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: 2012 Elections - Page 297







Post#7401 at 02-22-2012 12:27 PM by TnT [at joined Feb 2005 #posts 2,005]
---
02-22-2012, 12:27 PM #7401
Join Date
Feb 2005
Posts
2,005

Quote Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough View Post
Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum are considerably closer to the average American's views than Barack Obama is.
God help this country if what you say is true. We will indeed become a Christian theocracy.
" ... a man of notoriously vicious and intemperate disposition."







Post#7402 at 02-22-2012 01:33 PM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
02-22-2012, 01:33 PM #7402
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

Quote Originally Posted by JohnMc82 View Post
Ok, I kinda get what you're saying here. But there's a paradox at play: "Turnings drive generations, and generations drive turnings." So a turning is more than the sum of generations, it is a social mood that can be viewed by all sorts of political and economic and cultural developments.
I really don't know why the theory is so hard to understand. Maybe it's because it flies in the face of so much conventional wisdom about what causes, not only the events of history, but their timing.

The Americans of the 1770s were prosperous, their rights weren't seriously endangered -- calling the freest country in Europe by far a "tyranny" was nothing but overblown rhetoric -- and there was nothing to prevent them from continuing as privileged subjects of the greatest empire in the world, except their own ideals and desires and intransigence. The Americans of the 1860s were also prosperous, and although they had disagreements about the issue of slavery, there was nothing to stop them from finessing those disagreements until a solution presented itself through a mix of political evolution and technological progress. The 1930s were somewhat different, granted -- but that seems to be the exception.

We are not in Great Depression Mark II here. This is a new Crisis. It began with an economic downturn, but the economy is not the main issue. There are lots of things more on our plates, and I would say that that's always going to be the case -- there will always be problems. Do we view them with urgency? The theory's insight (or mistake, one way or the other) is to see the question answered by a generational dynamic.

It happens as Boomers enter elderhood. We're getting old, we know the end of life approaches, so it's time now for the Apocalypse, and we gird ourselves for battle and go out to confront the Forces Of Darkness -- which means other Boomers who think that phrase describes us.

It happens as Xers enter Midlife. Their power begins to eclipse that of Boomers and Silent, they tire of dysfunction and want to fix things, and so look for practical solutions, cutting through the ideological crap.

It happens (perhaps more than anything else) as Millennials come of age. A rising force of civic consciousness, raised on Boomer values but inclined to Xer pragmatism combined with their own group-think, they push society towards new forms of civic structure.

As long as these three generations are doing what's described above, we will be in Crisis. If the economy gets better, we will move to address environmental sustainability, or global terrorism, or how to rein in corporate excess worldwide, or some other damned thing.

Either that, or the theory is wrong.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"

My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/

The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903







Post#7403 at 02-22-2012 02:13 PM by Deb C [at joined Aug 2004 #posts 6,099]
---
02-22-2012, 02:13 PM #7403
Join Date
Aug 2004
Posts
6,099

Quote Originally Posted by TnT View Post
God help this country if what you say is true. We will indeed become a Christian theocracy.
Yep. The Crusades come to mind.
"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a







Post#7404 at 02-22-2012 02:26 PM by radind [at Alabama joined Sep 2009 #posts 1,595]
---
02-22-2012, 02:26 PM #7404
Join Date
Sep 2009
Location
Alabama
Posts
1,595

Quote Originally Posted by TnT View Post
God help this country if what you say is true. We will indeed become a Christian theocracy.
I think that the probability of a Christian theocracy is near zero.







Post#7405 at 02-22-2012 02:27 PM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
02-22-2012, 02:27 PM #7405
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

This election is going to be the end of the theocratic dream. Of that I feel increasingly confident.







Post#7406 at 02-22-2012 02:50 PM by Deb C [at joined Aug 2004 #posts 6,099]
---
02-22-2012, 02:50 PM #7406
Join Date
Aug 2004
Posts
6,099

Yeah, it's that frog in boiling water again. Have we as a nation become way too focused on sex? Can you imagine a sultry Marilyn Monroe singing a sexy Happy Birthday to Obama?

