Originally Posted by TimWalker

Concievably, harsher conditions might bring a cadre of mature nomads to the fore. Being Nomads their focus would likely be on pragmatic problem solving. I can imagine the cadre dumping the Atonement thing. They would be very unlikely to start a war for the sake of a crusade - in this respect they may resemble the remaining Silents. The agenda may be a patchwork of proposed actions/reforms to address the problems presented by the Crisis. The resulting institutional framework may not be strikingly different from that of the Millenial Saeculum.

This is my optimistic scenario. Don't know about the young Adaptives of the next 1T.

I wonder if the new adaptives are similar to the progressives. It's hard to tell because the old Adaptives have some civic in them. They came up with some good info on alternating nomads on this thread.http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...gm-Theory-(APT)

Originally Posted by millennialX

I wonder if the new adaptives are similar to the progressives. It's hard to tell because the old Adaptives have some civic in them. They came up with some good info on alternating nomads on this thread.http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...gm-Theory-(APT)

I recall a comment that Adaptives track the saeculum (that is, the turnings during the lifetime of a particular generation).

We don't know yet what character the next 1T will have. However, the double rhythm strongly suggests that the next 2T will be of the Apollo type, what the Grey Badger refers to as a "cool Awakening." We may anticipate that this 2T will be more intellectual than the last 2T, and will likely not explore the spiritual as much as, say, the Transcendental or Boom Awakenings.

On the paleo 4T site it was pointed out that the Silents attacked the spiritual staleness of a G.I. built world; while the Progressives attacked the Gilded Age from a worldly perspective. Perhaps the Homelanders will resemble the Progressives more than they resemble the Silents.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

I recall a comment that Adaptives track the saeculum (that is, the turnings during the lifetime of a particular generation).

We don't know yet what character the next 1T will have. However, the double rhythm strongly suggests that the next 2T will be of the Apollo type, what the Grey Badger refers to as a "cool Awakening." We may anticipate that this 2T will be more intellectual than the last 2T, and will likely not explore the spiritual as much as, say, the Transcendental or Boom Awakenings.

On the paleo 4T site it was pointed out that the Silents attacked the spiritual staleness of a G.I. built world; while the Progressives attacked the Gilded Age from a worldly perspective. Perhaps the Homelanders will resemble the Progressives more than they resemble the Silents.

Intellectual, huh? Geez...the next artist and prophets are going to have to do a better job at rocking this soon to be old geezer, boat. I'm all for impressionism part 2 and on that other thread we theorized that the Prophets might "button" up a tad bit more and calm down with the technology. I think we have gone to far now. At school, I've drawn many naked folks so I don't have problem with nudity. But goodness it would be nice is Lady Gaga and Keisha at least put some pants on when they are performing on a family show like American Idol.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

I recall a comment that Adaptives track the saeculum (that is, the turnings during the lifetime of a particular generation).

We don't know yet what character the next 1T will have. However, the double rhythm strongly suggests that the next 2T will be of the Apollo type, what the Grey Badger refers to as a "cool Awakening." We may anticipate that this 2T will be more intellectual than the last 2T, and will likely not explore the spiritual as much as, say, the Transcendental or Boom Awakenings.
On the paleo 4T site it was pointed out that the Silents attacked the spiritual staleness of a G.I. built world; while the Progressives attacked the Gilded Age from a worldly perspective. Perhaps the Homelanders will resemble the Progressives more than they resemble the Silents.

I believe the "ideology" of technology, that is, the role of technology in society, will be a key theme in the next 2T. by the end of the next awakening things will polarize into Transhumanist (Techno-Progressive) and Bioconservative (Techno-Skeptic) camps.

Nomads' attitudes are usually counter to the usually mood of a saeculum, the Xers are an Apollonian/Advancement generation in a Dionysian/Atonement saeculum, and some posters, most notably Chas, have suggested that Nomads are a harbinger of the following Awakening. Are the Xers not a technologically-oriented generation, either in praise or skepticism to it?

Originally Posted by Odin

I believe the "ideology" of technology, that is, the role of technology in society, will be a key theme in the next 2T. by the end of the next awakening things will polarize into Transhumanist (Techno-Progressive) and Bioconservative (Techno-Skeptic) camps.

