Originally Posted by JohnMc82

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.

This is good and it looks like you are suggesting we are in an Unraveling Crisis. So what are the different versions of the Highs and Awakenings? I want more!

Crisis High doesn't sound like fun, btw.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

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.

The Revolution Saeculum was the decaying of the old older, the Mega-Unraveling. The American Revolution was actually not very radical, it was more a secession than a true revolution. The brutal radicalism of the French Revolution was the exception that proves the rule, since it is probably what "catalyzed" the start of the Mega-Crisis.

I consider the Civil War Saeculum (and it's Western European equivalent) to be the Mega-Crisis. It was during that saeculum that the institutions of the modern Industrial Nation State that are still with us today were forged. The old aristocracy either evaporated or merged with the emerging class of great industrialist elites. Germany and Italy were unified. The American Civil War confirmed the US as a single nation state along with the supremacy of the Federal Government. The US Civil War also essentially destroyed our Planter Class equivalent of Europe's aristocrats. The urban industrial working class emerged as a political force.

During the Great Power Saeculum the institutions of the modern Industrial Nation State were solidified and fully took control of the governments of the West. In the UK and Scandinavia, and to a lesser extent in the US, France, and northern Italy, Organized Labor and the Industrial Elites created a "bargain of stability", good pay and benifits in exchange for a cartelization of the major industries. After WW2 this bargain was imposed on West Germany and Austria.

And now during the Millennial Saeculum the whole edifice of the modern Industrial Nation State has come under attack from many fronts.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

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.

Uh-huh. Mega-Unraveling, as I've said all along. The mega-Awakening was the 20st Century: ~1890-1970.

The reason I think so is that I've had art appreciation and music appreciation - freshman level courses, folks, art 101 and music 101 - and you can see the sudden change in both arts starting with the Missionary Awakening more or less. One decade the Impressionists are shocking; the next brings us Dada and Surrealism etc. In music we get the split between what once was classical music (technically, 'classical' is 18th century and the proper term for 16th-19th C music is art music; I say it's 'classical' and to hell with it) and the new popular music, largely African-influenced, starting with ragtime.

One can see the same thing in literature as we move from Dickens through Kipling to James Joyce. Or why I vastly prefer genre fiction - it has a plot and the language is comprehensible, or the reader throws the book against the wall if it's a print book. The entire "fine arts/great books/classical music vs 'that popular trash' split dates from then.

Not to mention the drastic changes in mores, fashion, and values. That's a mega-Awakening.

And anyone who doesn't think this is a mega-Unraveling as defined above either isn't paying attention or is indulging in wishful thinking.

Yours at the end of the Modern Era and 40 years into the Postmodern Era,

a creaking relic of the last cycle of history.

Originally Posted by millennialX

This is good and it looks like you are suggesting we are in an Unraveling Crisis. So what are the different versions of the Highs and Awakenings? I want more!

Crisis High doesn't sound like fun, btw.

Okay - Crisis High. Or rather, mega-High Crisis. No, it wasn't fun, from all the historical accounts I've read. Though it gave us some very stirring music.

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord, He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored ... he has loosed the fateful lightning of his terrible swift sword; his truth is marching on....!

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

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.

The American Revolution.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

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

The Civil War, which we entered saying "The United States are...." and left saying ":The United States is..."

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

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

WWII and the meteoric rise of the American Empire abroad instead of just on this continent.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

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.

Been watching the nightly news again, have you?

You are dead on.

Originally Posted by Odin

The Revolution Saeculum was the decaying of the old older, the Mega-Unraveling. The American Revolution was actually not very radical, it was more a secession than a true revolution.

It was the only form of representative democracy without a monarchy in the Western World in about a millennium. To me that is radical.

Interesting that the Mega-Awakening described includeds 2Ts of both types - Apollo as well as Dionysus. So....The recent 3T was an Unraveling 3T? And the Mega-Unraveling will extend through the next 3T?

