Originally Posted by JohnMc82

Eric, I'm disappointed! Would you forsake victories for the illusory promise?? Tell me that the left hasn't made progress fighting back the encroachment of social conservatism. Tell me with a straight face that the "moral majority" is anything other than its own freakshow these days, that they're only tolerated because we tolerate all the other atypical social orientations.

Unfortunately, in the financial world, the left has not really put together a coherent and competitive model to neoliberalism. At the political level, Democrats are still champions of the neoliberal model. So even if left wing politicians are victorious, they will institute a system that progressives see as conservative.

Well, liberals such as Elizabeth Warren might dispute that. And she is on a Senate Democratic policy committee. She targets the model directly and specifically. And Hillary will have to take note of the strong populist progressive trend these days. Democrats always campaign against neo-liberal economics, though they don't necessarily follow through by ditching it while in office. Then again, Bill Clinton was a hybrid "new" Democrat who instituted deregulation policies, but who nevertheless campaigned against "trickle-down economics," and says at recent conventions that "our way works better." So there is always a potential break from the conservative program, and I wouldn't exactly call Democrats "champions" of the neo-liberal model, since they always at least campaign or speak out against it.

But everything existing in the now is going to look conservative to progressives because progressives are already looking ahead to the next thing. It's just that the new thing is still fuzzy and not quite ready for prime-time. We're not even sure what it is, yet, but I'm starting to think it looks like MMT and borrows heavily from the originally-libertarian ideas of universal basic income (back before Rand infected libertarianism and hijacked it for the right).

That's OK, progressives always stay ahead of whatever the powers-that-be are doing. Myself, I agree with what you say, and add my suggestion that the rich CEOs and gamblers be taxed somewhat (or maybe a lot) more, and be given tax breaks if they hire more people at higher wages. Let them put their money where their mouth is that they are really the "job creaters."

In the meantime, don't ignore the very real victories of the left on social issues. Another way to look at 4Ts is to view it as the inclusion of previously excluded groups: The revolution allowed colonists full citizenship; The Civil War gave slaves full citizenship; The New Deal saw retirees and pensioners as excluded from society, so sought to bring them in; and the current crisis has normalized most of the awakening's subcultures, sexual, and social identities. Although symbolic, Obama's election also goes to show that the elite can include minorities, too (you don't HAVE to be a WASP, it just helps!) Violations of social norms and gender/race roles that used to be career-killers are just... pretty typical individualism these days.

Yes, it's progress, although "neoliberal" economics remains in place, and must be REplaced.

Originally Posted by millennialX

"I don't care" sums it up perfectly. I know everyone is looking for this grand regeneracy and consensus, that they don't believe is here yet, but honestly...I think that's it. I think we will arrive to a giant mobilization behind the phrase, "Whatever...I don't give a fuck..."

LOL

That's so Libertarian. So Nomad. So MEGA UNRAVELING.

You can't say anything like that about this 4T until the 2020s come. Remember that, and also that we are NOT in a mega-unravelling. We just had a longer one than usual this time, and an Indian Autumn today. But Nomads are not shaping our saeculum, or the way it ends. They are just driving the bus right now.

Originally Posted by Kepi

Demonizing? By talking about what you all, in the macro sense, have done? By saying precisely what the legacy of the generation will be? I don't think I've said anything unfair. As a generation, in aggregate, this is precisely what one failed generation passes on and the reality is that no matter what I do or say our what you do or say, that's precisely how it's going to happen. I mean, I wish I didn't have to spend almost 15 years after 9-11 with post 9-11 stupidity still being relevant, but here we all are, and while yes I acknowledge "not every Boomer", the theory's only relevance us in the macro sense. Sorry for those of you in the minority, but this is how it happens.

Unfair because you lump all folks older than you together and call them all "Boomers."

We were in a majority, barely, but we lost in the Supreme Court by one vote. Remember THAT too. Yes, that's how it happens. We blue boomers lost out.