In other words:

"
In this election season, it has rekindled a questioned that has haunted national politics since the nation’s founding: How “moral” does a president have to be? Or, put a different way, could Kennedy be elected today?


Sex, Sin & the 2012 election

* * *
Kennedy once allegdly complained, “I get a migraine headache if I don’t get a strange piece of ass every day.” The illicit sexual conduct involving the rich, powerful and famous was once discretely hidden, public secrets often alleged but never confirmed. The press accepted limits to how much they could report on the goings-on of those with power or influence. Thus, it was inappropriate to discuss FDR’s polio and extra-marital relations or Ike’s wartime intimacy with Kay Summersby.
Most remarkable, JFK’s extra-marital adventures went unreported. The list of women who he ostensibly had sex with keeps growing. The recent revelation by Mimi (Beardsley) Alford adds to the earlier allegation about his out-of-wedlock child with Mary Evelyn Bibb Worthington. These add to stories of his trysts with actresses Marilyn Monroe and Angie Dickinson; Inga Arvad, a Danish journalist; the stripper, Blaze Starr; Judith Exner Campbell, mistress to mob boss Sam Giancana; and White House secretaries Priscilla Weir and Jill Cowan, who he referred to as “Fiddle” and “Faddle.”

The nation’s most celebrated public birthday party was for JFK at Madison Square Garden on May 19, 1962. It is long remembered for featuring the hyper-eroticized movie goddess, MM, singing the most salacious version of “Happy Birthday Mr. President” ever performed. The only one missing from the festivities was Mrs. JFK, Jackie. Such a public spectacle could not happen today.


I have some mixed emotions about this whole topic. On one side, I feel like it's none of our business about the sex lives of politicians. Then, on the other side, I question a politician being trust worthy when he cheats on his spouse who is dying of cancer. I see integrity as a value that goes hand in hand with being a responsible person. These two come to mind - Newt and John Edwards.

Anyway, here is the entire article:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/02/...2012-election/


"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a







Post#7407 at 02-22-2012 02:52 PM by Odin [at Moorhead, MN, USA joined Sep 2006 #posts 14,442]
---
02-22-2012, 02:52 PM #7407
Join Date
Sep 2006
Location
Moorhead, MN, USA
Posts
14,442

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
Have you read the book? It's not just the fact of corruption, it's the entire atmosphere. I can't force any of you to educate yourselves about the Gilded Age but you won't have to look far to see that it has far more in common with the 1920s than with the 1950s or the 1800s. There was no civic rebirth, at least in the North, as a result of the Civil War. There was civic deterioration, and everyone who cared about the subject then could see it.
It was the Gildeds who replaced the corruption of the Spoils System with a civil service based on merit.
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#7408 at 02-22-2012 03:16 PM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
02-22-2012, 03:16 PM #7408
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

Quote Originally Posted by Odin View Post
It was the Gildeds who replaced the corruption of the Spoils System with a civil service based on merit.
No. Gilded politics ran on patronage. Chester Arthur introduced the first, extremely modest civil service reform after an office seeker shot Garfield and brought him into office. Nothing serious was done until the Progressive Era. The other book you need to read is Hofstadter, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life.







Post#7409 at 02-22-2012 03:21 PM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
02-22-2012, 03:21 PM #7409
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

I think if we're going to look back on prior 4T/1T transitions and especially the one between Reconstruction and the Gilded Age, we also need to recognize that the terms "Left" and "Right in politics don't have constant meanings. Even setting aside culture wars and focusing solely on politics and economics, you still have a "left" and "right" that are appropriate for an agrarian economy, a "left" and "right" appropriate for an industrial capitalist economy, and I would say maybe a "left" and "right" appropriate to a post-capitalist futuristic economy.

