pundits would not have considered it a politically viable move, but I think it would've struck a chord with everyone else, and we would've believed that he was telling it like it is, and speaking truth to power.
Rose, that is great insight. So who out there in the political realm right now could be today's Carter, to you?
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." —Albert Einstein

"The road to perdition has ever been accompanied by lip service to an ideal." —Albert Einstein

"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.” —Albert Einstein







Post#411 at 02-12-2011 07:48 PM by millennialX [at Gotham City, USA joined Oct 2010 #posts 6,597]
---
02-12-2011, 07:48 PM #411
Join Date
Oct 2010
Location
Gotham City, USA
Posts
6,597

Quote Originally Posted by Rose1992 View Post
I was completely off base when I was constantly bashing Atonement previously, and completely wrong about myself. I now think that I have a better understanding of what atonement is, and how it relates to myself.

To use an analogy:
Both Advancement and Atonement Civics are in pursuit of the future.
Advancement Civics look ahead and run faster.
Atonement Civics look behind and run faster.

An Advancement Civic wants change during a 4T because he or she imagines a future where everything is totally awesome and wants to reach it.

An Atonement Civic wants change during a 4T primarily out of fear of what the country will look like if past or present policies are continued.

Guess which one I am?

Hint: When JPT said that the changes to our social fabric that came as a result of our 2T needed to be undone my response was not "but those changes will create a better future" but "I DO NOT WANT TO GO BACK THERE AND YOU CAN'T MAKE ME DAMNIT!"

To elaborate, the reason why Obama seems off base with the rest of the country is because he assumes that advancement rhetoric will work on an atonement based society.

People compare Obama to Jimmy Carter and say that he is too much like him but I would argue that he actually is not like him enough. Imagine if, instead of all the talk of "a future of American innovation," Obama had given this speech? Pundits would not have considered it a politically viable move, but I think it would've struck a chord with everyone else, and we would've believed that he was telling it like it is, and speaking truth to power.
Couldn't agree with you more. I think thats why some didn't fully connect with Obama's state of the union, which was very great society or Kennedy.
Born in 1981 and INFJ Gen Yer







Post#412 at 02-13-2011 04:16 AM by Rose1992 [at Syracuse joined Sep 2008 #posts 1,833]
---
02-13-2011, 04:16 AM #412
Join Date
Sep 2008
Location
Syracuse
Posts
1,833

Quote Originally Posted by Xer H View Post
Rose, that is great insight. So who out there in the political realm right now could be today's Carter, to you?
I'm not romanticizing Carter by any means. I do not think that him or anyone like him is GC material. He was too idealistic. Also his speech, if anything, reflected a desire to hold off on the approaching 3T. A modern day Carter might now try to hold off on the 4T.

I do think however that if Obama really wanted popular support he'd start by giving a speech like Carter's. In his SOU, I noticed that he would give shades of it, but would then quickly move on to "and, to solve this problem, we need innovation because we obviously are going to have a better future, which is why I'm going to work with the people that made you all disillusioned in the first place; the Beltway half of both parties and large multinational corporations!"







Post#413 at 02-13-2011 04:50 AM by Xer H [at Chicago and Indiana joined Dec 2009 #posts 1,212]
---
02-13-2011, 04:50 AM #413
Join Date
Dec 2009
Location
Chicago and Indiana
Posts
1,212

Quote Originally Posted by Rose1992 View Post
I'm not romanticizing Carter by any means. I do not think that him or anyone like him is GC material. He was too idealistic. Also his speech, if anything, reflected a desire to hold off on the approaching 3T. A modern day Carter might now try to hold off on the 4T.

I do think however that if Obama really wanted popular support he'd start by giving a speech like Carter's. In his SOU, I noticed that he would give shades of it, but would then quickly move on to "and, to solve this problem, we need innovation because we obviously are going to have a better future, which is why I'm going to work with the people that made you all disillusioned in the first place; the Beltway half of both parties and large multinational corporations!"
Yes, he did do that. He continues to alienate those who elected him. There's been a tone-deafness there that's suprising for someone who's known for being so astute.