And, younger people voting against Boomers per se is a pipe dream of yours that's not going to happen. Millies are too smart to vote on that basis; they will vote for the best qualified candidates with policies that are in their interest. And if they fail to vote in midterms, then they get politicians and policies that work AGAINST their interests (i.e. what we have). They will get such politicians even if these politicians are themselves millennials. Bet on it.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

You can't say anything like that about this 4T until the 2020s come. Remember that, and also that we are NOT in a mega-unravelling. We just had a longer one than usual this time, and an Indian Autumn today. But Nomads are not shaping our saeculum, or the way it ends. They are just driving the bus right now.

True, but ain't it fun to speculate and predict the future? I mean that's what this whole boards really about, right?

Fun...we are not congress.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Remember that, and also that we are NOT in a mega-unravelling. We just had a longer one than usual this time, and an Indian Autumn today. But Nomads are not shaping our saeculum, or the way it ends. They are just driving the bus right now.

Oh and says you. LOL Everyone can be so set in their own view here.

While you say we are not, some say we are. I'm in the we are camp and believe next will be a Mega Crisis.

This era is similar to the Glorious Revolution, IMO and the next 4T will be Mega Crisis style.

Support my statement you say?

Sure...I'll find the entire conversation we had on this a few years ago were I think you said the same exact thing. LOL

MEGAs:

MEGA 3T CRISIS: Glorious

MEGA 4T CRISIS- Revolutionary War:
This revolution changed things and created the birth of a new Great Power).

MEGA 1T CRISIS- Civil War:
what's the economy that fuels this Great Power? Are we building an agricultural world or an industrial one? Everything before this was about the new frontier and expansion.

MEGA 2T CRSIS- WW2/ DEPRESSION

The Progressive era begat the New Deal era, while the War was definitely a moral one IMO. It was about what's right and wrong, with no blurred lines.

MEGA 3T- NOW

Culture Wars continue and won't friggin die. We live in a decadent and escapist system. Sexual freedom and Individuality reigns supremes. Our REAL problems...whatever...

MEGA 4T- MY PREDICTION
We must not kick the can any longer because our global world is at stake.

Originally Posted by millennialX

Hey Prince!

...

Boys are great. Learning experience, of course but expected for most parents with toddlers. Thankfully I'm surrounded by similar families to not feel alone or anything like that.

Well, that's really good to hear, MX.

I'm sure they're getting a decent diet of Motown and Philly Soul!

I was actually thinking about you during the
2014 Superbowl Halftime Show: Bruno Mars!

What a great performance! Jackie Wilson,
James Brown, Michael Jackson. Good stuff!
(I coulda done without RHCP, though.)


Anyway, take care,

Prince

PS: They shoulda teamed him with: Prince!

Originally Posted by millennialX

True, but ain't it fun to speculate and predict the future? I mean that's what this whole boards really about, right?

Yes, and that's why it's good to consult a good prophet too, with cosmic connections! (me)

I'm just saying it's too early to judge this 4T. It would be like writing histories of previous 4Ts in the mid 1770s, 1850s or 1930s.

Originally Posted by millennialX

Sure...I'll find the entire conversation we had on this a few years ago were I think you said the same exact thing. LOL

Of course! When you're right, you're right!

MEGAs:

MEGA 3T CRISIS: Glorious

MEGA 4T CRISIS- Revolutionary War:
This revolution changed things and created the birth of a new Great Power).

MEGA 1T CRISIS- Civil War:
what's the economy that fuels this Great Power? Are we building an agricultural world or an industrial one? Everything before this was about the new frontier and expansion.

MEGA 2T CRSIS- WW2/ DEPRESSION

The Progressive era begat the New Deal era, while the War was definitely a moral one IMO. It was about what's right and wrong, with no blurred lines.

MEGA 3T- NOW

Culture Wars continue and won't friggin die. We live in a decadent and escapist system. Sexual freedom and Individuality reigns supremes. Our REAL problems...whatever...

MEGA 4T- MY PREDICTION
We must not kick the can any longer because our global world is at stake.

That's the fact TODAY; not 80 years from now! We'll stop kicking the can before this 4T ends in 2028-29.

The only mega I think works is the cycle of civilization. So, the mega 4T was the last one, during a time of transition from one civilization to another. The last saeculum straddled that transition era.

The Revolution was not the creation of a new civilization; it was a rather-minor event, comparably speaking; a transfer of government authority from one entity to another, with little real change resulting. Not a Mega 4T at all, and not the start of any large cycle.

The civil war saeculum was the period of the new frontier, and was mainly agricultural until its late stages. It was a romantic era; the opposite of a 1T. It was our most inspired period in literature, for example. Transcendentalism is characteristic of 2Ts or 3Ts, and not at all of 1Ts.

There's absolutely nothing 2T about the progressive, new deal and WWII era. It was materialist and about power building most of the way. To call it 2T is to think that Awakenings are only about politics and economics. No, Awakenings are about spirituality and the arts, as well as cultural liberation. WWII was not moral; it responded to the worst tyranny in history, which grew out of the collapse of a civilization; a mega 4T. A necessity, and a matter-of-fact, industrial response to inescapable realities. No moral choice involved at all.

TODAY? Ours is a mega 1T. America has never been in a better position in the world, through most of this saeculum if not all. Our decadence is because we did not get moving on the Awakening enough. Sexual freedom and individuality reigns greater in regular 2Ts and 3Ts; nothing new there. Culture wars are not a big deal now since the 4T began; economic and foreign policy are uppermost by far. A blue victory in the culture wars has been easy on some issues these days; no war needed. The last culture war election was 2004. It amazes me that many people here say "culture wars won't friggin' die." Yes, they have. The blue side won. The division of the country remains, because this is a new civil war era. Our country is divided; that remains a fact.

But there has been lots of new prohibitions on sexuality in recent years; the obsession with molestation for example, sexual harassment, and the censorship of the media. Fear of crime has caused tightening of society; prosecutors and juries assume guilt, and parents watch their children more than is needed. Our greater freedom in the 2T had the potential to also become a Renaissance, but did not. That is the fault of American civilization; the potential is not there for it in the USA. We have always been crass commercialists, and we continue to be. So, nothing really new about our "decadence" at all. It is the nature of American society. And it is typical of 1Ts to be uninspired. So ours is a mega-uninspired, materialistic 1T, in spite of an Awakening that challenged this, and which is ignored by folks here and by most younger folks today. Too bad. MEGA uninspired 1T. Materialism, spirit death and boredom to the max.

Eric, you're wrong. I don't mean "you will be wrong in the future", I mean "you're wrong, right now, in real time". The economy is already in a deflationary trend. Even Alan Greenspan is saying stocks are extremely overvalued. The punch line is that... There's nowhere to go but down! The interest rate is zero. The only thing that can be categorically done is to either reduce interest rates to negative, driving deflation deeper or raise interest rates, which will drive deflation deeper.

Meanwhile, we got net neutrality passed, mostly because the president can fight republicans with his gloves off. If the president so chooses, he can revoke the NSA spying. If the Republicans choose, they can take a stand against effective overreach. Either way, I'm likely to win here.

So Eric, the writing is on the wall already. In real time.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Of course! When you're right, you're right!



That's the fact TODAY; not 80 years from now! We'll stop kicking the can before this 4T ends in 2028-29.

The only mega I think works is the cycle of civilization. So, the mega 4T was the last one, during a time of transition from one civilization to another. The last saeculum straddled that transition era.

The Revolution was not the creation of a new civilization; it was a rather-minor event, comparably speaking; a transfer of government authority from one entity to another, with little real change resulting. Not a Mega 4T at all, and not the start of any large cycle.

The civil war saeculum was the period of the new frontier, and was mainly agricultural until its late stages. It was a romantic era; the opposite of a 1T. It was our most inspired period in literature, for example. Transcendentalism is characteristic of 2Ts or 3Ts, and not at all of 1Ts.

There's absolutely nothing 2T about the progressive, new deal and WWII era. It was materialist and about power building most of the way. To call it 2T is to think that Awakenings are only about politics and economics. No, Awakenings are about spirituality and the arts, as well as cultural liberation. WWII was not moral; it responded to the worst tyranny in history, which grew out of the collapse of a civilization; a mega 4T. A necessity, and a matter-of-fact, industrial response to inescapable realities. No moral choice involved at all.