Hmm. This seems to be a new thought. I think I'm going to move this to the Theories of History forum, since it only barely touches on this year's election. All I'll say for the moment is that it's anachronistic to judge either the Gilded Age or the present in terms of the values of the Great Power Saeculum. Anyone interested in pursuing this further catch up with me over there, please.
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"

My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/

The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903







Post#7410 at 02-22-2012 07:14 PM by JustPassingThrough [at joined Dec 2006 #posts 5,196]
---
02-22-2012, 07:14 PM #7410
Join Date
Dec 2006
Posts
5,196

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Rush View Post
I really don't know why the theory is so hard to understand. Maybe it's because it flies in the face of so much conventional wisdom about what causes, not only the events of history, but their timing.

The Americans of the 1770s were prosperous, their rights weren't seriously endangered -- calling the freest country in Europe by far a "tyranny" was nothing but overblown rhetoric -- and there was nothing to prevent them from continuing as privileged subjects of the greatest empire in the world, except their own ideals and desires and intransigence. The Americans of the 1860s were also prosperous, and although they had disagreements about the issue of slavery, there was nothing to stop them from finessing those disagreements until a solution presented itself through a mix of political evolution and technological progress. The 1930s were somewhat different, granted -- but that seems to be the exception.

We are not in Great Depression Mark II here. This is a new Crisis. It began with an economic downturn, but the economy is not the main issue. There are lots of things more on our plates, and I would say that that's always going to be the case -- there will always be problems. Do we view them with urgency? The theory's insight (or mistake, one way or the other) is to see the question answered by a generational dynamic.

It happens as Boomers enter elderhood. We're getting old, we know the end of life approaches, so it's time now for the Apocalypse, and we gird ourselves for battle and go out to confront the Forces Of Darkness -- which means other Boomers who think that phrase describes us.

It happens as Xers enter Midlife. Their power begins to eclipse that of Boomers and Silent, they tire of dysfunction and want to fix things, and so look for practical solutions, cutting through the ideological crap.

It happens (perhaps more than anything else) as Millennials come of age. A rising force of civic consciousness, raised on Boomer values but inclined to Xer pragmatism combined with their own group-think, they push society towards new forms of civic structure.

As long as these three generations are doing what's described above, we will be in Crisis. If the economy gets better, we will move to address environmental sustainability, or global terrorism, or how to rein in corporate excess worldwide, or some other damned thing.

Either that, or the theory is wrong.
I'll post this again since you seem to have missed it. S&H put the boundaries for midlife at 42-62. The oldest Xers were 42 in 2003, and will be 62 in 2023. Turnings and generations last about 20 years. All of these numbers are approximations, allowing for wiggle room on either side. S&H never claimed you could time it down to the hour.

Your proclamations about what will or will not invalidate the theory are based on false premises with regard to the timing of dates and generations. To me, and many others, it is abundantly obvious that the primary catalyst for the 4T was 9/11/2001. The 2000 election fiasco and the bursting of the dot com bubble were also minor catalysts, in my opinion. You can agree or disagree with that view, but you cannot claim it's invalid based on what S&H wrote. In fact, it is the obvious answer to the question of when the 4T started. If you presented this theory to someone who had never heard it, and then asked them when they thought the 4T started, the first thing out of their mouth would be 9/11.

At the time it happened, S&H clearly thought it was the start of the 4T.

News & Media-Neil Howe on Gen X and 9-11 in 2001


Howe has equivocated since, but if you want to argue it wasn't the catalyst because the country didn't sufficiently rally around Bush, you have to apply the same standard to Obama, which means we still aren't in a 4T. The alternative is to recognize that internal division is a primary feature of this 4T. And then the argument against 9/11 goes out the window. If there was a flaw in S&H's ideas, it was in their characterizations of generations and turnings, not the fundamental mechanism. They undoubtedly saw a lot of things through rose-colored glasses, particularly the "national unity" of the previous 4T, and the personality of Civics as a generation. And we all seem to agree that they showed a huge amount of favoritism to Boomers.

The power of Boomers has already peaked and is receding. Xers are on the rise. If you look at the composition of Congress, and especially new incoming members, the power of Boomers peaked around 2006-2008. In 2010 there was a clear shift in the direction of Xers. The conclusion that we are about half way through the 4T is obvious, and requires a lot of explanation to disprove.
Last edited by JustPassingThrough; 02-22-2012 at 07:28 PM.







