Peter Gibbons wrote:

Did the resistance center in Fallujaheimburg?

Maybe, but I don't have the flyer in front of me at the moment. When I get home and read the flyer, and I can then give you a fuller response.

Stanley '61

Originally Posted by Stanley Alston '61

Peter Gibbons wrote:

Did the resistance center in Fallujaheimburg?

Maybe, but I don't have the flyer in front of me at the moment. When I get home and read the flyer, and I can then give you a fuller response.

Stanley '61

Sorry. I was being silly Stanley. Fallujaheimburg = Germanicized Fallujah (as in Iraq).

Still, I have not heard of any serious resistance in Germany on the Western side after the war, except for some short-lived, if occassionally intense, stuff in the first month or so after the surrender. That book sounds interesting.

Peter Gibbons wrote:

Sorry. I was being silly Stanley. Fallujaheimburg = Germanicized Fallujah (as in Iraq).

Oh, really. Gets ruler, and smack your hand. Bad joke, junior.

Still, I have not heard of any serious resistance in Germany on the Western side after the war, except for some short-lived, if occassionally intense, stuff in the first month or so after the surrender. That book sounds interesting.

Well, I'd found the flyer for the book.

The book is called Endkampf: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Death of Nazi Germany by Stephen G. Fritz. The reviewer was Dennis Showalter.

This is the first paragraph from the review:

This comprehensively researched book addresses a subject so timely that, were it not for the detailed research supporting his work, Fritz might be assumed to have written in the aftermath of the recent conquest and occupation of Iraq. He offers a case study of the end of Nazi Germany in the German state of Franconia and the establishment of the U.S. occupation on the ruins of the Third Reich. Franconia had been a center of support for Nazism since the earliest days of the movement in the 1920s. A region of small towns and farming villages, it had also largely been spared the Combined Bomber Offensive. Here, if anywhere in Germany, it should be possible to trace the impact on Germany of twelve years of Nazism and six of total war. It should be correspondingly possible to evaluate the specific effect of American conquest on a Nazi millieu relatively unaffected by attrition and provation.

And paragraph three has this:

That approach reflected the general lack of U.S. forces on the ground. The "90-division gamble" that slighted the army in favor of high-tech naval and air elements meant Franconia was initially overrun rather than occupied, which left corresponding opportunities for local resistance activity to survive well into 1946. A mixture of Nazi diehards, reckless adolescents, and men who simply resented the "Amis" sustained an enviornment of low-level violence long after official hostilities ceased.

Well, I hope to find this book and read it. Sounds like an interesting read.

Stanley '61

Maybe someone in the Bush Administration should read it?

Peter Gibbons wrote:

Maybe someone in the Bush Administration should read it?

I'm hoping that George will read it.

Stanley '61

To recapitulate what I've been arguing for about 7 years now, in most of Western Europe there was no domestic crisis until the war came, and the crisis lasted for quite a while after the war. In Britain I'd say it lasted until 1951, and in Germany until about 1954. (The Labour Government, obviously, was the equivalent of the New Deal, and Britain was shedding its empire, which is not what you do in a high.) I would readjust dates for Prophets accordingly. France is considerably more obvious although people refuse to see it. The crisis involved two major colonial wars, a change of regime in 1958, several attempted coups d'etat by the army and a civil war in Algeria, and wasn't over until about 1962.

It is the long lag that helps explain the current enormous gap between an Artist-led Europe and a Prophet-led US. And look out. The European prophets, when they come to power, will be men and women whose memories of the US run from Vietnam to Iraq.

David K '47

Muslim women find success in Europe But backlash from extremists poses problems for some by Arthur Max (The Associated Press) Quoting:

"AMSTERDAM, Netherlands-Novelist yasmine Allas doesn't believe in happy endings.

"That's strange, considering her own unlikely road to success. The daughter of a wealthy army officer, she fled as a teenager from her repressive childhood in Somalia, where she had dreamed of becoming an actress, dating men, drinking wine and living the life she saw in movies.

"Now in the Netherlands, having gained an audience for her bleak stories of oppressed women and failed immigrants, she finds she still can't escape fear.