Nomads' attitudes are usually counter to the usually mood of a saeculum, the Xers are an Apollonian/Advancement generation in a Dionysian/Atonement saeculum, and some posters, most notably Chas, have suggested that Nomads are a harbinger of the following Awakening. Are the Xers not a technologically-oriented generation, either in praise or skepticism to it?

Good point.

I once pointed out a pattern that has operated since after the Reformation.

Dyonysus-type Awakenings have been very intense, Apollo Awakenings less so. Dyonysus Awakenings at their best have been very fertile in terms of culture and spirituality and lofty principles, but not so much in terms of worldly affairs. Apollo-type Awakenings have been more fertile intellectually, and good for devising grand blueprints for the worldly order/institutions; spiritually, these 2Ts tend to probe the reaches of spirituality less than the Dyonysus Awakenings.

Perhaps as a consequence of their greater intensity, the Dyonysus Awakenings tend to produce Prophets who are more radical; this in itself may make it harder for such Prophets to unite during a 4T, that and the atonement thing will tend to result in a Fracturing Crisis. This is likely to result in an ending that is less than triumphant, so that the Hero generation (if there is one) will be less hubristic. Therefore, the generational tectonics will be less intense during the next Awakening - which is likely of the Apollo-type - decreasing the 2T intensity.

Therefore, the Prophets coming out of an Apollo Awakening will likely be less radical, thus making it easier to unite during the 4T. The resulting 4T is likelier to be a Unifying Crisis, with greater likelyhood of a triumphant conclusion, resulting in a more hubristic Hero generation. Therefore, the generational tectonics during the next (Dyonysus) 2T will be more severe, leading to a stronger reaction from the young Prophets and a more intense Awakening.

Note - the Reformation was a very intense Awakening of the Apollo type. But then, the Reformation was part of an era - the Renaissance/Reformation era - that was a macro/mega-Awakening.

Of course, the Atonement thing correlates with a Fracturing Crisis; also, correlating with a lack of a blueprint for a grand new order. And also a correlation with the choice between status quo or regression.

The Advancement Paradign correlates with a grand blueprint, a Unifying Crisis, and a triumphant/order-building conclusion.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

I once pointed out a pattern that has operated since after the Reformation.

Dyonysus-type Awakenings have been very intense, Apollo Awakenings less so. Dyonysus Awakenings at their best have been very fertile in terms of culture and spirituality and lofty principles, but not so much in terms of worldly affairs. Apollo-type Awakenings have been more fertile intellectually, and good for devising grand blueprints for the worldly order/institutions; spiritually, these 2Ts tend to probe the reaches of spirituality less than the Dyonysus Awakenings.

Perhaps as a consequence of their greater intensity, the Dyonysus Awakenings tend to produce Prophets who are more radical; this in itself may make it harder for such Prophets to unite during a 4T, that and the atonement thing will tend to result in a Fracturing Crisis. This is likely to result in an ending that is less than triumphant, so that the Hero generation (if there is one) will be less hubristic. Therefore, the generational tectonics will be less intense during the next Awakening - which is likely of the Apollo-type - decreasing the 2T intensity.

Therefore, the Prophets coming out of an Apollo Awakening will likely be less radical, thus making it easier to unite during the 4T. The resulting 4T is likelier to be a Unifying Crisis, with greater likelyhood of a triumphant conclusion, resulting in a more hubristic Hero generation. Therefore, the generational tectonics during the next (Dyonysus) 2T will be more severe, leading to a stronger reaction from the young Prophets and a more intense Awakening.

Note - the Reformation was a very intense Awakening of the Apollo type. But then, the Reformation was part of an era - the Renaissance/Reformation era - that was a macro/mega-Awakening.

Of course, the Atonement thing correlates with a Fracturing Crisis; also, correlating with a lack of a blueprint for a grand new order. And also a correlation with the choice between status quo or regression.

The Advancement Paradign correlates with a grand blueprint, a Unifying Crisis, and a triumphant/order-building conclusion.

Look away, look away, look away, Dixieland! Yeah. I sadly agree.