Post#7411 at 02-22-2012 08:17 PM by JustPassingThrough [at joined Dec 2006 #posts 5,196]
---
02-22-2012, 08:17 PM #7411
Join Date
Dec 2006
Posts
5,196

Quote Originally Posted by TnT View Post
God help this country if what you say is true. We will indeed become a Christian theocracy.
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Last edited by JustPassingThrough; 02-22-2012 at 08:19 PM.







Post#7412 at 02-22-2012 10:31 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
02-22-2012, 10:31 PM #7412
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
This election is going to be the end of the theocratic dream. Of that I feel increasingly confident.
It may go black and white, with some states going ga-ga for theocracy and others voting hell no. That might be a back story, or it could erupt into real tension and strife. Having Santorum as a candidate makes that a lot more likely than having Mitt the Mild setting the tone.

We've needed to have a Christian conservative make the pitch at least once. This could be the year. I'm betting that the results will be similar to McGovern's in '72, but in reverse. That might be a best case, actually. It' still scary, though.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#7413 at 02-22-2012 10:50 PM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
02-22-2012, 10:50 PM #7413
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
It may go black and white, with some states going ga-ga for theocracy and others voting hell no. That might be a back story, or it could erupt into real tension and strife. Having Santorum as a candidate makes that a lot more likely than having Mitt the Mild setting the tone.

We've needed to have a Christian conservative make the pitch at least once. This could be the year. I'm betting that the results will be similar to McGovern's in '72, but in reverse. That might be a best case, actually. It' still scary, though.
Santorum would win Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Texas, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and possibly a midwestern state or two. I suppose he might win Arizona. That puts him well ahead of McGovern/Goldwater territory. However, he'd be wiped out everywhere else. It would finally be a wake-up call for Republicans like the ones I know who have failed to take their right wing seriously. In that sense your McGovern analogy was apt. . .he's the last real Democratic candidate we've ever had, except perhaps Mondale. Obama did an imitation but that was it. .







Post#7414 at 02-22-2012 11:29 PM by Deb C [at joined Aug 2004 #posts 6,099]
---
02-22-2012, 11:29 PM #7414
Join Date
Aug 2004
Posts
6,099

"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a







Post#7415 at 02-22-2012 11:48 PM by Deb C [at joined Aug 2004 #posts 6,099]
---
02-22-2012, 11:48 PM #7415
Join Date
Aug 2004
Posts
6,099

Quote Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough View Post

"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a







Post#7416 at 02-23-2012 12:45 AM by JustPassingThrough [at joined Dec 2006 #posts 5,196]
---
02-23-2012, 12:45 AM #7416
Join Date
Dec 2006
Posts
5,196

Quote Originally Posted by Deb C View Post
I would be more sympathetic if the left was delusional and paranoid enough to actually believe that stuff. But I'm aware that it's just typical, intentional slander and propaganda.







Post#7417 at 02-23-2012 12:49 AM by JustPassingThrough [at joined Dec 2006 #posts 5,196]
---
02-23-2012, 12:49 AM #7417
Join Date
Dec 2006
Posts
5,196

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
It may go black and white, with some states going ga-ga for theocracy and others voting hell no. That might be a back story, or it could erupt into real tension and strife. Having Santorum as a candidate makes that a lot more likely than having Mitt the Mild setting the tone.