"Since the slaying of filmmaker Theo van Gogh last month in Amsterdam, there have been death threats against two prominent Muslim women-politicians Ayaan Hirsi Ali in Holland an Mimount Bousakla in Belgium-who have spoken out against repression in Islam.

"Allas, 35, is among a growing group of young women from Muslim backgrounds who are making it in politics, the arts, media or the law in Europe, and in some cases are putting themselves at the forefront of the fight against extremism from two directions-Islamic fundamentalists and Europe's far-right fringe.

"From a television journalist in Italy to a standup comic in Norway, these women are speaking up in voices that may never have been heard had they remained in their native lands.

"In Somalia, Allas says, 'If you are a girl, you always are in fear of your parents, your older brothers, your male neighbors. It is always the man. ...It is always fear and fear and fear.'

"Now her sister says she fears raising her small children here because of the heated anti-immigrant climate. her two brothers have left the country.

"'When I came to Holland, for me it was, Whew! What freedom! What a country! It was love, immediately,' she recalls.

"'But Holland is not the same.'

"Fatima Elatik, deputy mayor of Amsterdam's heavily immigrant Zeeburg borough, was assigned bodyguards after recieving threats from a right-wing Dutch extemist after the Van Gogh killing.

"Since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks 'there's been a lot of Muslim- and Islam-bashing in our society that really was very frightening,' said Elatik, 31.

"She often deals with young immigrant men and women who want to be Dutch yet feel alien. Even though she wears a scarf, she considers herself a modern, liberal Dutch woman.

"In Italy, Rula Jebreal, 31, of Palestinian descent, anchors the news on a national TV network. She see Western freedoms as 'absolutely compatible with the Muslim religion.'

"She's also a critic of the Iraq war, to which Italy contributed troops. 'When I criticized the war, I recieved messages with insults and threats.'"

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

To recapitulate what I've been arguing for about 7 years now, in most of Western Europe there was no domestic crisis until the war came, and the crisis lasted for quite a while after the war. In Britain I'd say it lasted until 1951, and in Germany until about 1954. (The Labour Government, obviously, was the equivalent of the New Deal, and Britain was shedding its empire, which is not what you do in a high.) I would readjust dates for Prophets accordingly. France is considerably more obvious although people refuse to see it. The crisis involved two major colonial wars, a change of regime in 1958, several attempted coups d'etat by the army and a civil war in Algeria, and wasn't over until about 1962.

It is the long lag that helps explain the current enormous gap between an Artist-led Europe and a Prophet-led US. And look out. The European prophets, when they come to power, will be men and women whose memories of the US run from Vietnam to Iraq.

Mr. K,

Very provocative and interesting. Though I'm in the "W. Europe's 4T ended in c. 1949" camp I have always had trouble reconciling France's 4th-to-5th Republic transition with this view.

OTOH, what of the collapse of Weimar 1930-1933, wouldn't that have been the opening phase of the 4T for Germany at least??

Yes, I remember you saying that Britain did not enter a 4T until 1939 and Neil Howe thought you were on drugs. What do S&H think of your ideas now? I am very curious.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

To recapitulate what I've been arguing for about 7 years now, in most of Western Europe there was no domestic crisis until the war came, and the crisis lasted for quite a while after the war. In Britain I'd say it lasted until 1951, and in Germany until about 1954. (The Labour Government, obviously, was the equivalent of the New Deal, and Britain was shedding its empire, which is not what you do in a high.) I would readjust dates for Prophets accordingly. France is considerably more obvious although people refuse to see it. The crisis involved two major colonial wars, a change of regime in 1958, several attempted coups d'etat by the army and a civil war in Algeria, and wasn't over until about 1962.

David K '47

So then when did the Awakening begin? Everything I've read about 1968 in Europe makes it sound very Awakening. If so, then you only have a six-year High in France. That doesn't make any sense either. :?

Has anyone tried applying a Saeculum I to Saeculum II shift for Europe?

If America experienced something in that case, then Europe probably has an anomaly somewhere.

