Page 1 of 1

Fifth Turning Nations

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 9:59 am
by jmm1184
Generational explanation for the violence in Mexico
Mexico's last generational crisis war was the Mexican Revolution of 1910-21. Mexico and Turkey are the only two major countries that have gone more than 90 years without a generational crisis war.
I was curious about this statement - does this mean that Russia and Eastern Europe experienced a first-turning reset during WWII?

Also, I thought it might be a good idea to list nations that are currently in the midst of Fifth Turnings. Some of these I'm not entirely sure about, and would love discussion about them.

In order from most recently entering into a fifth turning to oldest in a fifth turning

Spain - climax in 1939
Paraguay & Bolivia - climax in 1935
Brazil - climax in 1932
Morocco - climax in 1926
Saudi Arabia, Jordan - climax in 1925
Kazakhstan - climax in 1922
Uzbekistan - climax in 1922
Turkmenistan - climax in 1922
Kyrgyzstan - climax in 1922
Turkey - climax in 1922
Mexico - climax in 1920

Re: Fifth Turning Nations

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 11:01 am
by John
> Generational explanation for the violence in Mexico
> Mexico's last generational crisis war was the Mexican Revolution
> of 1910-21. Mexico and Turkey are the only two major countries
> that have gone more than 90 years without a generational crisis
> war.
jmm1184 wrote: > I was curious about this statement - does this mean that Russia
> and Eastern Europe experienced a first-turning reset during WWII?

> Also, I thought it might be a good idea to list nations that are
> currently in the midst of Fifth Turnings. Some of these I'm not
> entirely sure about, and would love discussion about them.

> In order from most recently entering into a fifth turning to
> oldest in a fifth turning

> Spain - climax in 1939
> Paraguay & Bolivia - climax in 1935
> Brazil - climax in 1932
> Morocco - climax in 1926
> Saudi Arabia, Jordan - climax in 1925
> Kazakhstan - climax in 1922
> Uzbekistan - climax in 1922
> Turkmenistan - climax in 1922
> Kyrgyzstan - climax in 1922
> Turkey - climax in 1922
> Mexico - climax in 1920
Obviously there are mor than two major countries that have gone more
than 90 years without a crisis war.

Russia is also in that category, but it's complicated because WW II
was particularly difficult for Russia. Also, Russia is so huge that
it has multiple timelines.

The real question is what happens to the society of a country as the
time of the last crisis war recedes. S&H have documented that for
Europe and America for the 60-70 years or so, though they're no help
with other countries or timespans because they have all countries in
the world on the same timeline.

I really began to get into this subject in 2005, after the 7/7/2005
London subway bombings, because there was published evidence that the
vast majority of suicide bombers in the Mideast had come from Morocco
and Saudi Arabia, two countries whose last crisis wars were in the
1920s.

The latest development (for me) was my recent articles:

** 2-Jul-18 World View -- Generational explanation of today's vitriolic divisiveness in America
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e180702


** 3-Jul-18 World View -- Mexico elects far left president amid skyrocketing murders, crime and corruption
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e180703


I now believe that taking Leon Festinger's work on Cognitive
Dissonance for small groups and extending it to entire populations,
sub-populations and generations is the key to understanding how
societies change as one generational era moves into the next.

