Is geographic location by far the most important?

Cool Breeze
Posts: 381
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:19 pm

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

Post by Cool Breeze »

I think it's safe to say we have entertained Bob's foolishness and attention seeking enough here.

John
Posts: 9938
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

Post by John »

** 03-Jan-2021 World View: Bob Butler and Adam Schiff
Cool Breeze wrote:
Sun Jan 03, 2021 5:15 pm
> I think it's safe to say we have entertained Bob's foolishness and
> attention seeking enough here.
I was always amazed by Adam Schiff. He lied every day, claiming he
had anti-Trump evidence that never existed, and sometimes completely
fabricating evidence that he knew was a lie. But no matter how many
times he was caught in a lie, no matter how many times he was
embarrassed, he simply went on and did it again. He knew that he could
count on the Democrats and the media to support his lies and
fabrications and repeat them, which they did many, many times.

Bob Butler is just like Adam Schiff in many ways. He's ignorant, he
has no idea what's going on, and he appears to be an idiot when he
posts his troll garbage. But he's just like Adam Schiff. Whenever
his ignorance is pointed out, he just goes on and posts more troll
garbage that's equally ignorant.

This seems to be a common thread among Democrats, especially in the
last year. Just lie, fabricate, be stupid, be ignorant, make up
anything, and when you're caught out, just go on and do it again.
It's really quite remarkable.

I know that when I make a mistake, I'm generally quite embarrassed by
it. But not Butler or Schiff or Democrats in general. When they lie,
make a mistake, or say something stupid, they repeat it or move on to
another lie or mistake, or something else equally stupid. It's a
feature of Democrat mind at the present time.

The other thing is that Butler seems completely obsessed with me
personally and with Generational Dynamics. I suppose I should be
flattered, but it's really quite disturbing.

tim
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

Post by tim »

Look at the parallels:

https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel ... and-peace/
According to the Austrian countess Bertha von Suttner, Alfred Nobel, as early as their first meeting in Paris in 1876, had expressed his wish to produce material or a machine which would have such a devastating effect that war from then on, would be impossible. The point about deterrence later appeared among Nobel’s ideas. In 1891, he commented on his dynamite factories by saying to the countess: “Perhaps my factories will put an end to war sooner than your congresses: on the day that two army corps can mutually annihilate each other in a second, all civilised nations will surely recoil with horror and disband their troops.” Nobel did not live long enough to experience the First World War and to see how wrong his conception was.
People felt that it must be brought into the public domain. If people saw what the bomb could do, it was reasoned, they would not allow circumstances to arise in which it would be used again. "In this war the atomic bomb was only a signal to the world," Morrison says. "The real problem was the next war."
"Nothing happens to anybody, that he is not fitted by Nature to bear" - Marcus Aurelius

Bob Butler
Posts: 274
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

Post by Bob Butler »

tim wrote:
Sun Jan 03, 2021 6:07 pm
Look at the parallels:

https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel ... and-peace/
According to the Austrian countess Bertha von Suttner, Alfred Nobel, as early as their first meeting in Paris in 1876, had expressed his wish to produce material or a machine which would have such a devastating effect that war from then on, would be impossible. The point about deterrence later appeared among Nobel’s ideas. In 1891, he commented on his dynamite factories by saying to the countess: “Perhaps my factories will put an end to war sooner than your congresses: on the day that two army corps can mutually annihilate each other in a second, all civilised nations will surely recoil with horror and disband their troops.” Nobel did not live long enough to experience the First World War and to see how wrong his conception was.
People felt that it must be brought into the public domain. If people saw what the bomb could do, it was reasoned, they would not allow circumstances to arise in which it would be used again. "In this war the atomic bomb was only a signal to the world," Morrison says. "The real problem was the next war."
Nobel just thought too small. The age transited from Industrial to Information with the invention of the nuke, not by a somewhat better chemical weapon. At that, war and tribal thinking are long established. It will take some time to fully take hold.

FullMoon
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2020 11:55 pm

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

Post by FullMoon »

Maybe Bob doesn't realize that the evidence on the ground, documented in detail with good accuracy points that this turning will be like previous one's. Which means the difference between and unpleasant experience as we have now, and a horrific dozen+years or bare bones existence requiring tenacity and strength just to survive. I like the easy choice but fear the odds of the second going up rapidly and my preparation lacking.
This thread was started with this principle in mind.
Where to be and how to prepare.
John has said he's going to sit it out. His work will be proven and if it's preserved, remembered. Sadly only a few could be helped beforehand. For this we should thank him. Buy the book and support him as well.