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

To recapitulate what I've been arguing for about 7 years now, in most of Western Europe there was no domestic crisis until the war came, and the crisis lasted for quite a while after the war. In Britain I'd say it lasted until 1951, and in Germany until about 1954. (The Labour Government, obviously, was the equivalent of the New Deal, and Britain was shedding its empire, which is not what you do in a high.) I would readjust dates for Prophets accordingly. France is considerably more obvious although people refuse to see it. The crisis involved two major colonial wars, a change of regime in 1958, several attempted coups d'etat by the army and a civil war in Algeria, and wasn't over until about 1962.

It is the long lag that helps explain the current enormous gap between an Artist-led Europe and a Prophet-led US. And look out. The European prophets, when they come to power, will be men and women whose memories of the US run from Vietnam to Iraq.

Mr. K,

Very provocative and interesting. Though I'm in the "W. Europe's 4T ended in c. 1949" camp I have always had trouble reconciling France's 4th-to-5th Republic transition with this view.

OTOH, what of the collapse of Weimar 1930-1933, wouldn't that have been the opening phase of the 4T for Germany at least??

Yes, I remember you saying that Britain did not enter a 4T until 1939 and Neil Howe thought you were on drugs. What do S&H think of your ideas now? I am very curious.

I think David K is spot on when it comes to the European prophet gen. It is indeed a few years behind its Yankee counterpart. In Asia, you still meet the occasional forty year old hippie, and he is almost always a German or a Dutchman. American hippies are either older (real hippies) or younger (consciously retro). But I think it is very, very difficult to put Euros as a whole into a generational scheme. I lived in Spain in the late eighties for a couple of years during something called 'La Movida.' Franco's presence had kept the Awakening pretty muted and Spaniards felt that the mid to late eighties were their '60's. Also, Felipe Gonzales, a real 'boomer' who led the students against Franco was in power way back then...yet I think young Euros are quite similar as a whole now.

I think Europe is a serious problem for those who want to take Strauss and Howe's theories and apply them internationally.

Originally Posted by lexpat

Originally Posted by Peter Gibbons

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

To recapitulate what I've been arguing for about 7 years now, in most of Western Europe there was no domestic crisis until the war came, and the crisis lasted for quite a while after the war. In Britain I'd say it lasted until 1951, and in Germany until about 1954. (The Labour Government, obviously, was the equivalent of the New Deal, and Britain was shedding its empire, which is not what you do in a high.) I would readjust dates for Prophets accordingly. France is considerably more obvious although people refuse to see it. The crisis involved two major colonial wars, a change of regime in 1958, several attempted coups d'etat by the army and a civil war in Algeria, and wasn't over until about 1962.

It is the long lag that helps explain the current enormous gap between an Artist-led Europe and a Prophet-led US. And look out. The European prophets, when they come to power, will be men and women whose memories of the US run from Vietnam to Iraq.

Mr. K,

Very provocative and interesting. Though I'm in the "W. Europe's 4T ended in c. 1949" camp I have always had trouble reconciling France's 4th-to-5th Republic transition with this view.

OTOH, what of the collapse of Weimar 1930-1933, wouldn't that have been the opening phase of the 4T for Germany at least??

Yes, I remember you saying that Britain did not enter a 4T until 1939 and Neil Howe thought you were on drugs. What do S&H think of your ideas now? I am very curious.

I think David K is spot on when it comes to the European prophet gen. It is indeed a few years behind its Yankee counterpart. In Asia, you still meet the occasional forty year old hippie, and he is almost always a German or a Dutchman. American hippies are either older (real hippies) or younger (consciously retro). But I think it is very, very difficult to put Euros as a whole into a generational scheme. I lived in Spain in the late eighties for a couple of years during something called 'La Movida.' Franco's presence had kept the Awakening pretty muted and Spaniards felt that the mid to late eighties were their '60's. Also, Felipe Gonzales, a real 'boomer' who led the students against Franco was in power way back then...yet I think young Euros are quite similar as a whole now.

I think Europe is a serious problem for those who want to take Strauss and Howe's theories and apply them internationally.

Most, if not all, of us agree that Europe is "behind" American society (if you will) in the saecular cycle. That's not in dispute (I don't think).