We've needed to have a Christian conservative make the pitch at least once. This could be the year. I'm betting that the results will be similar to McGovern's in '72, but in reverse. That might be a best case, actually. It' still scary, though.
Seriously, theocracy is right around the corner. And that's exactly what Rick Santorum and everybody who's voted for him wants. They're planning it right now. They must be stopped! Send me your money! (this message paid for by Obama/Biden 2012)







Post#7418 at 02-23-2012 10:42 AM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
02-23-2012, 10:42 AM #7418
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough View Post
Seriously, theocracy is right around the corner. And that's exactly what Rick Santorum and everybody who's voted for him wants. They're planning it right now. They must be stopped! Send me your money! (this message paid for by Obama/Biden 2012)
Religious zealots are always a problem. Pick any country where they exert substantial influence, and tell me why that influence is a positive. Luckily, Europe seems to be past that stage, but Israel certainly isn't. Then there are the various flavors of Islamism: Lebanon to Bali, Sudan to Luzon. Credit where it's due, the Buddhists tend to internalize it, though Tibet is still dicey.

American Chrisitans seem content to legislate at the moment, but what they want is opposed by the vast majority. Will they remain non-confrontational if they lose this election by record margins?
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#7419 at 02-23-2012 12:39 PM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
02-23-2012, 12:39 PM #7419
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
Religious zealots are always a problem. Pick any country where they exert substantial influence, and tell me why that influence is a positive. Luckily, Europe seems to be past that stage, but Israel certainly isn't. Then there are the various flavors of Islamism: Lebanon to Bali, Sudan to Luzon. Credit where it's due, the Buddhists tend to internalize it, though Tibet is still dicey.

American Chrisitans seem content to legislate at the moment, but what they want is opposed by the vast majority. Will they remain non-confrontational if they lose this election by record margins?
I think they will become even more aggressive--as they already are--in the areas in which they control local and state politics.







Post#7420 at 02-23-2012 01:21 PM by radind [at Alabama joined Sep 2009 #posts 1,595]
---
02-23-2012, 01:21 PM #7420
Join Date
Sep 2009
Location
Alabama
Posts
1,595

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
Religious zealots are always a problem. Pick any country where they exert substantial influence, and tell me why that influence is a positive. Luckily, Europe seems to be past that stage, but Israel certainly isn't. Then there are the various flavors of Islamism: Lebanon to Bali, Sudan to Luzon. Credit where it's due, the Buddhists tend to internalize it, though Tibet is still dicey.

American Chrisitans seem content to legislate at the moment, but what they want is opposed by the vast majority. Will they remain non-confrontational if they lose this election by record margins?
Zealots are a problem-religious or not.







Post#7421 at 02-23-2012 01:42 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
02-23-2012, 01:42 PM #7421
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
Santorum would win Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Texas, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and possibly a midwestern state or two. I suppose he might win Arizona. That puts him well ahead of McGovern/Goldwater territory. However, he'd be wiped out everywhere else. It would finally be a wake-up call for Republicans like the ones I know who have failed to take their right wing seriously. In that sense your McGovern analogy was apt. . .he's the last real Democratic candidate we've ever had, except perhaps Mondale. Obama did an imitation but that was it. .
It's interesting that you seeing Rick Santorum 'winning' a Midwestern state or two. Does that imply that the Dakotas, Nebraska, and Kansas go into play? Those states have large Lutheran populations, and Lutherans are a conservative lot -- about as conservative as Mormons, so far as I know. But Rick Santorum, associated with the Opus Dei wing of Catholic zealots, would remind Lutherans of why they are not Catholics. I can imagine a Lutheran voting for a conservative Catholic, but not for someone clearly of the militant Opus Dei wing.

Note well that Democratic nominees for President have won only one electoral vote from those four very conservative, consistently Republican-leaning, states since 1964; Republicans have often won those states by 40% margins. It is entirely possible that the Republican Party with Rick Santorum as its nominee could offer the wrong sort of conservatism for some conservative states -- as if the Democrats had nominated a Marxist for President.

I may be getting ahead of myself here, but the 2012 election could force American conservatism to redefine itself in ways that less insult the intellect and show far less "in-your-face" stridency. Maybe President Obama has successfully forced the Hard Right to underestimate him -- which is about what Ronald Reagan did in 1984.

