by DaKardii » Thu Feb 09, 2017 9:58 am
1) I'm very pleased by the turn of events between the Philippines and China, given that up until this morning, I was certain that Duterte would side with China and Islam in the upcoming Clash of Civilizations. He has Communists and Muslims in his family background, after all.
2) Time's argument that Steve Bannon is going to use the Fourth Turning as a means to start WWIII is outright ridiculous. However, it reminds me a lot of the main villain of a screenplay I'm currently in the process of writing (I'm no professional, but I'm a cinephile (a person who is fond of motion pictures) and am interested in using screenplays as a means to promote political discourse (I'm currently a double major in political science and international studies at the University of Miami)). For obvious reasons, I'm not going to reveal any other details about my screenplay, but let's talk about the villain. He's supposed to be a Soviet military adviser who was traumatized by the events of the Second World War, during which he witnessed the massive death and destruction Germany waged on Russia. Much like the expatriates of the interwar period, he subsequently became disillusioned with society and turned to the works of academics and intellectuals to formulate an alternate worldview. During the early years of the Cold War, he discovered the historical patterns that you cite in order to justify your "Generational Dynamics" theory (though he doesn't call his findings "Generational Dynamics"). However, instead of using his findings for good (such as education), he decides to use them for evil. During the next 23 years (the story takes place in 1968), he is deployed to various proxy wars between the US and the USSR that can be classified as crisis wars, such as Korea and Vietnam. Knowing that these are crisis wars and that there is a genocidal urge on both sides, he deliberately tries to inflame tensions in order to intensify the genocide. Why? Two reasons. First, he wants to inflict as much pain as possible in order to advance Soviet power. His experience during the Second World War has convinced him that massive atrocities and genocide is the path to power. Second, he wants to wage psychological warfare on the US military by using said atrocities to create propaganda that states: "The only way you can beat us is if you lose your soul and become us. Otherwise, you will be destroyed, because you are weak."
Obviously, the vast majority of people would be horrified by this character's actions. They would call him evil. A man whose mind is beyond warped. However, what do you think of this character's logic, regarding your theory? Also, are there historical examples of people who conducted foreign policy under that particular mindset?
1) I'm very pleased by the turn of events between the Philippines and China, given that up until this morning, I was certain that Duterte would side with China and Islam in the upcoming Clash of Civilizations. He has Communists and Muslims in his family background, after all.
2) Time's argument that Steve Bannon is going to use the Fourth Turning as a means to start WWIII is outright ridiculous. However, it reminds me a lot of the main villain of a screenplay I'm currently in the process of writing (I'm no professional, but I'm a cinephile (a person who is fond of motion pictures) and am interested in using screenplays as a means to promote political discourse (I'm currently a double major in political science and international studies at the University of Miami)). For obvious reasons, I'm not going to reveal any other details about my screenplay, but let's talk about the villain. He's supposed to be a Soviet military adviser who was traumatized by the events of the Second World War, during which he witnessed the massive death and destruction Germany waged on Russia. Much like the expatriates of the interwar period, he subsequently became disillusioned with society and turned to the works of academics and intellectuals to formulate an alternate worldview. During the early years of the Cold War, he discovered the historical patterns that you cite in order to justify your "Generational Dynamics" theory (though he doesn't call his findings "Generational Dynamics"). However, instead of using his findings for good (such as education), he decides to use them for evil. During the next 23 years (the story takes place in 1968), he is deployed to various proxy wars between the US and the USSR that can be classified as crisis wars, such as Korea and Vietnam. Knowing that these are crisis wars and that there is a genocidal urge on both sides, he deliberately tries to inflame tensions in order to [b]intensify[/b] the genocide. Why? Two reasons. First, he wants to inflict as much pain as possible in order to advance Soviet power. His experience during the Second World War has convinced him that massive atrocities and genocide is the path to power. Second, he wants to wage psychological warfare on the US military by using said atrocities to create propaganda that states: "The only way you can beat us is if you lose your soul and become us. Otherwise, you will be destroyed, because you are weak."
Obviously, the vast majority of people would be horrified by this character's actions. They would call him evil. A man whose mind is beyond warped. However, what do you think of this character's logic, regarding your theory? Also, are there historical examples of people who conducted foreign policy under that particular mindset?