What stands out in David's assertion is how far behind: In some cases maybe only five years, in others, such as France, possibly as much as sixteen!!! That's provocative, and it's intersting. What makes it both is it is counter to what many think (including presumably S&H) and it comes from an old-timer T4Ter who knows his history really, really well due to his profession.

Regarding France, what works in his favor are the troubles of the late 50's and early 60's. What works against him are the seemingly awakening events of 1968 and the clearly Nomadish generation (the "Bof Generation") that was on scene earlier than his timetable would predict or perhaps even permit.

Yes, I agree with you that Europe isn't as easy as the United States to study in terms of saecular milestones and trends. Their individual national societies have been isolated enough from one another to be marching to different drummers for a long time, even then usually not that far off. But no more; they are very likely in synch now, with the one possible exception of Britain (along with the rest of the non-American Anglosphere) acting as spectral medium between the Continent and America.

In regards to your Spanish observations, I wouldn't be surprised if 1989-91 represented the end of the Awakening for Europe proper, while being just barely 3T for Britain and firmly 3T for America and Russia. And I would only be mildy surprised if it proved to be the start of a 4T in parts of the Balkans (as John Xenakis would argue).

Originally Posted by lexpat

I think Europe is a serious problem for those who want to take Strauss and Howe's theories and apply them internationally.

Unquestionably true! In fact, sometimes I tend to think that S&H's theories work only for the U.S., or for the Anglosphere at most, but that the rest of the Western World is on a different wavelength, that is not generation-driven in anything remotely resembling the same way. Not to mention the rest of the World, period. At most, the others would have only begun to show any real sign of starting to conform to S&H theories with the last 4T, and the current saeculum. And even then, such apparent conformity would have only been in response to the sheer power (soft as well as hard) of the U.S. during the 20th cent. If America does go under during this 4T, would that seeming increased conformity to the theories continue, or would the World revert to a more 'a-generational' pattern, as before?

OK, this doesn't surprise me. Disturbs me, and disgusts me, but given recent trends, it doesn't surprise me.

Clitoral Mutilation Appears To Be A Growing Phenomenon In Europe

The following is quoted without intention of fear or profit for the purpose of illustration and discussion only.

Make of it what you will.



Genital Mutilation 'On the Increase in Europe'

Young girls born in Europe to immigrant families from Africa are being subjected to ritual genital mutilation, and authorities are doing little to discourage it, a leading women?s rights activist warned.

Somalia-born supermodel and best-selling author Waris Dirie, who has campaigned to end the disfiguring practice she suffered at age five in her homeland, said yesterday that she estimates one in every three African families living in Europe is secretly carrying out the ritual on their daughters. No official figures exist.

The procedure ? illegal in most European countries ? is especially prevalent in Germany and the Netherlands, as well as in Austria, where an estimated 8,000 girls born into immigrant families have been affected, Dirie said.

?We don?t know who?s doing it and where,? because there are few initiatives to prevent it or to encourage doctors, nurses, social workers, teachers and others to report suspected cases, Dirie said. An exception is France, where there is strong awareness and education, she said.

?What good is a law if no one is paying attention?? Dirie told reporters in Austria, where she was being honoured yesterday by a Roman Catholic men?s movement for her efforts to stop the practice.

Islamic religious leaders are telling Europe?s Muslim Africans that the prophets recommend the ancient ritual, which involves the removal of the clitoris, often with a dull blade and no anaesthesia, Dirie said.

?That is a catastrophe,? she said. ?Every imam who is not actively against genital mutilation is guilty. Mutilation is not a tradition ? it?s a crime that must be abolished.?

Although women generally perform the procedure, sometimes called female circumcision, men are ultimately responsible because ?untrimmed? young women ?face great difficulties in African societies in finding a husband,? Dirie said.

Between 100 million and 140 million women have undergone genital mutilation worldwide, and two million girls are at risk each year, according to the World Health Organisation, which says the practice can lead to infection, the spread of Aids and crippling physical, psychological and sexual problems.

The practice has been on the rise not only among immigrants in Europe but also in Australia, Canada and the US, Who says.