Bob Butler
Posts: 274
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

Post by Bob Butler »

John wrote:
Sun Jan 03, 2021 5:50 pm
The other thing is that Butler seems completely obsessed with me personally and with Generational Dynamics. I suppose I should be flattered, but it's really quite disturbing.
I am more concerned with the conflict between the cavalier / tribal / rural / red worldview and the roundhead / WEIRD / urban / blue one. That conflict pretty much defines US politics over the last unraveling, and its nature defines why most of the blue who have followed turning theory consider us in a crisis state in which we have already forced a regeneracy. After that, the crisis problems are solved in favor of the new values.

You just happen to think you are always right. At the same time, you don't bother to understand the other side's motivation. You prefer to present straw man motivations which are not mine and do not belonging to any blue I know. You prefer to dwell in the past, to present Industrial Age patterns when many have moved on. The pattern of civilization changes at Age boundaries.

It should be disturbing to have the flaws in your world view pointed out. Me, most of what I get is the same sort of rejection Cassandra got. People are not ready to honestly look at their own worldview, and try to shoot the messenger.

Bob Butler
Posts: 274
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

Post by Bob Butler »

FullMoon wrote:
Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:21 pm
Maybe Bob doesn't realize that the evidence on the ground, documented in detail with good accuracy points that this turning will be like previous one's.
Again, I see the Age as changed. The pattern of how civilizations behave has changed if you look at the evidence on the ground, documented in detail. Democracies change by non violent protest and legislation, not crisis wars. Nukes, proxy wars and insurgent wars are common. War is less cost effective, and the leaders and elites are becoming slowly aware of it. Clinging to the wisdom of the old time will leave you thinking of leaving the country just when the regeneracy is happening.

I suspect many of moving in the wrong direction.

tim
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

Post by tim »

FullMoon wrote:
Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:21 pm
Maybe Bob doesn't realize that the evidence on the ground, documented in detail with good accuracy points that this turning will be like previous one's. Which means the difference between and unpleasant experience as we have now, and a horrific dozen+years or bare bones existence requiring tenacity and strength just to survive. I like the easy choice but fear the odds of the second going up rapidly and my preparation lacking.
This thread was started with this principle in mind.
Where to be and how to prepare.
John has said he's going to sit it out. His work will be proven and if it's preserved, remembered. Sadly only a few could be helped beforehand. For this we should thank him. Buy the book and support him as well.
In my experience many otherwise intelligent and educated people are incapable of understanding The Fourth Turning. It really is a simple cycle when you break it down to its most basic level.

This was discussed in another thread where I think Higgy posted how it may be due to genetic wiring. Poltics is more then just Democrat or Republican, its how a person is hardwired to perceive and process the information in their environment.
"Nothing happens to anybody, that he is not fitted by Nature to bear" - Marcus Aurelius

FullMoon
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2020 11:55 pm

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

Post by FullMoon »

Thanks Tim. Very interesting observations.
Believing John's perspective is possible is not something that came quickly to me. I'm underprepared and reading Navigators book shows me how much so. Being responsible for a family makes simply being unprepared for a natural disaster unwise, let alone a war and the after effects. Navigators book opened my eyes.

spottybrowncow
Posts: 49
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2020 11:06 am

Re: Is geographic location by far the most important?

Post by spottybrowncow »

Bob Butler wrote:
Sun Jan 03, 2021 4:14 pm
FullMoon wrote:
Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:55 pm
That very nice of you. If you could please be a bit more civil throughout this forum, I would consider your viewpoint as valuable. I think bother sides have their strengths and weaknesses, and yes, you can point out how your viewpoint might be a superior alternative. You might help me understand a vastly complex issue from a different perspective. In fact, I long considered John a bit more conservative than I usually preferred. But his research and analysis was captivating and I feel that I've learned much. It wasn't until Trump that I started to see the Left from a different perspective. Especially so when race and gender became an acceptable stereotype for myself as a political tool that I started to feel vulnerable. Honestly, I consider John's perspective and opinions usually the closest to truth than anything else I can find. Personal faults have I and everyone else I know, including John. But his research and work on GD is admirable and much appreciated.
John is quite good when he sticks to areas of the world that are still doing tribal thinking, that are still doing Industrial Age behavior in that war is considered cost effective. If you are dealing with areas of the world where nukes, proxy wars and insurgent wars have influenced how people act, or if you are looking to understand motivations, well... Take a look at alternate sources.
EVERYONE is still doing tribal thinking. No one can help it. We haven't even evolved enough in 10,000 years to manage the excess carbohydrates from farming - do you really think that human nature has changed? What you cite as revolutionary new changes in how world affairs are conducted are just another level in a video game - a game still being played by the same people. We can't escape ourselves. Not that we shouldn't try. But we are, to a large extent, still cavemen, with a lot more knowledge and toys, but cavemen, nonetheless.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests