Basics of Generational Theory

[CrosstimbersOkie]

For those unfamiliar with Robert Greene's "The 48 Laws of Power," here they are. He identifies the importance of identifying the spirit of the times. Thanks to John, William Strauss, and Neil Howe we understand the why behind the spirit of the times.

http://www2.tech.purdue.edu/cg/courses/ ... _power.htm

Law 35

Master the Art of Timing

Never seem to be in a hurry – hurrying betrays a lack of control over yourself, and over time. Always seem patient, as if you know that everything will come to you eventually. Become a detective of the right moment; sniff out the spirit of the times, the trends that will carry you to power. Learn to stand back when the time is not yet ripe, and to strike fiercely when it has reached fruition.

[Higgenbotham]

http://www.financialsense.com/financial ... -neil-howe

[burt]

John a question about the points between the eras.

So one era turns to another, fine, but yet I'm a little bit confused of what MARKS (it doesn't have to be a precise event, but something...) the passage from one era to another.
If it is only time, then how do you take into account that a generation is something much longer today than what it was before (t is moving from a historical value of 18-22 into something close to 30 in every so called devellopped countries) and that more people get older, meaning that the "mass memory" does NOT evaporate as quickly as before.

Regards

[John]

Dear Bertrand,

> John a question about the points between the eras.

> So one era turns to another, fine, but yet I'm a little bit
> confused of what MARKS (it doesn't have to be a precise event, but
> something...) the passage from one era to another.

> If it is only time, then how do you take into account that a
> generation is something much longer today than what it was before
> (t is moving from a historical value of 18-22 into something close
> to 30 in every so called devellopped countries) and that more
> people get older, meaning that the "mass memory" does NOT
> evaporate as quickly as before.

First off, there is no change in the length of a generation. People
get confused about this because they say that the length of a human
lifetime has been increasing, but that refers to the AVERAGE lifespan.
What's important to Generational Dynamics is the MAXIMUM lifespan, and
that's remained fairly constant at 80 years for millennia.

Look, if you want to learn how to evaluate generational eras, then you
just have to get lots of practice. At this point, I've evaluated many
hundreds of generational eras, so I've developed a pretty good
intuition, and I can usually do it fairly quickly. But when I was
first starting out, it took me a very long time in some cases. I've
mentioned elsewhere that evaluating the War of the Spanish Succession
took me several days camped out in Barnes & Noble bookstore reading
history books.

If you really want to learn how to do it, then I suggest that you
start evaluating different periods in history. After you've been
doing it for several months, then it'll become easier.

There are no simple formulas, but here are two places where I've
described the process:


** "International business forecasting using System Dynamics with generational flows."
** http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com/ww2 ... asting.pdf


** Generational Dynamics forecasting methodology
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... cast090503

Here is some of the text in those sources:

Here's a bare bones outline of the guidelines that I use in
determining generational eras (or turnings). These guidelines seem to
work in all the cases I've seen.

It's important to remember, when reading these guidelines, that
generational eras are determined not by specific events, but by the
"mood" of the great masses of people. It's worthwhile pointing out
that there are two distinct methods for determining where a particular
country is at a particular time: (1) By number of years since the last
crisis war; or (2) By turning-specific events. In practice, it's
easiest to use the two methods together, especially for historical
periods in countries where little information is available.

In Generational Dynamics, here are some guidelines for estimating
turnings and turning boundaries:

• The Recovery/Austerity/High period (first turning) begins just after
  the smoke clears from the explosive climax of the crisis war. It's
  "Austerity" for the survivors, who are still traumatized and will
  devote their lives to keep it from happening again, and it's a "High"
  for those in the new the Prophet generation, born right after the war,
  who feel contempt for the austere rules.
• The Awakening period (second turning) begins 15-18 years later, when
  the Prophets begin to make themselves felt. An Awakening can be
  identified by "Awakening-type" events that are caused by a political
  struggle between the war survivors and the Prophet generation. Typical
  Awakening-type events are: Riots and demonstrations for individual
  rights; greater prominence for gender issues; pro-war or anti-war
  demonstrations – whichever is the opposite of what their parents
  prescribe. If there is violence in this period, it's "low-level
  violence," punished by police action in specific cases.
• "Awakening crisis": The Awakening seems almost always to climax with
  an event that defines a winner between the older and younger
  generations. This is sometimes called a "bloodless coup" or a "velvet
  revolution" or an "internal revolution." Examples where the younger
  generation won are: resignation of Richard Nixon; replacement of
  Second Reich with Weimar Republic. Example where the older generation
  won: Tiananmen Square massacre. I believe that the victory of the
  older generation is a bad thing for a country, and foreshadows a civil
  war in the crisis period. International Business Forecasting … by
  John J. Xenakis, page 47 of 68 Copyright © John J. Xenakis 2001-2009 -
  Printed Thursday, May 14, 2009
• The transition from Awakening to Unraveling (third turning) to
  Crisis (fourth turning) is a gradual one, without clear
  boundaries. Basically, the austere rules set down in the first turning
  begin to unravel almost as soon as they're enunciated. The Unraveling
  officially begins 40 years after the end of the last crisis war. The
  "Awakening crisis," which can occur before or after the Unraveling
  period begins, is a much more important marker than the Unraveling era
  itself. After the Awakening crisis, the austere rules that were set
  down during the first turning really begin to unravel, and total
  craziness sets in. Typical unraveling type events are: willingness to
  compromise to the point of appeasement; economic bubble.
• The Crisis Era (fourth turning) is in two parts that have to be
  separated: before and after the regeneracy (where the real crisis war
  begins).
• The Crisis Era - Part I -- the "post-unraveling period." This begins
  when the survivors of the last crisis war all disappear (retire or
  die), all at the same time. This is about 55-60 years after the end
  of the last crisis war. This would be amended if the crisis war begins
  earlier than 55 years after. Typical Crisis Era - Part I events are
  immigration laws, signs of xenophobia including maltreatment of
  foreigners, emphasis on stereotypical gender roles.
• The Crisis Era - Part II -- begins with the regeneracy, when the new
  crisis era really begins. The “regeneracy” is a series of events
  (think of the 9/11 attack) that unify the people, and “regenerate”
  civic unity for the first time since the end of the last Crisis
  War. Typical Crisis Era - Part II events are: financial crisis, total
  war.
• A fifth turning occurs if the Crisis Era goes by with no crisis
  war. This is a distinctly different era from the others. Typical fifth
  turning events today: Suicide bombers.
• From the point of view of determining long-term (multi-saecular)
  generational timelines, the only important date is the date on which
  the first turning begins.
• It's impossible to enter a fifth turning except from a fourth; or a
  fourth turning except from a third; or a third turning except from a
  second; or a second turning except from a first. Thus an Awakening era
  country that experiences an unexpected genocidal invasion will still
  fight the war as an Awakening war; the country will NOT transition
  into a Crisis era.
• However, it is possible to enter a first turning from another
  turning when a massive population relocation occurs, destroying the
  generational relationships that existed prior to the relocation. This
  sometimes happens to a country with a huge unexpected invasion by
  another country. This is called a "first turning reset," and it's
  quite rare.

Every society and nation experiences a genocidal crisis war every
70-90 years, with a new one starting just around the time that the
generations of survivors of the previous one all disappear (retire or
die), all at once. This is a basic component of generational theory.

John

[burt]

Thank you

First off, there is no change in the length of a generation. People
get confused about this because they say that the length of a human
lifetime has been increasing, but that refers to the AVERAGE lifespan.
What's important to Generational Dynamics is the MAXIMUM lifespan, and
that's remained fairly constant at 80 years for millennia.

The official definition of a generation is the average time between birth and the first time you got a child, so the first part of my question had nothing to do with lifetime, but with the relation between father-mother and children, and so to the speed of change in attitudes.
Lifetime (second part of my question) was about time before memory dies (today we can still speak with people having survived to WWII) and this is important, because, on my point of view it keeps us away from WWIII for a little bit of time.

You use a different view, thank you for the explanation. If I understand well your view is connected to the fact that, whatever education you had, you are the most powerful person when you are 40 (and this is VERY stable) and you die (or have Alzheimer) at 80 (this is less stable, because nowadays you can find quite healthy people at 90 and more)

Look, if you want to learn how to evaluate generational eras, then you
just have to get lots of practice.

For sure, I take some time to do it and I'm quite fascinated today with Turkey, it is as if they were headed by "Heros" who'd like to be friends with everyone (exactly as if there were a brain new cycle), as it will not work, they are going to be VERY disappointed and at that time we will have a problem.
It really takes time and a lot of readings, and I'm still not sure of the validity of my remark (see below)

It's important to remember, when reading these guidelines, that generational eras are determined not by specific events, but by the "mood" of the great masses of people. It's worthwhile pointing out that there are two distinct methods for determining where a particular country is at a particular time: (1) By number of years since the last crisis war; or (2) By turning-specific events. In practice, it's easiest to use the two methods together, especially for historical periods in countries where little information is available.

Thank you for this precision, yes I find hard sometimes the "balance" between the 2 approaches.
My question came from there.

[*] The Awakening period (second turning) begins 15-18 years later, when
the Prophets begin to make themselves felt. An Awakening can be
identified by "Awakening-type" events that are caused by a political
struggle between the war survivors and the Prophet generation. Typical
Awakening-type events are: Riots and demonstrations for individual
rights; greater prominence for gender issues; pro-war or anti-war
demonstrations – whichever is the opposite of what their parents
prescribe. If there is violence in this period, it's "low-level
violence," punished by police action in specific cases.

That is where I made the mistake, mixing the "Awakening-type" event and the "Awakening crisis"

[*]After the Awakening crisis, the austere rules that were set
down during the first turning really begin to unravel, and total
craziness sets in. Typical unraveling type events are: willingness to
compromise to the point of appeasement; economic bubble.

Do you mean by "willingness to compromise to the point of appeasement" what we are living now in Europe with the crazy communication on bailout for Greece and today Ireland, trying to compromise to an illusion OR compromise to a REAL point of appeasement?

Can the problem we have here could come from the illusion that Merkel and Sarkosy think that they can communicate in 2010 as if we were in 1970 (it can also very well be manipulation in the sense that you say "no bailout" and provoke a crisis so that the population is so shocked that it accepts anything, i'm hesitating between stupidity and manipulation)?

[*] The Crisis Era - Part I -- the "post-unraveling period." This begins
when the survivors of the last crisis war all disappear (retire or
die), all at the same time. This is about 55-60 years after the end
of the last crisis war. This would be amended if the crisis war begins
earlier than 55 years after. Typical Crisis Era - Part I events are
immigration laws, signs of xenophobia including maltreatment of
foreigners, emphasis on stereotypical gender roles.

Then again my question about length of generation, today people retire later, and specialy from the political life (even if they don't do politics, retired people (from the active life) are an important mass of people very influent). Does it have any influence on the start of the Crisis era - part I or on its length?? or is it out of subject

A fifth turning occurs if the Crisis Era goes by with no crisis
war. This is a distinctly different era from the others. Typical fifth
turning events today: Suicide bombers.

Can we consider that Turkey is in this case, this country is making a tremendous effort to be happy with everybody, and live with a tremendous hope on the future? It is not as religious as that, it is actuallly 50-50, some people want a religious change some want a more laic country, so there is a hope that, not going too far in any direction, means peace. And today the economy runs fine, so it helps.

But then I'm trying to find the forth turning and I dont see it yet.
any advice?

Every society and nation experiences a genocidal crisis war every
70-90 years, with a new one starting just around the time that the
generations of survivors of the previous one all disappear (retire or
die), all at once. This is a basic component of generational theory.

What is your opinion on Mexico? I have NOT studied this country with the generational tool, but it looks like the period is longer than that? no?

Regards
Thank you for your patience

[gerald]

John

Is it possible that generational dynamic theory may only apply to societies of a particular level of sophistication and complexity?. I can think of two types of societies where the theory may not have application. Validation of this however could be difficult or imposable.

The first type of society is the "stone age type" the remnants of which were studied in the early to middle 20th century by anthropologists, primarily in New Guinea or the upper tributaries of the Amazon .These primitive people "tribes" were constantly in a survival mode against the natural environment and generally in some form of "war" with one another. This would seem to imply a steady state existence thereby eliminating generational differences.

The second type of society is one that is highly structured and guided / controlled by "old men". A possible example of this, is early Pharaonic Egypt. The early Dynasties appeared to have had relatively long periods of stability. These early dynasties had an interesting social structure which was divided into three parts.
One, the general population,-- two, the government "Pharaoh and his administrators",-- and three, the priests.
The roll of the priests is interesting, and most likely the root of early pharaonic stability. The priests had great influence over who was to be Pharaoh and who was to be his wife. A priest's authority was based upon age and knowledge, and in many ways the Pharaoh was the visible tool of authority for the priests. The priests kept extensive libraries and records which were used as guides by the priests when giving advice and recommending actions to be carried out by the pharaoh.

If a society is run and controlled by those who know the cycles of time and events would they not also be able to minimize generational differences ? This is what seems to be indicated by the longevity and stability of the early dynasties.

In an another stable society, sorry I don't recall which, individuals were not allowed to vote until they were 35 years old, had an adequate level of life experiences, and exhibited an appropriate level of social and governmental knowledge. Yes, this can lead to an ossified society.

During the last presidential election I learned of a college social science class discussion, in which the instructor asked the class a question, "who was going to vote for whom and why". Many of the female voting students said they were going to vote for Obama because he was "cute". In the decline of ancient Rome it was learned that if you want a politician elected to the senate it was advantageous to select a charismatic actor to get the support of the citizens. These two examples of public thinking can lead to disastrous results.

Is it possible to circumvent the destructive generational dynamic cycles by having a society governed by " the old and wise" and still maintain the dynamism and knowledge seeking required for technologic, scientific, and cultural advancement? Or are we trapped in a cycle of development and destruction?

[burt]

One, the general population,-- two, the government "Pharaoh and his administrators",-- and three, the priests.

It is the way that ANY urban society is managed, the pseudo democraty we have in the west is managed this way.
On the top you have "god", today it's called the "Market", then you have the media linked to the governments (governments are the lobbies, no more any kind of president) (these medias are very equivalent to the priests), then you have the population who venere what the priests say .
Opposition is less and less aceptable today, it goes through Internet, and Internet, one day or the other, is going to be shut down.

My suggestion: try to find cycles in the power of the priests in Egypt, they DID change, and at some time pharaon created new gods. It looks like you have a good egyptian culture, why not make this reasearch for us (the readers)? the question is: was it cyclical?

In an another stable society, sorry I don't recall which, individuals were not allowed to vote until they were 35 years old, had an adequate level of life experiences, and exhibited an appropriate level of social and governmental knowledge.
...
During the last presidential election I learned of a college social science class discussion, in which the instructor asked the class a question, "who was going to vote for whom and why". Many of the female voting students said they were going to vote for Obama because he was "cute". In the decline of ancient Rome it was learned that if you want a politician elected to the senate it was advantageous to select a charismatic actor to get the support of the citizens. These two examples of public thinking can lead to disastrous results.

Greek knew that democraty IS unstable, they haven't found any solution for that problem. Now you have people who try to think how to make democraty viable. For that you need education, information (this is what Stigilz suggests) AND restriction of the voting right to the people who understand (even a little bit) the problem (I do not mean that the voting right has to be take away from any kind of people, I mean BEFORE going to vote you have to be aware of what you are voting for). Today ANY kind of change on the voting right would be feeled as unacceptable and the lobbies thrhough the media would "kill" ANY new idea, ans any debate.

Have you any suggestion for studying the cycle of the type of governments (the lobbycraty we have today emerged between WWI and WWII and took its power after 1970-80). There was a try to make a new type of governement in 1917 in Russia, ans between 1700 and 1900 it was a very open subject (this is no more the case now, everyone looks like he is happy in this manipulating lobbycraty), it looks like, for me, this is cyclical on very long time frame?

Is it possible to circumvent the destructive generational dynamic cycles by having a society governed by " the old and wise" and still maintain the dynamism and knowledge seeking required for technologic, scientific, and cultural advancement? Or are we trapped in a cycle of development and destruction?