TODAY? Ours is a mega 1T. America has never been in a better position in the world, through most of this saeculum if not all. Our decadence is because we did not get moving on the Awakening enough. Sexual freedom and individuality reigns greater in regular 2Ts and 3Ts; nothing new there. Culture wars are not a big deal now since the 4T began; economic and foreign policy are uppermost by far. A blue victory in the culture wars has been easy on some issues these days; no war needed. The last culture war election was 2004. It amazes me that many people here say "culture wars won't friggin' die." Yes, they have. The blue side won. The division of the country remains, because this is a new civil war era. Our country is divided; that remains a fact.

But there has been lots of new prohibitions on sexuality in recent years; the obsession with molestation for example, sexual harassment, and the censorship of the media. Fear of crime has caused tightening of society; prosecutors and juries assume guilt, and parents watch their children more than is needed. Our greater freedom in the 2T had the potential to also become a Renaissance, but did not. That is the fault of American civilization; the potential is not there for it in the USA. We have always been crass commercialists, and we continue to be. So, nothing really new about our "decadence" at all. It is the nature of American society. And it is typical of 1Ts to be uninspired. So ours is a mega-uninspired, materialistic 1T, in spite of an Awakening that challenged this, and which is ignored by folks here and by most younger folks today. Too bad. MEGA uninspired 1T. Materialism, spirit death and boredom to the max.

Look at the clownish final stabs into the thin air of the so called "Republicans" who've become a pathetic "Anti-Obama Party." Almost no one takes them seriously. Their base is no longer the conservative faction of the monied elites, instead, the base is a revolutionary element who are comprised of subscribers to the Quigley/Skousen world view and Birchers. Even Goldwater was not this reliant on such fringe elements during his short time in the sun. We are witnessing the death of a party. I look forward to its replacement.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Of course! When you're right, you're right!



That's the fact TODAY; not 80 years from now! We'll stop kicking the can before this 4T ends in 2028-29.

The only mega I think works is the cycle of civilization. So, the mega 4T was the last one, during a time of transition from one civilization to another. The last saeculum straddled that transition era.

The Revolution was not the creation of a new civilization; it was a rather-minor event, comparably speaking; a transfer of government authority from one entity to another, with little real change resulting. Not a Mega 4T at all, and not the start of any large cycle.

The civil war saeculum was the period of the new frontier, and was mainly agricultural until its late stages. It was a romantic era; the opposite of a 1T. It was our most inspired period in literature, for example. Transcendentalism is characteristic of 2Ts or 3Ts, and not at all of 1Ts.

There's absolutely nothing 2T about the progressive, new deal and WWII era. It was materialist and about power building most of the way. To call it 2T is to think that Awakenings are only about politics and economics. No, Awakenings are about spirituality and the arts, as well as cultural liberation. WWII was not moral; it responded to the worst tyranny in history, which grew out of the collapse of a civilization; a mega 4T. A necessity, and a matter-of-fact, industrial response to inescapable realities. No moral choice involved at all.

TODAY? Ours is a mega 1T. America has never been in a better position in the world, through most of this saeculum if not all. Our decadence is because we did not get moving on the Awakening enough. Sexual freedom and individuality reigns greater in regular 2Ts and 3Ts; nothing new there. Culture wars are not a big deal now since the 4T began; economic and foreign policy are uppermost by far. A blue victory in the culture wars has been easy on some issues these days; no war needed. The last culture war election was 2004. It amazes me that many people here say "culture wars won't friggin' die." Yes, they have. The blue side won. The division of the country remains, because this is a new civil war era. Our country is divided; that remains a fact.

But there has been lots of new prohibitions on sexuality in recent years; the obsession with molestation for example, sexual harassment, and the censorship of the media. Fear of crime has caused tightening of society; prosecutors and juries assume guilt, and parents watch their children more than is needed. Our greater freedom in the 2T had the potential to also become a Renaissance, but did not. That is the fault of American civilization; the potential is not there for it in the USA. We have always been crass commercialists, and we continue to be. So, nothing really new about our "decadence" at all. It is the nature of American society. And it is typical of 1Ts to be uninspired. So ours is a mega-uninspired, materialistic 1T, in spite of an Awakening that challenged this, and which is ignored by folks here and by most younger folks today. Too bad. MEGA uninspired 1T. Materialism, spirit death and boredom to the max.

I'll give you that the blue has ALREADY won.

Pondering everything else.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Well, that's really good to hear, MX.

I'm sure they're getting a decent diet of Motown and Philly Soul!

I was actually thinking about you during the
2014 Superbowl Halftime Show: Bruno Mars!

What a great performance! Jackie Wilson,
James Brown, Michael Jackson. Good stuff!
(I coulda done without RHCP, though.)


Anyway, take care,

Prince

PS: They shoulda teamed him with: Prince!

That was my favorite half time by far so your thoughts were on point!

Most recently I started a facebook group for the discussion of all things music and actually wish I could invite you.

Haha, look at us having this conversation here. LOLOLOL

Originally Posted by Kepi

Eric, you're wrong. I don't mean "you will be wrong in the future", I mean "you're wrong, right now, in real time". The economy is already in a deflationary trend. Even Alan Greenspan is saying stocks are extremely overvalued. The punch line is that... There's nowhere to go but down! The interest rate is zero. The only thing that can be categorically done is to either reduce interest rates to negative, driving deflation deeper or raise interest rates, which will drive deflation deeper.

We'll see who's wrong! I predicted the 2008 crash, to the month, based on my cosmic sources. And yet you say my predictions are bad. Well, we'll see. Indications are that 2008 was the worst crash we'll see. I don't see any deflation going on now, and a stock market correction is due in a few years, but nothing significant now. Even so, stocks being over-valued is not the signal for a crash. Only a potential bear market.

Meanwhile, we got net neutrality passed, mostly because the president can fight republicans with his gloves off. If the president so chooses, he can revoke the NSA spying. If the Republicans choose, they can take a stand against effective overreach. Either way, I'm likely to win here.

So Eric, the writing is on the wall already. In real time.

As I said, net neutrality is no big deal. It was set in 2008 when Obama was elected and could appoint sane Democrats to replace insane Republicans on the FCC. Even now, it only means the status quo is preserved from the thugs. Nothing the Republicans do against "overreach" will be a win for you. Anything they do will be a loss. And Obama can't do much because of their blocks. You X/Yers are in deep do doo, my friend. All because you didn't vote as you should have.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

Look at the clownish final stabs into the thin air of the so called "Republicans" who've become a pathetic "Anti-Obama Party." Almost no one takes them seriously. Their base is no longer the conservative faction of the monied elites, instead, the base is a revolutionary element who are comprised of subscribers to the Quigley/Skousen world view and Birchers. Even Goldwater was not this reliant on such fringe elements during his short time in the sun. We are witnessing the death of a party. I look forward to its replacement.

Can't quarrel with you there; spot on.

Originally Posted by millennialX

This era is similar to the Glorious Revolution,

This has been said before. If I recall correctly, there was conflict, but not a full scale, shooting civil war.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

This has been said before. If I recall correctly, there was conflict, but not a full scale, shooting civil war.

While true, as far as it goes, there WAS an invasion by the Dutch. Who would play the part of William of Orange, this time around?

Originally Posted by Kepi

Russia takes Europe and finally gets the spoils of victory (they won the Napoleonic Wars and World War II and got the shaft both times).

Given that Russia is in a High currently, perhaps it's economic takeover of Europe will be what sparks the first hint of Civic overreach and early signs of a 2T? Could doing that be equivalent to a "Vietnam" like moment?

The Middle East reorganizes, possibly taking out the Zionist government in Israel. The US is too preoccupied to back Israel.

The Middle East is having problems like what was sparked in the beginning of the Renaissance/Reformation saeculum: too much money too quickly. Only instead of trade money that got the Renaissance rolling with a developing Middle Class, it was Oil money. This past saeculum for them has had to deal with the intellectual problems accompanying modernizing and new sections of society having greater wealth than before, which has brought out a culture clash that has led to a questioning of Islamic values which brings us to the Radical Islam movement, which like the Radical Reformation seeks to change the world by eliminating all who disagree with their religious interpretation (hello Muenster Commune). It's not our Reformation exactly, but similar stresses have prompted similar reactions and actions in the Muslim world. So I expect some kind of Counter-Reformation from them in the future, unless the rest of the world keeps butting in.