Originally Posted by Ed S

When thinking about their theory that the generations cycle last for about one lifetime, a little less than 80 years, I believe that the cycle really lasts two lifetimes or about 150 yea



What I noticed is that every other crisis produces one of two different type of questions. In one type of crisis, the issue is whether to build a new system or maintain the status quo. But in the alternating cycle the issue is whether to maintain the status quo or go back to an earlier era.



Thus, there may not be a heroic generation in this cycle. We may end up with significant reforms such as universal health care, but it won't be as earth shattering as forming a new nation or reorganizing our whole economic system. It will be more like the Glorious Revolution where either there will be modest reforms, or the major reforms will involve reducing government's role in the economy and dismantling the social safety net.

In conclusion, the next big revolution will be in about 70 years from now. Roughly around 2080 we will once again think about creating something new.

Society will start thinking about building a new system during the next 2T, which will probably be of the Apollo type. In terms of intensity (relative to other 2Ts) it may be as mild as the Missionary Awakening.

It seems that a saeculum may have one particular strength - it can have a 2T that profoundly affects the culture; or else it can culminate in a 4T that becomes a Great Gate of History.

Originally Posted by Ed S

When thinking about their theory that the generations cycle last for about one lifetime, a little less than 80 years, I believe that the cycle really lasts two lifetimes or about 150 years. What I noticed is that every other crisis produces one of two different type of questions. In one type of crisis, the issue is whether to build a new system or maintain the status quo. But in the alternating cycle the issue is whether to maintain the status quo or go back to an earlier era. We are now in a 9-11/Great Recession crisis. People have erroneously compared Obama to FDR so they expect a great Obama Revolution and have been disappointed. But that's because they believe in the one lifetime cycle theory. More likely, we are in a period more like the Civil War, where the question is whether to keep the status quo or repeal the New Deal and return to a free capitalist system. If past history is a guide, we won't know what the decision will be until the time comes. Thus, there may not be a heroic generation in this cycle. We may end up with significant reforms such as universal health care, but it won't be as earth shattering as forming a new nation or reorganizing our whole economic system. It will be more like the Glorious Revolution where either there will be modest reforms, or the major reforms will involve reducing government's role in the economy and dismantling the social safety net. In conclusion, the next big revolution will be in about 70 years from now. Roughly around 2080 we will once again think about creating something new.

What may keep the length of the Two-Lifetime-Cycle viable is the possiblity of some reform during Awakenings, as well as every other 4T. Course corrections applied to the old order, patching it up.

Originally Posted by millennialX

Makes sense, considering that many people on the Right are constantly pushing for a return to Reagan's era.

So does this support David's view that we are headed for another Gilded Age? Or are we thinking Calvin Coolidge?

Duh! We have never left Reagan's era since it began three full decades ago. We are not headed for another Gilded Age, we have been there for the entire time frame with only select modest bursts of backlash. And let's not forget that NAFTA was signed on Bill Clinton's watch. Which is a big reason why the edginess within our society continues to grow, and we no doubt have a much bigger malaise than was there during the Carter years. However, there are now restless influences yearning for something different. They are all over the web pages even though it doesn't seem to have filtered down through mainstream culture as of yet--at least not to the point where the powers that be can no longer ignore us. Yes, there are those who still considered the very word "union" when it refers to labor as a five-letter obscenity and who want to see even more deregulation than what already exists. At the same time more and more people are losing their jobs to automation and outsourcing. IMO, a blueprint for disaster.

History may prove otherwise, but to all those who grew up in the postwar era, when family life was more stable, life was more predictable, and if you got a job in a good company and did everything you were supposed to do, you could be set for a life. That is what everybody from that time seems to consider "normal" except maybe a lot of African-Americans who were still for the most part shut out of the good life of that era. I'm referring to those who lived the "Ozzie and Harriet" lifestyle and grew up in that type of environment. History does, however, show that this roughly two and a half decade period from the late 1940's to the early 1970's was the exception rather than the rule. And, yes, it was the youthful Boomers who rebelled against the idea of folks being chained to one job and one employer throughout their lives. But as time went on it became more difficult for all those who weren't really well-connected to get ANY kind of a job, and now it is harder than ever, especially those of us who are past, say, 55 and want to remain actively engaged in work. And yet they want to raise the SS and Medicare eligibiilty to 70, which would make sense if people between 55 and 70 can get jobs to begin to with. And much too often they are passed over despite all the age discrimination laws in effect now.