As for the 20th Century being a massive cultural change, from a member of the Lost Generation who was *there* for most of it - I give you this excerpt from C.S. Lewis' "Great Divide":

"I do not think that any previous age produced work which was, in its own time, as shatteringly and bewilderingly new as that of the Cubists, the Dadaists, the Surrealists, and Picasso has been in ours. And I am quite sure that this is true of the art I love best, that is, of poetry…. Skaldic poetry was unintelligible if you did not know the kenningar, but intelligible if you did. And – this is the real point – all Alexandrianmen of letters and all skalds would have agreed about the answers. I believe the same to be true of the dark conceits in Donne; there was one correct interpretation of each and Donne could have told it to you. Of course you might misunderstand what Wordsworth was “up to” in Lyrical Ballads; but everyone understood what he said. I do not see in any of these the slightest parallel to the state of affairs disclosed by a recent symposium on Mr. Eliot’s Cooking Egg. Here we find seven adults (two of them Cambridge men) whose lives have been specially devoted to the study of poetry discussing a very short poem which has been before the world for thirty-odd years; and there is not the slightest agreement among them as to what, in any sense of the word, it means. I am not in the least concerned to decide whether this state of affairs is a good thing, or a bad thing. I merely assert that it is a new thing. In the whole history of the West, from Homer - I might almost say from the Epic of Gilgamesh - there has been no bend or break in the development of poetry comparable to this."

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

Been watching the nightly news again, have you?

Oh no no no, I gave up that bad habit years ago!

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

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.

On your view what do civics do in each of the mega-turnings? I'm curious as to what the job of the millennials is mostly.

Sorokin described a sort of Roman cubism, and something somewhat similar in Mycenean art. The implication is that secular art exhausts more naturalistic renderings, and finally moves to cubism. Cubism represents the idea of an object. Sorokin associated this kind of art with a general exhaustion of the secular world view.

Originally Posted by scotths

It seems (perhaps especially in a "spirtual" saeculum) that a strong reactionary movement exists in opposition to a strong progressive movement. A leader must pull together a coalition of progressive and moderate forces and chart a more moderate path until it becomes obvious that such a path will not work. This will lead to angry reactionaries attempting to portray the leader as more progressive then he is (and perhaps for a time may gain some traction) at the same time as progressive portray him as more moderate or conservative than he is. This leads to a period of strong dissatisfaction by most everyone which ultimately ends in an assertion of a reasonable agenda of progressive and moderate ideas that is able to become the new status quo.

This suggests that, to defeat the reactionaries, the radicals must successfully recruit the moderates. This in turn suggests a package of mild (or weak) to moderate reforms. At least during a Dionysus 4T.

Originally Posted by TimWalker

This suggests that, to defeat the reactionaries, the radicals must successfully recruit the moderates. This in turn suggests a package of mild (or weak) to moderate reforms. At least during a Dionysus 4T.

Agreed on moderates needing to join the radicals. However, there is another option than weak and mild reforms. Events could transform the landscape to the degree that the radical doesn't seem so radical and in fact the moderate moves towards the radical. This seems more 4T. In a 3T you get compromise and mild reform.

Book - copyright 2012. The Lost Majority Why the Future of Government Is Up for Grabs - and Who Will Take It by Sean Trende. The author is skeptical about realignment theory - the idea that a realigning election may result in a 30+ dominance by an political coalition/party. Instead, he writes about "forks in the road" such as FDR and the New Deal.

Quoting Trende: "...The truth is that voter coalitions in a broad, diverse country are inherently fragile. Issue that cause disparate groups to band together tend to fade quickly, while new issues arise that can put these groups at loggerheads...Parties tend to overinterpret their mandate and overreach. And above all else, wars, recessions, domestic unrest, and other contingencies will inevitably intrude, throwing coalitions into disarray, shifting loyalties...."

Originally Posted by Odin

The Revolution Saeculum was the decaying of the old older, the Mega-Unraveling. The American Revolution was actually not very radical, it was more a secession than a true revolution. The brutal radicalism of the French Revolution was the exception that proves the rule, since it is probably what "catalyzed" the start of the Mega-Crisis.

While I agree with Beard's interpretation that the revolution was largely by and for rich white men, that doesn't diminish its radicalism versus to Europe's dominant idea of divine right. Radical in 21st century terms is very different than radical in the 18th century.

I consider the Civil War Saeculum (and it's Western European equivalent) to be the Mega-Crisis. It was during that saeculum that the institutions of the modern Industrial Nation State that are still with us today were forged. The old aristocracy either evaporated or merged with the emerging class of great industrialist elites. Germany and Italy were unified. The American Civil War confirmed the US as a single nation state along with the supremacy of the Federal Government. The US Civil War also essentially destroyed our Planter Class equivalent of Europe's aristocrats. The urban industrial working class emerged as a political force.

And while the US and Europe both dealt with the transition from agricultural to industrial economy, the experience of those who lived through it varied greatly from one to the other. Militarily, the US Civil War seems to share more with Europe in WW2 than it does with England's Opium wars. For the average person, these total wars mean drafts of all fighting-aged men and total economic mobilization against neighboring states.

Comparing the US, UK, and Germany:

Mega-high (Unity at any cost): Civil War, Glorious Revolution, WW2 (continental Europe)

Mega-awakening (Empire gains self-awareness/dominance): WW2 (USA), 7 years war to Act of Union, Battle over the Euro

Mega-unraveling (Unwinnable colonial distraction on steroids): War on Terror, Opium Wars, Seven Years War to Partition of Poland (Prussia)

Mega-crisis (A new nation is declared): Constitutional convention, James I declares himself king of Great Britain (a nation that wasn't even confirmed as existing until a saeculum later), Franco-Prussian War

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

While I agree with Beard's interpretation that the revolution was largely by and for rich white men, that doesn't diminish its radicalism versus to Europe's dominant idea of divine right. Radical in 21st century terms is very different than radical in the 18th century.



And while the US and Europe both dealt with the transition from agricultural to industrial economy, the experience of those who lived through it varied greatly from one to the other. Militarily, the US Civil War seems to share more with Europe in WW2 than it does with England's Opium wars. For the average person, these total wars mean drafts of all fighting-aged men and total economic mobilization against neighboring states.

Comparing the US, UK, and Germany:

Mega-high (Unity at any cost): Civil War, Glorious Revolution, WW2 (continental Europe)

Mega-awakening (Empire gains self-awareness/dominance): WW2 (USA), 7 years war to Act of Union, Battle over the Euro

Mega-unraveling (Unwinnable colonial distraction on steroids): War on Terror, Opium Wars, Seven Years War to Partition of Poland (Prussia)

Mega-crisis (A new nation is declared): Constitutional convention, James I declares himself king of Great Britain (a nation that wasn't even confirmed as existing until a saeculum later), Franco-Prussian War

I changed my mind and I agree with Pat, now.

Originally Posted by Odin

The Revolution Saeculum was the decaying of the old older, the Mega-Unraveling. The American Revolution was actually not very radical, it was more a secession than a true revolution. The brutal radicalism of the French Revolution was the exception that proves the rule, since it is probably what "catalyzed" the start of the Mega-Crisis.

I consider the Civil War Saeculum (and it's Western European equivalent) to be the Mega-Crisis. It was during that saeculum that the institutions of the modern Industrial Nation State that are still with us today were forged. The old aristocracy either evaporated or merged with the emerging class of great industrialist elites. Germany and Italy were unified. The American Civil War confirmed the US as a single nation state along with the supremacy of the Federal Government. The US Civil War also essentially destroyed our Planter Class equivalent of Europe's aristocrats. The urban industrial working class emerged as a political force.

During the Great Power Saeculum the institutions of the modern Industrial Nation State were solidified and fully took control of the governments of the West. In the UK and Scandinavia, and to a lesser extent in the US, France, and northern Italy, Organized Labor and the Industrial Elites created a "bargain of stability", good pay and benifits in exchange for a cartelization of the major industries. After WW2 this bargain was imposed on West Germany and Austria.

And now during the Millennial Saeculum the whole edifice of the modern Industrial Nation State has come under attack from many fronts.

While I am coming around to the two-lifetime cycle theory in a different form myself, I frankly think, Odin, that you have got this backwards.

Gordon Wood, in The Radicalism of the American Revolution, showed that it was indeed radical. The idea of equal citizenship was revolutionary; so was the idea of elected leadership. In addition, the revolution abolished slavery in the northern colonies. The French Revolution turned out to be far too radical for the times. Britain, on the other hand, swung rightward. But the state got stronger in both Britain and in France--especially in France, where Napoleonic centralization survived the Revolution.

Central authority got weaker in the 19th century, except in one place: Germany. That was true in the US, as I've said again and again, despite the civil war. Civic culture also got weaker. But thanks in part to the emergence of centraliziing ideologies, Communism and Fascism--which forced democracies to respond in kind--States got stronger than ever during the mid-twentieth century crisis and its aftermath.