Petra Bayr, an official with Austria?s Socialist Party, said the bloc?s women would press the government to consider genital mutilation an ?act of violence? and legitimate grounds for women fleeing it to be granted asylum in Austria.

?Women who are threatened with genital mutilation or have already suffered it should not have to wait for months for an open door,? added Raimund Loeffelmann, a spokesman for the Catholic men?s organisation honouring Dirie yesterday.

Just out of curiosity, HC, why did you put this in the Western Europe thread?

The article notes that the practice is also growing in other countries, such as Australia, Canada, and the US. I wonder if those nations are doing any better at combating it.

Yesterday I was reading an article in the Wall Street Journal (sorry, I didn't get the tital or author).

According to the article, local officials in Bonn, Germany have been trying to shut down a Muslim school. Opened about nine years ago for children of Saudi diplomats; other Muslim children have been in attendance.

The officials found out that the lesson plan includes martyrdom and jihad against the West.

KaiserD2 wrote:

To recapitulate what I've been arguing for about 7 years now, in most of Western Europe there was no domestic crisis until the war came, and the crisis lasted for quite a while after the war. In Britain I'd say it lasted until 1951, and in Germany until about 1954. (The Labour Government, obviously, was the equivalent of the New Deal, and Britain was shedding its empire, which is not what you do in a high.) I would readjust dates for Prophets accordingly. France is considerably more obvious although people refuse to see it. The crisis involved two major colonial wars, a change of regime in 1958, several attempted coups d'etat by the army and a civil war in Algeria, and wasn't over until about 1962.

It is the long lag that helps explain the current enormous gap between an Artist-led Europe and a Prophet-led US. And look out. The European prophets, when they come to power, will be men and women whose memories of the US run from Vietnam to Iraq.

I'm sorry David, but I have to disagree with you on Britain. From my readings, Britain's crisis starts in 1931, when the coalition government, which by the way ends in 1945 with the creation of the so-call caretaker government of '45 under Churchill and then the 1945 election that saw his defeat by the Labour Party under his fellow Ecumenical Clement Attlee. As for the English letting go of her colonies, excuse me but the majority of its empire was let go in the 1960s, most of it during the tail end of what I considered its High and right before the swinging 60s affected the country, starting in 1965. The first countries that it released, India, Pakistan, Burma, was in South-East and East Asia and began in the post-war period, but the main divestment of it empire occurred when it gave up the African real-estate and that was in the late '50s-early '60s. Unlike what happened with the French (IndoChina, Algeria), it was a mostly peaceful transition, and if any problems occurred it was after the British had transferred power. As for the Labour Party, I wouldn't exactly call them the equivalent of the New Deal Democrats, since they nationalized large sectors of British business, something the New Dealers, might, MIGHT, have dreamed of doing, but had enough sense not too, and well, from what I have heard from friends and read, it hasn't exactly helped the Brits. Anyway, I still need to read up on my post World War II British history, but I seriously doubt I am going to move either the Mods Birth years, or the 20th Century British Saculeum that I'd post during the summer.

Stanley '61

Titus Sabinus Parthicus wrote:

lexpat wrote:
I think Europe is a serious problem for those who want to take Strauss and Howe's theories and apply them internationally.

Unquestionably true! In fact, sometimes I tend to think that S&H's theories work only for the U.S., or for the Anglosphere at most, but that the rest of the Western World is on a different wavelength, that is not generation-driven in anything remotely resembling the same way. Not to mention the rest of the World, period. At most, the others would have only begun to show any real sign of starting to conform to S&H theories with the last 4T, and the current saeculum. And even then, such apparent conformity would have only been in response to the sheer power (soft as well as hard) of the U.S. during the 20th cent. If America does go under during this 4T, would that seeming increased conformity to the theories continue, or would the World revert to a more 'a-generational' pattern, as before?