Another thing to consider is that we have over time built an entire economy around this platform, which is something that doesn't get discussed very often. The idea of consumer credit was the biggie, and the way people now buy cars and homes and other big ticket items. In the future, how are people ever going to be able to honor long-term payment contracts if they don't know if their income is even going to be there? This is something that never seems to get brought up.

So, for every other 4T:1. Retention of the existing order (perhaps with modest/moderate reform?)2. Reverting to an older order. Suggested by American civil war - fracture along regional lines.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

What may keep the length of the Two-Lifetime-Cycle viable is the possiblity of some reform during Awakenings, as well as every other 4T. Course corrections applied to the old order, patching it up.

If the book by Aussie environmentalist Paul Gildas I mentioned in the Global Warming thread is correct this 4T will have a lot of institutional similarities with the last one, except we will be at war with Climate Change and Peak Oil rather than the Nazis, but there will be a lot of similarities:

Strong government direction of the economy.

Huge amounts of "Shumpeterian" Creative Destruction as old dinosaurs that don't adapt to a carbon-free economy fast enough perish and are replace by dynamic new enterprises. Something similar happened during the Great Depression, many companies got their start during the last 4T.

Rationing and shared sacrifice. The Elites will accept being taxed at higher rates because their fortunes are worthless if society itself collapses.

Originally Posted by Brian Beecher

History does, however, show that this roughly two and a half decade period from the late 1940's to the early 1970's was the exception rather than the rule.

I would think so. And I also think that at least part of the economic mess we're in today (certainly not all, maybe not even "most") stems from our denial that the economic promises governments and employers made during that era were not sustainable indefinitely.

Originally Posted by Odin

If the book by Aussie environmentalist Paul Gildas I mentioned in the Global Warming thread is correct this 4T will have a lot of institutional similarities with the last one, except we will be at war with Climate Change and Peak Oil rather than the Nazis, but there will be a lot of similarities:

So yesturday a whole bunch of free compact fluorescent light bulbs came to my house from Duke Power (I think I agreed to recieving them, while really trying to pay my bill online) and at first I was okay with them, because I work for a network that's all about being green and this was my part.

But then I did some research on the bulbs and have been hearing complaints about the government eventually making us use them and that that if they break, mercury is leaked and we have to call in a hazmat crew. I'm probably so late to this debate and to be honest, I don't want the bulbs in my house until I have further information. The baby is causeing me to not be as risky.

This just feels like one of those GI scientific advancements that ended up kicking us in the butt. What do you guys think?

Here's a site I quickly found:
http://www.renewableenergygeek.ca/en...onment-part-1/

As far as I know the amount of mercury in CFBs is extremely tiny, the mercury in a can of tuna is probably worse.

yeah, mercury is nasty shit, but it seems ever since the "mercury in vaccines causes autism" nonsense started people have become hysterical about the stuff.

Originally Posted by Odin

yeah, mercury is nasty shit, but it seems ever since the "mercury in vaccines causes autism" nonsense started people have become hysterical about the stuff.

Not to mention that some things we mostly consider "poison" can even be necessary for life and good health in trace amounts. Not that mercury is useful in any quantity, but many things that are toxic in larger doses are beneficial and necessary in smaller amounts.

Thanks for the information and comments, guys.

Originally Posted by Odin

If the book by Aussie environmentalist Paul Gildas I mentioned in the Global Warming thread is correct this 4T will have a lot of institutional similarities with the last one, except we will be at war with Climate Change and Peak Oil rather than the Nazis, but there will be a lot of similarities.

I see it as being more like the 4T before the last one in that we're not really fighting an "enemy" but trying to cure an ill in our own society that we object to despite its economic benefit.

Originally Posted by ziggyX65

I would think so. And I also think that at least part of the economic mess we're in today (certainly not all, maybe not even "most") stems from our denial that the economic promises governments and employers made during that era were not sustainable indefinitely.