South Korea is in its 3T (though how close they are to 4T I don't know), so I don't see them as the economic center of Asia--but you already said we'd disagree there.

Meanwhile in Latin America, with the US occupied, criminal cartels take total run of the place. So once the US gets itself back together, getting Latin America back in order is the first order of business and that becomes the US's new primary sphere of influence.

And Brazil just sits back and lets all this happen? I'd venture that they'd step in and takeover first. The runner-up economies aren't called: BRIC for nothing.

Maybe a cyberattack? One where, rather than causing the US population to rally around the flag and commenceWWIII, caused the population to rejoice at the fall of the hated Wall Street/Big government/ what have you, with the histories written to emphasize the victory of the common people and not the foreign catalyst.



Or maybe the system falls apart on its own, in which case the better comparison might be to the Soviet Union in the '80s. They also had a war in Afghanistan at the time...

Originally Posted by TimWalker

This has been said before. If I recall correctly, there was conflict, but not a full scale, shooting civil war.

Depends on where you look and what you define as "shooting civil war".

If you're looking at the American Colonies--no there was conflict and there was active shooting. The First of the French and Indian Wars (the one by which we know the name is actually the last in a long series of them which begins during the Glorious Revolution period) was going on. In fact that's why the town of Salem was so jumpy. Natives had just massacred a town not that far from Salem to the North in present day New Hampshire IIRC. The governor of Massachusetts during the Salem Witch Trials was more interested in fighting the French and the Indians in what's now Maine/New Hampshire, than handling the domestic issues (like the Salem Witch Trials) at home in Massachusetts--leaving that to his much older Lt. Governor to use as a kind of "last stand" for old-fashioned Puritanism, helping to blow the event far out of proportion than it might otherwise have been.

If you're talking about Virginia in this time period--there was a domestic rebellion where the slaves and the indentured servants rose up together. After this indentured servants fell out of favor in the south.

If you're talking about Pennsylvania in this time period it was trying to establish itself and managed for a time to go without any form of government at all after its founding because they couldn't agree on anything. Hmm... sounds familiar.

If you're talking about England... well that's because James II was an unpopular monarch due to his religious faith and the Awakening before that had proved exactly what happens to unpopular monarchs in England. And even England had problems with Ireland at this point.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by Chas'88

Given that Russia is in a High currently, perhaps it's economic takeover of Europe will be what sparks the first hint of Civic overreach and early signs of a 2T? Could doing that be equivalent to a "Vietnam" like momentpromote?

Possibly a cold Vietnam? The issue here is that when you have populations that are in decline, or even plateauing, life is considered more valuable, as are things created by labor. Vietnam was a large scale conflict. I think a smaller scale, more compact conflict is more likely. Still apocalyptic feeling, but more medival than anything we've experienced in a long time.

The Middle East is having problems like what was sparked in the beginning of the Renaissance/Reformation saeculum: too much money too quickly. Only instead of trade money that got the Renaissance rolling with a developing Middle Class, it was Oil money. This past saeculum for them has had to deal with the intellectual problems accompanying modernizing and new sections of society having greater wealth than before, which has brought out a culture clash that has led to a questioning of Islamic values which brings us to the Radical Islam movement, which like the Radical Reformation seeks to change the world by eliminating all who disagree with their religious interpretation (hello Muenster Commune). It's not our Reformation exactly, but similar stresses have prompted similar reactions and actions in the Muslim world. So I expect some kind of Counter-Reformation from them in the future, unless the rest of the world keeps butting in.

The thing is, they're going to need to inflate their own balloon soon, which means propping up a large middle class. That sort of influence tends to be stabilizing. Whoever wins today is somewhat irrelevant, because either they will have to promote a stable philosophy that is inclusive towards the average person who has a high amount of personal autonomy, or they'll either be over thrown our wind up running a crap hole they have to live in. I think a counter reformation is highly likely, it might have a liberalizing effect, and you could expect to see the sort of culture that you see in places like Lebanon or Turkey arise, or it could be a sort of inclusive "hey, you're not the right kind of monotheist, but buddy I like your face, now let's go somewhere and talk yeah about some Hindus" more right-winger breed out of places like Pakistan.