For the last 45 years--my adult lifetime--we've been in the midst of a gradual decline of central authority. That decline has become spectacular in many parts of the world, e.g. the former USSR and China. It has not happened, as yet, in western Europe. But this is surely the trend.

Because I care about politics so much I've been very negative about the late nineteenth century. But since the younger folk seem doomed to live out much of their adulthood, at least, in similar conditions, perhaps we should all start trying to find good things in it!

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

For the last 45 years--my adult lifetime--we've been in the midst of a gradual decline of central authority. That decline has become spectacular in many parts of the world, e.g. the former USSR and China. It has not happened, as yet, in western Europe. But this is surely the trend.

How do you mean not happened yet? The tendency in European countries has been towards deregulation, privatization and de-centralization for an odd 30 years now or more. De-centralization and privatization, the state resigning its powers to the market, essentially the state becoming lax in every sense of the word, including immigration and an actual as well as an intellectual inabilty to police its own borders, are of central importance to the problems and dysfunctions that this 4T will have to deal with.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Because I care about politics so much I've been very negative about the late nineteenth century. But since the younger folk seem doomed to live out much of their adulthood, at least, in similar conditions, perhaps we should all start trying to find good things in it!

There are many good things about the late 19th century/turn of the century. Protectionism (as in the US) and various forms of national regulation in various countries making society more egalitarian and geared towards mass consumption for example; architecture that's more beautiful than ever, before or since, while at the same time becoming functionally modern (bathtubs, elevators and apartments suited for urban life); enormous leaps of scientific progress and resulting technological applications; culture, art and intellectual life probably reaching a pinnacle of refinement during this period etc, etc...

Originally Posted by Tussilago

How do you mean not happened yet? The tendency in European countries has been towards deregulation, privatization and de-centralization for an odd 30 years now or more. De-centralization and privatization, the state resigning its powers to the market, essentially the state becoming lax in every sense of the word, including immigration and an actual as well as an intellectual inabilty to police its own borders, are of central importance to the problems and dysfunctions that this 4T will have to deal with.

I should say that that tendency has been relatively mild compared to the US--even in Britain it hasn't gone nearly as far as here. Nor would I regard the Euro as an example of decentralization! Europe has, by US standards, very strong states. Particularly Germany and France.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

While I agree with Beard's interpretation that the revolution was largely by and for rich white men, that doesn't diminish its radicalism versus to Europe's dominant idea of divine right. Radical in 21st century terms is very different than radical in the 18th century.



And while the US and Europe both dealt with the transition from agricultural to industrial economy, the experience of those who lived through it varied greatly from one to the other. Militarily, the US Civil War seems to share more with Europe in WW2 than it does with England's Opium wars. For the average person, these total wars mean drafts of all fighting-aged men and total economic mobilization against neighboring states.

Comparing the US, UK, and Germany:

Mega-high (Unity at any cost): Civil War, Glorious Revolution, WW2 (continental Europe)

Mega-awakening (Empire gains self-awareness/dominance): WW2 (USA), 7 years war to Act of Union, Battle over the Euro

Mega-unraveling (Unwinnable colonial distraction on steroids): War on Terror, Opium Wars, Seven Years War to Partition of Poland (Prussia)

Mega-crisis (A new nation is declared): Constitutional convention, James I declares himself king of Great Britain (a nation that wasn't even confirmed as existing until a saeculum later), Franco-Prussian War

Yes. And the mega-Crisis will probably involve fossil fuels and natural resources, and quite possibly wars fought in space or at least using space as a "higher ground" platform.

BTW - a guess I am going to throw out - mega-Unravelings seem to be periods of witch hunts, among other things. We're already seeing American Muslims being targeted - if the War on Terror continues, it's a sure bet we'll see a repeat of Manzanar et. al. --- internment camps for American Muslims. Followed by shame and apologies at the Recovery/Awakening cusp if things go well and with scapegoating as things go badly. Pity -- I rather wanted to see the basic American pattern - "They're Americans, except that they go to Mosque on Friday and dress more conservatively - " continue in the same way as ".... except that they go to synagogue on Saturday and won't eat pork" is well established. However - there is nothing to make you more pessimistic about mega-Unravelings than having had your head in the 30 Years War for the last few months.

Is there a thread about this mega saeculum stuff?

Originally Posted by Felix5

Is there a thread about this mega saeculum stuff?

Several. Look under the theories sub-thread.

~Chas'88

The MegaSaeculum thread.