Denial--alias malaise, and a worse one than the supposed one during the Carter years, which was at the time that the notion of lifetime employment and near-guaranteed security started on its course toward oblivion. But we all were convinced that anything was possible, and to some extent the denial of its demise still exists. And I wouldn't be surprised if in many people's mind the malaise continues unabated unless we can find a way to bring that situation back.

I had never looked at this thread, I must admit, and I did not take the time today to read the whole thing, but actually my own thinking has been going in this direction. Essentially, we have learned that if Prophets grow up in a highly stable era (Era of Good Feelings or American High), they will spend their adulthood tearing it down. If on the other hand they grow up in chaos (Gilded Age) they will spend their adulthood trying to impose order on it. I don't know enough about the Glorious Revolution crisis in the US to make a judgment about how it might have affected the Awakeners and then the revolution itself.

In the same way the late 17th century was an era of increasing state power, that is, discipline, of consensus, and of stability in the upper orders (that extends well into the eighteenth.) So it spawned a generation of Prophets who wanted to overturn the existing order in the name of Reason, which is what happened in the French Revolution (even though by the time it happened all the Prophets were dead.) At that point, however, I'm not sure my model holds up in Europe.

It is clear that both the 4Ts in Eastern Europe (about 1914-30) and the Atlantic world (about 1933-58) and in Asia (1931-45?) vastly strengthened the state, and it's been getting weaker everywhere for the last 40 years, most dramatically in Eastern Europe. The current struggles of the EU also reflect this trend.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

I had never looked at this thread, I must admit, and I did not take the time today to read the whole thing, but actually my own thinking has been going in this direction. Essentially, we have learned that if Prophets grow up in a highly stable era (Era of Good Feelings or American High), they will spend their adulthood tearing it down. If on the other hand they grow up in chaos (Gilded Age) they will spend their adulthood trying to impose order on it. I don't know enough about the Glorious Revolution crisis in the US to make a judgment about how it might have affected the Awakeners and then the revolution itself.

In the same way the late 17th century was an era of increasing state power, that is, discipline, of consensus, and of stability in the upper orders (that extends well into the eighteenth.) So it spawned a generation of Prophets who wanted to overturn the existing order in the name of Reason, which is what happened in the French Revolution (even though by the time it happened all the Prophets were dead.) At that point, however, I'm not sure my model holds up in Europe.

It is clear that both the 4Ts in Eastern Europe (about 1914-30) and the Atlantic world (about 1933-58) and in Asia (1931-45?) vastly strengthened the state, and it's been getting weaker everywhere for the last 40 years, most dramatically in Eastern Europe. The current struggles of the EU also reflect this trend.

England before the Glorious Revolution -- England when the Puritans were young -- let me see. The Stuart Dynasty succeeding the long reign of Elizabeth Tudor. James going in for witch hunts, Charles I turning Catholic (or trying to? Anyway, a sympathizer) when Catholics had been their bitter enemies in the Armada Crisis, the English Civil War and the Restoration of Charles II - a brilliant and corrupt mega-Unraveling of a high order, or why S&H named an entire reactive generation after the Cavaliers - and I still suggest reading Neal Stephenson's brilliant Baroque Cycle, out in mass market paperback for years and probably on Kindle. Stephenson *immerses* you in the 17th Century.

Yeah. I'd call that chaos on a scale that totally dwarfs the Gilded Age.

Could the present 4T be described as an Unraveling Crisis?

Originally Posted by TimWalker

Could the present 4T be described as an Unraveling Crisis?

I think this is a Mega-Awakening saeculum., the next saeculum will be the Mega-Unraveling.

Originally Posted by Odin

I think this is a Mega-Awakening saeculum., the next saeculum will be the Mega-Unraveling.

Crisis-crisis: The colonial state dies and is replaced by a completely new system. Doubts linger as to whether or not the new system will survive.

High-crisis: The new system defines hierarchy and exercises physical power against those who doubt it.

Awakening-crisis: America realizes its powerful position in the world and seeks to protect vulnerable members of society.

Unraveling-crisis: Denial, distraction, more denial, and other post-seasonal 3T artifacts. Crisis-sized interventions are used to increase the gap between rich and poor. Early indicators that our once-dominant military strategy are anachronistic. Sustainability becomes a growing concern.