But then, that's the problem with all the parties, isn't it? The Republicans don't have anyone they can rally behind, nor do the Libertarians or Democrats. And those of us who don't have a party just shake our heads.
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them." —Albert Einstein

"The road to perdition has ever been accompanied by lip service to an ideal." —Albert Einstein

"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.” —Albert Einstein







Post#414 at 02-21-2011 04:57 AM by princeofcats67 [at joined Jan 2010 #posts 1,995]
---
02-21-2011, 04:57 AM #414
Join Date
Jan 2010
Posts
1,995

In line w/the Advancement/Atonement Concept:

We've talked about Guilt/Shame. Wouldn't that mandate that Some would be considered "Innocent"?
Innocence

I've been thinking about how certain Archetypes may be "looking backward" at a certain time in their Life/the Saeculum. Could be that there is a sub-conscious/conscious desire for a "Return to Innocence".

I know that personally I am longing for a return to the perception of "simpler times". I also know that I have a desire to protect my GF's 9-year old from some of the "Evils of the World"(but not too much). One way I do this is by respecting and teaching Tradition.

Looking Backward-
Memory-
Tradition-(handing over of something of Value for safe-keeping).

If their is in fact a perception of Guilt in Some, I believe they would be looking for a Cause for their Guilt(ie: Someone/Something to Blame). This is problematic for me personally b/c I don't quite have Morals per se(maybe some kind of Ethics). So how can I(or anyone else) be held Morally Responsible for anything?

Maybe Someone who does have Morals can weigh-in here.(I understand that sounds funny, but I'm being serious).

Anyway, The APT Concept makes me think/feel that this is another example of the alternating/osscilating "Regression toward the Mean" that we are noticing/discussing.

PoC67

PS: Just sayin' and Bumping(Bring-Up-My-Post) the Thread, I guess.
Last edited by princeofcats67; 02-21-2011 at 04:59 AM.







Post#415 at 02-26-2011 12:01 AM by JDW [at joined Jul 2001 #posts 753]
---
02-26-2011, 12:01 AM #415
Join Date
Jul 2001
Posts
753

The following article is from the New American. It affirms my belief that Cleveland (along with McKinley) was part of an 1837-1843 cohort group that could have been Atonement Heroes. (I know it gets a little political at the end, but it wouldn’t be fair to the magazine to edit the article.)

President Grover Cleveland: the Democrat Who Vetoed 300 Bills
Written by Bob Adelmann
Tuesday, 22 February 2011 16:15

Prior to serving two non-consecutive terms as President of the United States (#22 from 1885-1889 and #24 from 1893-1897), Grover Cleveland’s reputation for “obstinate honesty” actually served him well in politics.

In the early 1880s the political machine in Buffalo, New York, was a finely-honed mechanism of organized looting by both Republicans and Democrats. In 1881, however, the Democrats sought to gain significant advantage over their Republican partners in crime by supporting an honest politician for mayor, thus drawing disgusted Republican voters to their side of the craps table. When Cleveland was approached by the Democrats to be their candidate, he accepted the nomination subject to his approval of other candidates running on the same ticket. After the most notorious blackguards had been removed from the ticket, Cleveland ran, and won.

But that was just the beginning. The political system of payoffs was deeply entrenched and a change of laundry at the top of the flagpole was certainly not going to change the system of payoffs that had worked so well for so long. Cleveland’s character was tested early on when the Common Council (city council) voted to accept the highest bidder for the job of cleaning the streets, rather than the lowest. The high bidder had political connections, and this was his payoff. When Cleveland uncovered the scam, he vetoed the move, stating:

I regard it as the culmination of a most bare-faced impudent and shameless scheme to betray the interests of the people, and to worse than squander the public money.

As Cleveland’s reputation of honesty grew, so did the interest of the Democrat party to push him up the ladder to higher office. In 1882, Cleveland ran for governor of the State of New York, and won in a walk.

And he also continued to veto bills not to his liking. During his first two months in office, he vetoed eight bills, with one in particular gaining him the most notoriety. Jay Gould, popularly known and greatly disliked as a railroad robber baron, owned New York City’s elevated train system, and when he tried to raise fares, the public was outraged. Never at a loss for solutions to perceived problems like this, the legislature passed a bill to force Gould to reduce his fares to five cents. No friend of Gould or others who had succeeded in bilking the federal government for millions of dollars and millions of acres of land in building shoddy railroads, Cleveland nevertheless vetoed the bill. He took his position that the bill violated the Constitution and the law of contracts, and that intervention by the legislature would forcibly void the contract that Gould held with the city, and result in the weakening of all contract law, thus inhibiting private commerce. A challenge to Cleveland’s veto was mounted, but failed.

Cleveland’s run at the Presidency in 1884 was marred by an incident that nearly cost him the election, but also confirmed his integrity. When his opponents uncovered proof that Cleveland had fathered an illegitimate child, Cleveland told his staff to “tell the truth. ” He admitted to paying child support to one Maria Crofts Halpin, who claimed Cleveland was the father of her child whom she named Oscar Folsom Cleveland. Since Halpin had numerous adulterous relationships, including one with Cleveland’s law partner, Oscar Folsom, (for whom the child was also named), no one knew for sure who fathered the child. Historians have concluded that Cleveland accepted the blame because he was the only bachelor among Halpin’s “suitors. ”

The election in 1884 was close, with Cleveland winning by just one-quarter of one percent over his rival, James Blaine.

As President, Cleveland’s propensity for doing the right thing rather than the expedient thing constantly put him in the center of controversy and conflict. He actually reduced the number of federal employees, and those he hired were hired on the basis of ability and not connections. He investigated the land grants offered by the government as inducements to railroad looters, and had his Secretary of the Interior demand that rights of way fraudulently obtained be returned to the government. Some 81 million acres of land were returned to the government.

As a Democrat President, Cleveland often found himself fending off aggressive and unconstitutional bills from the Republican-controlled congress. Perhaps his best known veto became known as the Veto of the Texas Seed Bill. After a crop failure in Texas in 1886, Congress decided to “appropriate” $10,000 from the general treasury to purchase seed grain for those farmers disastrously affected. Cleveland vetoed the measure with these words:

I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit…The lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the government, the government should not support the people…Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character…

His understanding of the Constitution was sound, and yet he had to defend it and explain it and expound upon it time and time again as politicians, more interested in votes than integrity, tried to breach its limits. In his third annual message to Congress in December 1887, Cleveland returned to the basic principles of the founding of the republic:

When we consider that the theory of our institutions guarantees to every citizen the full enjoyment of all the fruits of his industry and enterprise, with only such deduction as may be his share toward the careful and economical maintenance of the Government which protects him, it is plain that the exaction of more than this is indefensible extortion and a culpable betrayal of American fairness and justice (emphasis added)…The public Treasury, which should only exist as a conduit conveying the people’s tribute to its legitimate objects of expenditure, becomes a hoarding place for money needlessly withdrawn from trade and the people’s use, thus crippling our national energies, suspending our country’s development, preventing investment in productive enterprise, threatening financial disturbance, and inviting schemes of public plunder. ” (emphasis added)

Cleveland was no perfect President, nor was his administration. During his first term he signed into law the momentous and disastrous breach in the wall of the Constitution, the Interstate Commerce Act, in 1887 — a breach that has since allowed the continuing and accelerating flow of government agencies known as the Fourth branch of Government to rise up as a flood of pestilence, all but choking off the remaining island of private enterprise once left to itself.

In his second term, he arrived just in time to witness the Panic of 1893, the cause of which had been building for years beforehand. In 1890 the Sherman Silver Act once again allowed free coinage of silver by the federal government, much to the delight of farmers (who were able to pay off debts with cheaper money), and miners. Since the currency at the time was redeemable in either silver or gold, a significant run on gold from the treasury resulted in drawing down its reserves to a dangerously low level.

Hamstrung by a Republican congress that wouldn’t allow Cleveland to offer the sale of bonds to purchase gold to replenish the Treasury, and by a growing populist sentiment of disgust against international bankers such as J.P. Morgan, Cleveland had no place to turn. Following a failed attempt to negotiate a gold purchase directly from the English Rothschilds, all Cleveland (and Morgan) could do was wait and watch as the reserves dwindled further. In a scene right out of a John Grisham novel, Ron Chernow, author of The House of Morgan, explains what happened next:

At the White House, obedient as a schoolboy, [Morgan] sat wordless while Cleveland Attorney General Olney, and Treasury Secretary Carlisle debated the issue. Edgy, [Morgan] crushed an unlighted cigar, leaving a pile of tobacco on his pants.

Cleveland still clung to the hope of a public bond issue, which would spare him congressional obloquy. Not until a clerk informed Carlisle that only $9 million in gold coin remained in government vaults on Wall Street did Pierpont pipe up, saying he knew of a $10 million draft about to be presented: “If that $10 million draft is presented, you can’t meet it,” Pierpont said. “It will be all over before 3 o’clock. ”

“What suggestions have you to make, Mr. Morgan?” asked the President.

The solution, a loan of gold (with strings attached) to the Treasury from Morgan, Rothschild and other international bankers, saved the day for Cleveland, but opened the door that led, ultimately, to the establishment of the Federal Reserve System in 1913.

Historians have counted more than 300 bills vetoed by Cleveland during his political career as a Democrat. In a “juxtaposition of history” the current Democrat resident of the White House is threatening his own veto of a bill which would modestly cut a few of the programs and agencies that have inexorably grown out of the Cleveland presidencies.







Post#416 at 02-26-2011 02:46 PM by Rose1992 [at Syracuse joined Sep 2008 #posts 1,833]
---
02-26-2011, 02:46 PM #416
Join Date
Sep 2008
Location
Syracuse
Posts
1,833

I wonder if the theory itself is a product of Atonement Era thinking. It is trying to predict the future not through modern trends but through an exploration of the past. It is a concession that the future will be exactly like the past in terms of generational alignment. Advancement generations do not create theories such as this about the future; they predict flying cars and moon colonies. To them, the past is irrelevant.

Also the theory could be a product of "N" thinking too. People have observed that there are more of certain Myers Briggs types on this board than in general society. I think a big difference is that there are far more "N's" here than "S's." IMO taking a theory about history and then using history to support it sounds like intuitive behavior.
Last edited by Rose1992; 02-26-2011 at 02:49 PM.







Post#417 at 02-26-2011 03:19 PM by millennialX [at Gotham City, USA joined Oct 2010 #posts 6,597]
---
02-26-2011, 03:19 PM #417
Join Date
Oct 2010
Location
Gotham City, USA
Posts
6,597

Quote Originally Posted by Rose1992 View Post
I wonder if the theory itself is a product of Atonement Era thinking. It is trying to predict the future not through modern trends but through an exploration of the past. It is a concession that the future will be exactly like the past in terms of generational alignment. Advancement generations do not create theories such as this about the future; they predict flying cars and moon colonies. To them, the past is irrelevant.

Also the theory could be a product of "N" thinking too. People have observed that there are more of certain Myers Briggs types on this board than in general society. I think a big difference is that there are far more "N's" here than "S's." IMO taking a theory about history and then using history to support it sounds like intuitive behavior.
We would all have to be N's in order to believe and see signs of the theory for ourselves. Just taking it for what it is would be hard because if I didn't personally believe it I would think that its all a bunch of generalities, B.S. and propaganda. Maybe it is...but my intuition says that their is something to it.

I'll also add that a lot of us like to create list and find patterns.
Born in 1981 and INFJ Gen Yer







Post#418 at 03-05-2011 11:33 PM by JDW [at joined Jul 2001 #posts 753]
---
03-05-2011, 11:33 PM #418
Join Date
Jul 2001
Posts
753

I’d like to revisit the idea of Directing/Directed versus Suppressed:
Advancement Prophet (Missionary): Suppressed = Atonement
Counter-Advancement Nomad (Lost): Suppressed = Advancement
Advancement Hero (GI): Suppressed = Atonement
Artist: No Suppressed
Atonement Prophet (Boom): Suppressed = Advancement
Counter-Atonement Nomad (X): Suppressed = Atonement
Atonement Hero (Millennial): Suppressed = Advancement

I'd be interested in whether personal experiences confirm this.







Post#419 at 03-07-2011 02:44 AM by JustPassingThrough [at joined Dec 2006 #posts 5,196]
---
03-07-2011, 02:44 AM #419
Join Date
Dec 2006
Posts
5,196

With all due respect, I think the ideas discussed in this thread are "what if?" self-amusement taken to the extreme. I may have posted something to that effect earlier in the thread long ago. I'm not trying to single this one out, because there have been many over time, stacking layers of new conjecture onto S&H's existing theories. My instinct runs in the opposite direction. I think breaking their ideas down to the their most basic form provides results that are more supportable and satisfying. It may be fun to sit around and make stuff up for your own enjoyment and try to shoehorn together historical facts that support your concept, but it can also be misleading.







Post#420 at 03-07-2011 05:45 AM by pizal81 [at China joined May 2010 #posts 2,392]
---
03-07-2011, 05:45 AM #420
Join Date
May 2010
Location
China
Posts
2,392

Quote Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough View Post
With all due respect, I think the ideas discussed in this thread are "what if?" self-amusement taken to the extreme. I may have posted something to that effect earlier in the thread long ago. I'm not trying to single this one out, because there have been many over time, stacking layers of new conjecture onto S&H's existing theories. My instinct runs in the opposite direction. I think breaking their ideas down to the their most basic form provides results that are more supportable and satisfying. It may be fun to sit around and make stuff up for your own enjoyment and try to shoehorn together historical facts that support your concept, but it can also be misleading.
It's funny should post that here because I think this is one of the best ideas floating around on the forum. I really skeptical about a lot of the add-ons to the theory to. I don't buy mega or micro-turnings. There is just no mechanism that would account for a four rhythm cycle over 300 years.

I do like the double rhythm ideal because it seems that one awakening would make the other necessary for a balanced society. Basically, the next prophets will be critiquing what is lacking from this past awakening and over correct for the mistakes of the consciousness revelution. I can see how there could be a double rhythm there.

There is a danger in discussing these things and then using them as if they were established facts. Sometimes I've seen people use these add-ons as evidence for their particular opinion so I see what you are getting at.







Post#421 at 03-07-2011 09:04 AM by JustPassingThrough [at joined Dec 2006 #posts 5,196]
---
03-07-2011, 09:04 AM #421
Join Date
Dec 2006
Posts
5,196

Quote Originally Posted by pizal81 View Post

There is a danger in discussing these things and then using them as if they were established facts. Sometimes I've seen people use these add-ons as evidence for their particular opinion so I see what you are getting at.
Indeed, that is a danger. There is some support for the idea that things have alternated, at least in terms of which political party has emerged with the superior position. But the idea that "advancement" and "atonement" should be adopted as accepted laws of cyclical history is a stretch, to put it mildly. Maybe you could say that each crisis corrects for the defects of the previous one. But even that is suspect.







Post#422 at 03-07-2011 10:33 PM by JDW [at joined Jul 2001 #posts 753]
---
03-07-2011, 10:33 PM #422
Join Date
Jul 2001
Posts
753

I can handle the criticism. It’s just that for me, something clicked when I realized that Jimmy Carter actually did behave as a Hero and was unable to “get” the change that was coming. Walter Mondale (in contrast) “got” Reagan, even if he did not agree with Reagan. It shows that the country, even in 1976, was still in the mood for a World War II era president.

I’ve observed Boomers (early 50’s cohorts) who did not feel a part of their generation, yet were very intellectually perceptive and experimental – Prophets, yes, but of the opposite temperament. These older friends of mine actually relate to Gen X leaders better than I do. I’ve also observed suppressed Xers, who seemed “idealistic” but lacked the passion and humor of similar minded Boomers.

I think it is a fair question to consider whether there is such a thing as a suppressed Silent.







Post#423 at 03-07-2011 10:48 PM by Chas'88 [at In between Pennsylvania & Pennsyltucky joined Nov 2008 #posts 9,432]
---
03-07-2011, 10:48 PM #423
Join Date
Nov 2008
Location
In between Pennsylvania & Pennsyltucky
Posts
9,432

A Silent who has a majority of memories of the Great Depression vs. a Silent who has a majority of memories of WWII?

Perhaps that might create a difference in "supression"? Just throwing out an idea here.

~Chas'88
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."







Post#424 at 03-07-2011 11:46 PM by JDW [at joined Jul 2001 #posts 753]
---
03-07-2011, 11:46 PM #424
Join Date
Jul 2001
Posts
753

I want to distinguish between "suppressed" in one's own generation versus "virtual" of another. My mother-in-law for example is a 1944 "virtual Silent." She appeared much older than her 16 years when she got married. Therefore, she remembered Kennedy as an "adult. I also knew a 1926 "virtual GI," who misrepresented his age in order to fight in both theatres of WWII. In contrast, I do not see Jimmy Carter as merely a cusper.







Post#425 at 03-08-2011 12:21 AM by Chas'88 [at In between Pennsylvania & Pennsyltucky joined Nov 2008 #posts 9,432]
---
03-08-2011, 12:21 AM #425
Join Date
Nov 2008
Location
In between Pennsylvania & Pennsyltucky
Posts
9,432

Thank you for making that clarification. I'll be dwelling on it for a while to come.

~Chas'88
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
-----------------------------------------