That's a goof question, as long as people are happy and THINK they live in a true democraty, ther is NO hope for anything, it is exactly the description you make on Rome...
Second remark, as long as I understand correctly, after the Unravel era which corrupt all kind of value, a crisis era is an era where hope for changing anything is very low.
You need some destructive event to make a rebirth of the society, the problem, for me, is "what happen at an end of civilization?", ours began mor or less in 1500 and is very close to its end (very close doesn't mean today, it could be 2300, I have no idea yet, my feeling says much closer, but I have no proof for that, and there is still room for hope)

[John]

Dear Bertrand,

> Do you mean by "willingness to compromise to the point of
> appeasement" what we are living now in Europe with the crazy
> communication on bailout for Greece and today Ireland, trying to
> compromise to an illusion OR compromise to a REAL point of
> appeasement?

> Can the problem we have here could come from the illusion that
> Merkel and Sarkosy think that they can communicate in 2010 as if
> we were in 1970 (it can also very well be manipulation in the
> sense that you say "no bailout" and provoke a crisis so that the
> population is so shocked that it accepts anything, i'm hesitating
> between stupidity and manipulation)?

Yes, appeasement is certainly part of it. But I see craziness
everywhere, and I write about it in the web log. I've said many times
that I wake up in the morning and sometimes have to ask myself
seriously whether I'm crazy or the rest of the world is crazy.

> Then again my question about length of generation, today people
> retire later, and specialy from the political life (even if they
> don't do politics, retired people (from the active life) are an
> important mass of people very influent). Does it have any
> influence on the start of the Crisis era - part I or on its
> length?? or is it out of subject

I don't believe that this makes any difference. A generation first
makes itself felt in their early 20s. They gain power through their
40s, and start to lose power in their 50s. I don't believe that it
makes much difference whether they retire at age 60, 70 or 80.
They're still pretty powerless at any of those ages. Of course there
are always particular individuals who are powerful, but for the
generational as a whole, they've lost most of their power after age
60.

> Can we consider that Turkey is in this case, this country is
> making a tremendous effort to be happy with everybody, and live
> with a tremendous hope on the future? It is not as religious as
> that, it is actuallly 50-50, some people want a religious change
> some want a more laic country, so there is a hope that, not going
> too far in any direction, means peace. And today the economy runs
> fine, so it helps. But then I'm trying to find the forth turning
> and I dont see it yet. any advice? ...

> What is your opinion on Mexico? I have NOT studied this country
> with the generational tool, but it looks like the period is longer
> than that? no?

There are several countries that have had not had a crisis war in over
80 years. These include: Mexico (Mexican revolution), Turkey (Ottoman
collapse), Saudi Arabia (Ibn Saud conquest, ending 1925), Morocco (Rif
war, ending 1927), Russia (Bolshevik Revolution and civil war).

What are the factors that can delay a country from having a crisis
war? I believe that plenty of money is one of them, and that could
apply to oil money for Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Morocco and even Russia.

However, in the case of Turkey I don't really have any explanation.
Perhaps it had something to do with the intensity of Turkey's
participation in WW II.

John

[John]

Dear Gerald,

> Is it possible that generational dynamic theory may only apply to
> societies of a particular level of sophistication and
> complexity?. I can think of two types of societies where the
> theory may not have application. Validation of this however could
> be difficult or imposable.

Every society has to have wars of extermination, because the
population grows faster than the food supply and other resources. The
Generational Dynamics paradigm explains how these wars of
extermination occur, and as far as I know, the same paradigm applies
to all societies throughout history.

In fact, I've argued that the same paradigm must apply to all
intelligent species in the universe.

** Chapter 7 - The Singularity
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi ... book2.next

John

[gerald]

One, the general population,-- two, the government "Pharaoh and his administrators",-- and three, the priests.

It is the way that ANY urban society is managed, the pseudo democraty we have in the west is managed this way.
On the top you have "god", today it's called the "Market", then you have the media linked to the governments (governments are the lobbies, no more any kind of president) (these medias are very equivalent to the priests), then you have the population who venere what the priests say .
Opposition is less and less aceptable today, it goes through Internet, and Internet, one day or the other, is going to be shut down.