South Korea is in its 3T (though how close they are to 4T I don't know), so I don't see them as the economic center of Asia--but you already said we'd disagree there.

I'm combining them with India, which is more the critical point. India can't make that hump to a developed nation. They just don't have the infrastructure yet. So they need someone small and agile, but economically on fire enough to spark them. Mean while, to me, Korea is likely because they've got an axe to grind and I think they really do want the top portion of their country back. Like I said, it could be Hong Kong, it could be Taiwan, it could be Singapore... But to me, South Korea has the axe to grind, and the 4T potential to take India to new heights, which would leave everyone else in the dust.

And Brazil just sits back and lets all this happen? I'd venture that they'd step in and takeover first. The runner-up economies aren't called: BRIC for nothing.

Absolutely. The big difference between leader nations and growing nations is that leader nations kick the obviously corrupt portions of their power structure out. Meanwhile, they're surrounded by nations like Columbia and Venezuela. By comparison Brazil is downright upright. They might help the US lead the charge, but initially it will appear to be at least an equal alliance, if not that the US is directing things. I don't think it will be till later that it becomes obvious that the US isn't the center of the picture.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

Maybe a cyberattack? One where, rather than causing the US population to rally around the flag and commenceWWIII, caused the population to rejoice at the fall of the hated Wall Street/Big government/ what have you, with the histories written to emphasize the victory of the common people and not the foreign catalyst.



Or maybe the system falls apart on its own, in which case the better comparison might be to the Soviet Union in the '80s. They also had a war in Afghanistan at the time...

I like that you're thinking big, but really, I can't think of a cyber attack that wouldn't involve basically an element of shitting your own drawers from the attacker's standpoint. The downside to hacking as a revolutionary tool is that it sort of requires an upper middle class background to have the free time and free access to stage such an attack that would be so effective without a planned an obvious immediate physical follow up. I mean there it's the potential to pull a cyber fight club, but the reality is that that's going to take more than a few people with a lot of know how. The typical anon style DDOS attacks just won't cut it. The sorry of people who have that know how? Their pay grade is usually such that they have a somewhat vested interest in the powers that be. Maybe not these specific powers, but In the system which generates them.

Originally Posted by Kepi

I like that you're thinking big, but really, I can't think of a cyber attack that wouldn't involve basically an element of shitting your own drawers from the attacker's standpoint. The downside to hacking as a revolutionary tool is that it sort of requires an upper middle class background to have the free time and free access to stage such an attack that would be so effective without a planned an obvious immediate physical follow up. I mean there it's the potential to pull a cyber fight club, but the reality is that that's going to take more than a few people with a lot of know how. The typical anon style DDOS attacks just won't cut it. The sorry of people who have that know how? Their pay grade is usually such that they have a somewhat vested interest in the powers that be. Maybe not these specific powers, but In the system which generates them.

No, man, I was comparing the thing to the Glorious Revolution. I was talking about a foreign cyber-attack.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

No, man, I was comparing the thing to the Glorious Revolution. I was talking about a foreign cyber-attack.

I mean that's more conceivable, just because it's less close to the hand that feeds them, but it'd be kinda like shooting you're dad's boss. He may be a dick, but he's signing the pay checks for now, in most cases. Plus you it's got a higher probability of getting you caught. And that's if you can find a good target. Lots of systems we use in the government aren't on the same network as the traditional internet. Not to say that they are completely inaccessible, but just that they are much harder to find as a result. But we'll see, I guess.

Originally Posted by Kepi

I mean that's more conceivable, just because it's less close to the hand that feeds them, but it'd be kinda like shooting you're dad's boss. He may be a dick, but he's signing the pay checks for now, in most cases. Plus you it's got a higher probability of getting you caught. And that's if you can find a good target. Lots of systems we use in the government aren't on the same network as the traditional internet. Not to say that they are completely inaccessible, but just that they are much harder to find as a result. But we'll see, I guess.

Yeah, man, I'm not fixated on it as an outcome, though the relevant literature does suggest that it's a major area of in interest for the big powers. Just throwing out ideas. Who knows, maybe we'll be invaded by Canada.