...I found an open computer in a hotel lobby.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#7422 at 02-23-2012 01:46 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
02-23-2012, 01:46 PM #7422
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough View Post
I would be more sympathetic if the left was delusional and paranoid enough to actually believe that stuff. But I'm aware that it's just typical, intentional slander and propaganda.
Americans are becoming more sympathetic to feminism and homosexuality even as they develop more repressive attitudes toward drugs, booze, and overt sexual perversion (child abuse, for example). Rick Santorum rides a dead horse and you ride the buggy behind Rick and the dead horse.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#7423 at 02-23-2012 01:59 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
02-23-2012, 01:59 PM #7423
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by JohnMc82 View Post
Ok, I kinda get what you're saying here. But there's a paradox at play: "Turnings drive generations, and generations drive turnings." So a turning is more than the sum of generations, it is a social mood that can be viewed by all sorts of political and economic and cultural developments.

Significant economic growth with relatively balanced budgets (not that I expect to see it any time soon) would have a hard time coexisting with a crisis mentality.

Likewise, reactionary forces who fear a revolutionary crisis may strike pre-emptively to disrupt protest movements and radicals who threaten their status quo... And when enough would-be revolutionaries are hanging on the gallows, other populist agitators might be spooked in to accepting a new Gilded Age that demands conformity with the explicit threat of violence.

Further, each crisis catalyst only seems to remain a primary focus for a few years, so if people patiently adapt to a post-housing bubble world without additional economic panics or terrorist attacks for a few more years, I can imagine a sense of relief creeping in slowly - even if there is no final showdown to the scale of WW2. This is actually the kind of anti-climax I'd expect in the mega-unraveling of a rich nation. We have serious problems of economic inequality and long-term sustainability, but individuals remain relatively well-fed, distracted, and entertained. Reaching the pinnacle of history kind of has an anti-crisis undertone to it - even if that is exactly the mistake that causes vanguard civilizations to ignore their internal fault lines.
If anything I see Crisis Eras as waves of danger and revolutionary (if unwelcome) change. Waves may be international meltdowns of the economic order (the Great Stock Market Crash and subsequent failure of the world economy), coups and putsches (prime examples: takeovers by Lenin, Hitler, or Mao), revolutions whether they succeed or fail (France 1871, Hungary 1919), acts of consummate madness by political leaders (Stalin's forced collectivism and Great Purge; the Kristallnacht and Holocaust); and of course, apocalyptic war (WWII, Crimean War, Franco-Prussian War, American Civil War, maybe the Thirty Years War). A Crisis can have one clear wave (the American Civil War) and be relatively short, have two and last perhaps fifteen years or so (USA in the Great Depression/World War II), or have three and last twenty-five or so (Russia between 1917 -- I expect Mr. Kaiser to disagree with my interpretation of the first 28 years of the USSR). If any war was ever Apocalypse it was the Great Patriotic War even if Stalin didn't want it but bumbled into it instead.

I think that we are in a partial cool-off for now. The second wave of this Crisis will depend upon events of 2016 and later. President Obama is no revolutionary and has little capacity or opportunity in which to operate as a populist. Such may be for someone else to do.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#7424 at 02-23-2012 04:36 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
02-23-2012, 04:36 PM #7424
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by JohnMc82 View Post
The Iraq war MIGHT be comparable to Vietnam, but there are always parallels between awakenings & crises. It is a very poor comparison to Korea, where many South Koreans are still grateful for America's help (even if they don't like much of what we've done since then!)

The Iraq War is also a poor comparison to Operation Desert Storm. But, the relative scale difference between Desert Storm & Iraqi Freedom (3t / 4t) matches with the relative scale of interventions we've also seen in Libya, Liberia and Somalia during the 3 and 4T. "Problems" that were identified but largely ignored in the 3T are approached again with much more decisive action after 9-11.
My point is not that the wars were alike. They happened in different turnings, after all. The point is we have a military-industrial complex, and it's need to fight wars is business as usual. Whether you think any of our wars went well or not, they were waged only because the military-industrial complex has to have wars to fight to keep going, and that is the only reason that any of these wars were fought. That was most especially true of the Iraq War.


That kind of thinking might be the most dangerous thing about Bush's legacy. Since Bush didn't change our national policies on spying, torture, summary assasination, and indefinite detention, then there's nothing for Obama to "fix," huh?