I think the main problem might be trying to see Europe as a whole instead of seeing them as a group of nation-states that began to appear in Modern Time, starting about the time the War of the Roses ended in England, the Spanish finished recapturing Spain from the Moors and sent Columbus out to the West where he discovered a new world, Portgual have finished sending out the fleet that had gone around the tip of modern South Africa and reached India getting the European trade out of the hands of the Middle Eastern Arabs anf their Italian (mainly Venice) middle men and France had sent her armies over the Alps to involve itself in Italian Renaissance politics militarily. All around the early 1490s. (Don't ask me about the Germanies. Please.) Think a country by country look should really be done before a European wide Saculum is even attempted. But I will say that, from my searches, I believe that Voltaire is an Artist. Why? The guy had critized everything, and no one was safe from his critism. Seems like an artist from the way he acted.

Stanley '61

Paul Gibbons wrote:

What stands out in David's assertion is how far behind: In some cases maybe only five years, in others, such as France, possibly as much as sixteen!!! That's provocative, and it's intersting. What makes it both is it is counter to what many think (including presumably S&H) and it comes from an old-timer T4Ter who knows his history really, really well due to his profession.

I have to agree. 16 years is a bit too much for one country to be out of synch of its neighbors. But hey, won't be the first time this older nomad disputed something the older prophet had said. :wink: And at least I can say that I have the historial training to know where I can get the information. As for seeing where France's location is, I think several things need to be done: 1) find out how French society was during the Drefus affair of the 1890s; 2) France and the First World War; 3) France between the wars, especially in the 1930s; 4) France and the Second World War; 5) Petain and Charles De Gaulle, see how they fits generationally, especially when the former was head of the Vichy government during WWII and the later when he was head of the French government during '68; 6) the immediate post-war period (1945-1954); and lastly, '68 and the first few years after it. You have been given your assignments. And, happy hunting folks.

Stanley '61

Paul Gibbons wrote:

Yes, I agree with you that Europe isn't as easy as the United States to study in terms of saecular milestones and trends. Their individual national societies have been isolated enough from one another to be marching to different drummers for a long time, even then usually not that far off. But no more; they are very likely in synch now, with the one possible exception of Britain (along with the rest of the non-American Anglosphere) acting as spectral medium between the Continent and America.

Well, since the United States and her cousins, Canada, Australia and New Zealand were all founded by people mostly from England, I would have to say, D'ah!!! But seriously, that was how I'd looked at English saeculums, I used the US as a model, then went back and looked at England's own society and see if and when the two country diverge (and they do folks. Just follow the clues. The divergence starts to appear around the time before the French and Indian/Seven Years War period of peace.) and worked from there. That is how you should be working folks, follow the society of the country you are looking at and search for clues and look for when changes have occurred. You'll be quite amaze when they occur. Some are subtle and some'll hit you right between the eyes.

Stanley '61

Paul Gibbons wrote:

OTOH, what of the collapse of Weimar 1930-1933, wouldn't that have been the opening phase of the 4T for Germany at least??

That looks like a fourth turning moment to me. Especially since the economy of Germany collapsed after first the US Stock Market Crash of '29, then the crash of an Austrian bank in 1930 started to put Europe in an economic tailspin, that really affected Germany until a large part of the people of working age were put out of work. This was when Hitler and the Nazis, as well as the Communist Party, started to get a large number of people, because most were out of work and were attracted to the two parties promises of more or less follow us and once we're in charge, you'll be given work. Those two parties more or less help to destroy the Republic by making things so bad that the people were first to choose sides and then those who had the political power made the 'bad' choice of throwing their support behind Hitler and his Nazi bully boys, so that they would get rids of the Communists, while they would control him. Well, we all know how that 'Devil's Bargain' ended, don't we folks?

Stanley '61

Originally Posted by Stanley Alston '61

Paul Gibbons wrote:

Yes, I agree with you that Europe isn't as easy as the United States to study in terms of saecular milestones and trends. Their individual national societies have been isolated enough from one another to be marching to different drummers for a long time, even then usually not that far off. But no more; they are very likely in synch now, with the one possible exception of Britain (along with the rest of the non-American Anglosphere) acting as spectral medium between the Continent and America.