Roughly, the concepts are a follows:
  • The generational crisis war unifies the nation, with the entire
    population committed to a set of common beliefs, based on "lessons
    learned."
  • As the years go buy, chunks and pieces of that set of common
    beliefs are broken off by different groups in younger generations, and
    the group takes a position (pro or con) on that chunk. Two different
    groups may break off the same chunk, but take opposition positions.
  • Each of these groups "commits" to the chunk that it selected, in
    the form of political donations, political support, riots,
    demonstrations, violence, and so forth. The commit turns into an
    ideology, and the ideology must be defended with commitments. Recall
    that one of Festinger's requirements for cognitive dissonance is that
    each member of the group must be totally committed to the group's
    belief.
  • During the Unraveling era, the crisis war survivors are still able
    to mediate between the different opposing groups and different
    ideologies. Furthermore, each of the groups can still claim that its
    ideology is supported by the facts. Where there are difficulties or
    differences, the survivors force a compromise.
  • Once the nation enters a new generational Crisis era -- 58 years
    after the climax of the preceding crisis war, as the voices of the
    survivor generations can no longer be heard -- the disputes over the
    different ideologies can no longer be resolved.
  • As a few more years go by, the facts of what's happening in the
    world conflict with some of the ideologies. In other words, people
    who have committed their lives to one political belief or ideology are
    suddenly faced with facts that clearly contradict their committed
    believes. This is what "cognitive dissonance" means.
  • Some of the people accepts the new facts, and adapt their beliefs
    to what's really going on in the world. A significant minority refuse
    to do so, and they double down on their beliefs.
  • In Festinger's experiment, the ones who doubled down re-committed
    their lives to proselytizing a revised versions of their old beliefs.
    The revised version in Festinger's experiment was to explain that, at
    the last minute, God had decided to give the world a second chance.
  • In the Crisis era society, the groups that refuse to accept that
    facts have disproven their ideologies double down on their ideologies
    by revising them and proselytizing. This explains the increase in
    nationalism during a Crisis era.
  • Revising them usually means blaming the facts on the other
    political party, the other ethnic group, the other religion, or
    whatever. This explains the increase in xenophobia during a Crisis
    era.
  • Proselytizing could mean new political movements, new religious
    factions, violence, terrorism, suicide bombings and, eventually, a
    crisis war.
This outline provides a framework for how every country in the world
can be analyzed for how the society is behaving in different
generational eras.

Re: Fifth Turning Nations

Posted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:50 am
by Trevor
I was curious about this statement - does this mean that Russia and Eastern Europe experienced a first-turning reset during WWII?
I believe so, yes. I'm fully aware not everyone agrees with me on this, but I read multiple books, many articles, those that discussed the war decades later, and that the USSR collapse reads like an awakening era climax to base my conclusion on.

My thoughts when it comes to Mexico is that a reason for the delay in a crisis war, even if there are likely multiple reasons, is that a significant portion of their population has immigrated to the United States, serving as a sort of safety valve for the nation. Added to that all the money they send to their relatives in Mexico helps keep them afloat, if only marginally.

With the former USSR republics, it'd depend on whether they endured the same sort of First Turning Reset that impacted the Soviet Union as a whole. They're in a crisis era either way.

With Brazil, according to the Country Studies, their last crisis was the military rule of the late 60s, early 70s. I don't know if that's truly accurate or not, though; would that period be enough to have the same effect that a crisis war climax does? I don't know enough about what's going on in Brazil right now to really judge whether they're in a Fifth Turning or unraveling period.

During our Civil War, we were just beginning to enter a Fifth Turning when everything finally shattered completely and we lost around 2.5-3 percent of our total population.

I know that unusually short crisis periods (50 years or sooner) are generally the result of an unexpected invasion brutal enough to start the crisis war prematurely. Unusually long periods, say over 80 years... I will freely admit that this is not much more than conjecture, but they can be associated with a lack of internal fault lines, a lack of pressure from exterior sources, no event that is severe enough to make the population feel like their survival is on the line.

To use another American example... our own revolution was close to a 100-year gap. For the New England colonies, at least. The impression i get from reading about the time period was that the northern colonies were deeper into a crisis era than the Southern Colonies. We'd had plenty of resentment for a long time, but as long as we needed British protection against France and Spain, this was muted to some extent. Once it appeared that necessity was gone after the Seven Years War and with the onset of new taxes, it didn't take much for people to start rising up.

It's really something that requires further study, since I'm sure there are multiple answers to your question.

Re: Fifth Turning Nations

Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2018 12:53 am
by Hintergrund
Maybe Islamists coming to power in Turkey was the real Crisis there.