The tax vs borrowing thing is virtually irrelevant. Government borrowing as a percentage of GDP peaked in the 1940s, so there's nothing that says a government can't borrow in a 4T. Using tax rates as a guide is a shallow parallel at best, because 20th century income tax rates have no meaningful correlation to taxation in prior saeculae.
I'm not sure what you are saying here. Of course Bush changed our national policies on spying. There was no security justification for any of these changes. As I said, they were a power grab by Bush and Cheney. The difference between WWII and Iraq, among others, is that the country bared the sacrifice for the former and not the latter. Among other ways, this sacrifice was made in tax rates that went up from about 30% to 90% rates on the wealthy.

Tooth and nail? You are practically rewriting history here! The Iraq Resolution went from draft to approval, by supermajorities in both houses, in just nine days. There was more buyer's remorse from the left than there was initial opposition.
That is an utterly ridiculous statement; I am sorry. There was huge opposition to the Iraq War, as there was to Vietnam. It was the major issue in the 2004 election too, which had more participation than any other since 1960. The fact that the opposition was not the majority was also true in the case of Vietnam; it took many years to change our government so that it would stop both wars. The majority of Americans can often be persuaded to "support our troops" by appealing to their fear, but that does not mean there is not a strong peace movement in America. World War II was a 4T war that united America in a common purpose that was pursued with total commitment. Iraq and Afghanistan were totally 3T wars that bitterly divided a partisan America, and were pursued with no appropriate commitment or dedication at all. You can't compare WWII to Iraq in any way.


The entire federal bureaucracy has another powerful layer added on top. Treasury? Transportation? Immigration? FEMA? Coast Guard? All hidden behind the incredibly secretive DHS.
You still don't explain what "DHS" means. You lost me.
Where's the program? Where's the alternative? How many decades do you need to put it together, and can you sell it as a sound byte that doesn't include references to Clintonian tax rates or deficit reduction?
I don't get you here. The Left has had lots of programs and proposals going back 40 years; the right wing blocks almost all of them, whether that be single payer health care (medicare for all), new energy and cap and trade, pollution control, reduction of our war machine, restoring and enhancing our transportation system, and many others. Don't knock Clintonian tax rates; they would solve our budget deficit and trim back income inequality. That is important, and is being blocked by Republicans whose only economic or social interest or concern is not raising taxes. Democratic presidents do at least manage to help raise the condition of the less wealthy with earned income credits and minimum wages. When Republicans are in power, these things are not done. It is assumed that if the wealthy are given tax cuts, the benefits will trickle-down. They don't at all.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 02-23-2012 at 06:12 PM.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#7425 at 02-23-2012 04:44 PM by Deb C [at joined Aug 2004 #posts 6,099]
---
02-23-2012, 04:44 PM #7425
Join Date
Aug 2004
Posts
6,099

Quote Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough View Post
I would be more sympathetic if the left was delusional and paranoid enough to actually believe that stuff. But I'm aware that it's just typical, intentional slander and propaganda.
Living in a relatively conservative state, I have to admit, his religious fanaticism deeply concerns me. Rick Santorum is, in my estimation, a fanatic.

Excerpt from a Maureen Dowd piece:

"Satan strikes, a Catholic exorcist told me, when there are “soul wounds.” Santorum, who is considered “too Catholic” even by my über-Catholic brothers, clearly believes that America’s soul wounds include men and women having sex for reasons other than procreation, people involved in same-sex relationships, women using contraception or having prenatal testing, environmentalists who elevate “the Earth above man,” women working outside the home, “anachronistic” public schools, Mormonism (which he said is considered “a dangerous cult” by some Christians), and President Obama (whom he obliquely and oddly compared to Hitler and accused of having “some phony theology”)."

Here are more of my concerns from a Maureen Dowd article:

Rick's Religious Fanaticism


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/op...ef=maureendowd

"The only Good America is a Just America." .... pbrower2a
-----------------------------------------