Well, since the United States and her cousins, Canada, Australia and New Zealand were all founded by people mostly from England, I would have to say, D'ah!!! But seriously, that was how I'd looked at English saeculums, I used the US as a model, then went back and looked at England's own society and see if and when the two country diverge (and they do folks. Just follow the clues. The divergence starts to appear around the time before the French and Indian/Seven Years War period of peace.) and worked from there. That is how you should be working folks, follow the society of the country you are looking at and search for clues and look for when changes have occurred. You'll be quite amaze when they occur. Some are subtle and some'll hit you right between the eyes.

Stanley '61

Stanley,

I've been trying to think of where America and Europe parted paths saecularly, and I think it goes back to the 17th century. It seems to me that America entered a 4T in 1675 whereas Britain did in 1685 (trigger: ascension of James II). [Now how Britain had a 3T last SO LONG (1649-1685) doesn't compute with me, but I don't see 4T evidence for England until James II]

So therefore the War of Spanish Succession (Queen Anne's War) was 4T for Europe but 1T for America. And from there we seem to be a bit off.

Then, in the early 19th century, we have a LONG 1T (and a subsequently long Prophet gen), but it looks to me like Europe had a exceedingly short 1T (c. 1815-c. 1830). Now you may be of the school that ends the Napoleonic 4t at 1805 but I have a hard time swallowing that. Are there any signs that the European 4T started before 1789?

If I'm right and Europe's 19th century prophet gen was short, then that would help explain the relative mildness of their 4T (the Parisian mayhem surrounding the Communard notwithstanding).

Thoughts?

Paul Gibbons wrote:

Stanley,

I've been trying to think of where America and Europe parted paths saecularly, and I think it goes back to the 17th century. It seems to me that America entered a 4T in 1675 whereas Britain did in 1685 (trigger: ascension of James II). [Now how Britain had a 3T last SO LONG (1649-1685) doesn't compute with me, but I don't see 4T evidence for England until James II]

So therefore the War of Spanish Succession (Queen Anne's War) was 4T for Europe but 1T for America. And from there we seem to be a bit off.

Actually, the colonies and Britain was still in synch, although the parting of the way was starting. You seem to have forgotten about a few things that began in 1678 and the Popish Plot fear that began to grip England when people started to believe the lies of Titus Oates, who claimed that the Catholics were plotting to murder King Charles II (who was a secret Catholic) and replace him with his brother, James, who everyone knew was a real Catholic, and everyone thought was confirmed by the still unsolved murder of Sir Godfrey, whose death, by the way, was used by those who would later be called Whigs by their opponents who would form the backbone of those later called Tories, to try and get rid of James from the direct line to the throne and have him replaced either by Monmouth (Charles' oldest illegimate son) or Williams (James' son-in-law by mariage to James' oldest daughter, Mary) and with his being replaced on the throne by James and with the twin fears of Arbitrary Government and popery coming in turned England once more into a Catholic start that would follow the Pope's dictates, as well as England being placed under the thumb of the France of Louis XIV. If you look between then and the Glorious Revolution of 1688 when James was removed, James was as much at center stage as anyone else, since anyone who was suppose to be a 'Good Protestant' stood in fear of him becoming their king and bringing back Catholicism and the Pope in his wake. (And idea that was ridiculous since most of the English people were confirmed Protestants, but who says folks were rational when religion was concerned back then. And that everyone who was an Anglican was being told to not resist what ever then king does, since god would punish him in the after life if he was a bad ruler.) Another thing is starting with 1678, the final phase of whether Parliament would either sit at the will of the king, as it was when the First Turning began when James I was made king, or be a permanent fixture and elected every 3 years (later made 7 during the next high) during the end of the Crisis period was started in the following year. In fact, there were three elections, One in 1679, which occur after the end of the Cavalier Parliament of 1661-1679, the second Parliament of 1680-81, and then the third 'Oxford' Parliament of 1681, which like the two previous Parliament, wanted to exclude James from the direct line of succession when Charles died. This one was ended because Charles had enough of the Whigs' determination of removing his brother from the succession line, and desolved what would be his last Parliament in 1681. He then rule England, sending his Tory supporters after the Whigs. This culminated with the 'Rye House' Plot, where, supposively, the more radical of the Whig leaders were planning to overthrow the government, including the assassination of the King and James, and were found out and caught and then put on the trial. This occured in 1683, and the period between then and James' coming to the throne is known as the Stuart reaction, where the Tories used all of the power under their control to put all those who didn't think James' should be allowed to come to the throne by legal terror. So, 1678 was the beginning of England's crisis, 1679-1683 was the Exclusion Crisis period, 1683-85 was the time of the Stuart reaction, which ends with James coming to the throne, the crushing of Monmouth's Rebellion in the West, and then the Bloody Assizes trials conducted by Judge Jeffries, who hanged or sent out to the colonies as Indentured Services as many people from the West who had supported the uprising. There was then a short period of quiet (1685-1688) during which James did everything he could to squander the support of the people of England in general and then his Tory supporters in particular by trying to make things easier for English Catholics, and then the Protestant Dissenters. The crisis' flashpoint comes in 1688 when the possibilty of a Catholic dynasty came with the birth of a Catholic Prince of Wales to James and his Italian Catholic born wife, Mary of Modena, and then the landing of William at the head of a Dutch/Protestant Army, the collapse of James' resolve and the English Army and then James' leaving for the continent and the court of King Louis XIV and a Britain mainly determined to not have him back, and to stop France's trying to form a hegemony on the continent. Everything that happens in the next two decades, England becoming a European Power, a Naval Power, a Colonial Power and an Economic Power comes out of 1688. 1688-1697 was the period of the Nine Year's War, also called the War of the League of Augsburg and the War of the English Succession, because of the dispute of whether William and Mary should be on the throne, or James should be placed back onto the throne, by force. 1697-1701 is a period of peace (armed truce is more like it) for England. Then come the period of The War of the Spanish Succession. Now, the whole period I don't consider a full Fourth Turning period. The period up to 1709 is, especially the reaction to Marlborough's crushing of the French Army at Blenheim, is a Fourth Turning period, but after the last of Marlborough's victory, the 1709 Battle of Malplaquet, was won at a high cost, as well as see the French Army get away to fight another day, and the war more or less slows down after that and warwariness sets in, is a First Turning Period.