My suggestion: try to find cycles in the power of the priests in Egypt, they DID change, and at some time pharaon created new gods. It looks like you have a good egyptian culture, why not make this reasearch for us (the readers)? the question is: was it cyclical?

In an another stable society, sorry I don't recall which, individuals were not allowed to vote until they were 35 years old, had an adequate level of life experiences, and exhibited an appropriate level of social and governmental knowledge.
...
During the last presidential election I learned of a college social science class discussion, in which the instructor asked the class a question, "who was going to vote for whom and why". Many of the female voting students said they were going to vote for Obama because he was "cute". In the decline of ancient Rome it was learned that if you want a politician elected to the senate it was advantageous to select a charismatic actor to get the support of the citizens. These two examples of public thinking can lead to disastrous results.

Greek knew that democraty IS unstable, they haven't found any solution for that problem. Now you have people who try to think how to make democraty viable. For that you need education, information (this is what Stigilz suggests) AND restriction of the voting right to the people who understand (even a little bit) the problem (I do not mean that the voting right has to be take away from any kind of people, I mean BEFORE going to vote you have to be aware of what you are voting for). Today ANY kind of change on the voting right would be feeled as unacceptable and the lobbies thrhough the media would "kill" ANY new idea, ans any debate.

Have you any suggestion for studying the cycle of the type of governments (the lobbycraty we have today emerged between WWI and WWII and took its power after 1970-80). There was a try to make a new type of governement in 1917 in Russia, ans between 1700 and 1900 it was a very open subject (this is no more the case now, everyone looks like he is happy in this manipulating lobbycraty), it looks like, for me, this is cyclical on very long time frame?

Is it possible to circumvent the destructive generational dynamic cycles by having a society governed by " the old and wise" and still maintain the dynamism and knowledge seeking required for technologic, scientific, and cultural advancement? Or are we trapped in a cycle of development and destruction?

That's a goof question, as long as people are happy and THINK they live in a true democraty, ther is NO hope for anything, it is exactly the description you make on Rome...
Second remark, as long as I understand correctly, after the Unravel era which corrupt all kind of value, a crisis era is an era where hope for changing anything is very low.
You need some destructive event to make a rebirth of the society, the problem, for me, is "what happen at an end of civilization?", ours began mor or less in 1500 and is very close to its end (very close doesn't mean today, it could be 2300, I have no idea yet, my feeling says much closer, but I have no proof for that, and there is still room for hope)

Studying the early or predynastic history of the Egyptian priests would be interesting but I think next to imposable, because the needed information has most likely been destroyed either inadvertently or purposely. Complicating the study of these priests is understanding the role of Ra, this "god" was an apparent living individual who had an extremely long life as indicated in some of the Sumerian tablets. His long live would have been a strong moderating force over the generations of priests. As a side note the red disk with the snake and the winged red disk associated with Ra, have very different meanings from what is generally believed.
http://www.ancient-egypt-online.com/egy ... od-ra.html ( notice the disk with wings and two snakes ) The red disk does not represent the our sun, our sun is yellow. Some of the Sumerian tablets indicate that the red disk represents the planet Nibiru the home planet of the gods, the "Annunaki" some related information http://www.redicecreations.com/specialr ... unaki.html, the wings represent it's atmosphere which flairs out apparently at the equator, the snake represents a strand of DNA . The disk (or small ball) with wings and two entwined snakes represented in the Caduceus is used today as a symbol for medicine.http://hubpages.com/hub/Caduceus-Medical-Symbol

The destruction of knowledge is a recurring theme in history, since knowledge is power the destruction of knowledge makes control of many by the few easier. Standard operating procedure, a few examples

The destruction of the library of Alexandria

First emperor of china http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qin_Shi_Huang burning of books and mass killing of scholars

Mesoamerican Spanish destruction of books and manuscripts http://religionvirus.blogspot.com/2008/ ... ntire.html

Nazi burning of books

US destruction of books 1956 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Reich

The current debate on Internet censorship, or censorship depending on location.

Just variations on a theme.