by John » Sun Jul 30, 2017 8:30 pm
Coordinated fires wrote:
> John, I have some questions regarding the generational dynamics
> framework. Given that generational crisis eras occur 60-80 years
> after the previous crisis war, do you expect that trends such as
> longer life spans, ageing populations( at least in the west),
> people staying in influential positions until an older age( ex:
> Nancy peloton, donald trump many others are 70 80 + with no signs
> of retirement )will impact, perhaps even stretch the intervals
> between crisis wars?
> Do you believe that adversaries on different timelines are at a
> sort of disadvantage? since theoretically according to GD, one
> nation's leaders may be a younger and therefore more likely to use
> military force to impose their political will. Parenthetically,
> does a country such as China, who hasnt fought any major wars
> since the 1950's, possess a greater will to go to war than, let's
> say, the United States whose leaders still have memories of
> Vietnam, iraq, and Afghanistan?
The average human lifespan is irrelevant, since the average is mostly
determined by child mortality. 200 years ago, something like 50% of
all children died before age 5. Today, that figure is more like 1-2%.
That's why the average human lifespan has increased. What's important
to generational theory is the maximum effective human lifespan, and
that's been around 75-80 years for millennia.
As for your second question, I don't know the answer. I believe the
fact that China's military has never fought an external war puts them
at a major disadvantage, but that has nothing to do with generational
theory.
[quote="Coordinated fires"]
> John, I have some questions regarding the generational dynamics
> framework. Given that generational crisis eras occur 60-80 years
> after the previous crisis war, do you expect that trends such as
> longer life spans, ageing populations( at least in the west),
> people staying in influential positions until an older age( ex:
> Nancy peloton, donald trump many others are 70 80 + with no signs
> of retirement )will impact, perhaps even stretch the intervals
> between crisis wars?
> Do you believe that adversaries on different timelines are at a
> sort of disadvantage? since theoretically according to GD, one
> nation's leaders may be a younger and therefore more likely to use
> military force to impose their political will. Parenthetically,
> does a country such as China, who hasnt fought any major wars
> since the 1950's, possess a greater will to go to war than, let's
> say, the United States whose leaders still have memories of
> Vietnam, iraq, and Afghanistan?[/quote]
The average human lifespan is irrelevant, since the average is mostly
determined by child mortality. 200 years ago, something like 50% of
all children died before age 5. Today, that figure is more like 1-2%.
That's why the average human lifespan has increased. What's important
to generational theory is the maximum effective human lifespan, and
that's been around 75-80 years for millennia.
As for your second question, I don't know the answer. I believe the
fact that China's military has never fought an external war puts them
at a major disadvantage, but that has nothing to do with generational
theory.