So, to remind everyone, this was how I'd originally said this period was place in Britain saeculum, and the generations that lived through it:

Glorious Revolution Crisis - 1678-1708

Puritans entering elderhood
Cavaliers entering midlife
Glorious entering young adulthood
Hanoverians entering childhood.

As for the Generations themselves:

English Puritan (Prophet) - 1588-1617
English Cavaliers (Nomad) - 1618-1650
English Glorious (Hero) - 1651-1676
Hanoverians (Artist) - 1677-1701.

Hopefully I haven't confused anyone. :wink:

In Amercia, this was what was going on for most of that same time:

colonial Glorious Revolution Crisis (Fourth Turning, 1675-1704):

Puritans entering elderhood
Cavaliers entering midlife
Glorious entering young adulthood
Enlighteners entering childhood.

And the Generational lineup was:

Puritans (Prophet) - 1588-1617
Cavaliers (Nomad) - 1618-1647
Glorious (Hero) - 1648-1673
Enlightenment (Artist) - 1674-1700.

Stanley '61

Paul Gibbons wrote:

Then, in the early 19th century, we have a LONG 1T (and a subsequently long Prophet gen), but it looks to me like Europe had a exceedingly short 1T (c. 1815-c. 1830). Now you may be of the school that ends the Napoleonic 4t at 1805 but I have a hard time swallowing that. Are there any signs that the European 4T started before 1789?

If I'm right and Europe's 19th century prophet gen was short, then that would help explain the relative mildness of their 4T (the Parisian mayhem surrounding the Communard notwithstanding).

As far as I know, No. The French Revolution, is the direct result of the American Revolution, but the explosion itself occurs in 1789. There might have been a few years previous to the explosion, but you would have to look at what was going on politically, economically and socially in France before the Storming of the Bastille in Paris. And I know that there was an attempt to reform France's economic state right before the big blow up.

Stanley '61

So by the GR 4T England was 3-5 years behind, but by the FR/Napoleonic 4T they were considerably more so (in your view)?