Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

An alternate home for the community from the legacy Fourth Turning Forum
Cool Breeze
Posts: 2935
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:19 pm

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Cool Breeze »

I don't believe delusional people can make predictions, since their foundation is straw, but I'm curious anyway:

Bob, what's your prediction over the next 2-3 years, or from here til the end of the decade?

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 1466
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Bob Butler »

Anyone can make a prediction. Maybe not an accurate one, but they can make a prediction. As I suspect Generational Dynamics lies on a foundation of straw, I expect the predictions that come from it will fail.

As for the near future, the Delta variant of Covid will continue to convince more people to get the vaccine, but they will not speak of their error. People tend not to admit their worldview is wrong. Similarly, if the courts continue to declare the Big Lie a big lie, if no evidence to support it surfaces, it will become harder to cling convincingly to the idea. The Afghanistan decision to withdraw will remain controversial but respectable. Continuing to spend big bucks to keep an unpopular and corrupt regime in power is a lose. Both infrastructure bills will eventually pass putting the voting rights issue in the forefront. With the Texas method for overturning Roe v Wade, there will come a backlash that will result in the filibuster being killed and voting rights reestablished.

The next big branch point is the mid term elections. The Republican are counting on the party in the White House not doing well as has been the case recently. This was not the case in the last crisis when FDR kept the White House with ever increasing pluralities. Still, they Republicans are opposing popular measures in order to guarantee things not doing well. Will Republican opposition to the popular really make them more popular? I’m kind of doubtful on that. If the Democrats can increase their majorities in Congress, not every senator and congressman has an effective veto. That would allow the Democratic agenda to solidify before 2024. As is, the agenda is being passed, but ever so slowly.

The other thing concerned about here is China or another power starting a major conflict. I kind of doubt it. Conflict, as proven in World War II, is not cost effective. Folks can gain much with financial games and loose big time with war. China and Russia have become oligarchies, and while the government remains dominant over the oligarchs, they can do nothing which would alienate them. Obviously, John and I disagree on this, and John is insecure enough in his prediction not to put a date on it. There will supposedly be another big war? Eventually? I doubt it.

Anything else?

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 1466
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Botch?

Post by Bob Butler »

Spending more lives and money to keep a highly corrupt and unpopular government in place would have been a botch. Getting out may have been unpopular in certain circles, and they certainly could have used their time getting folks out better. I suspect it is those who hoped to stay that delayed. But, ending the war was a proper move.

spottybrowncow
Posts: 317
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2020 11:06 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by spottybrowncow »

Are you really blaming the victims who are being killed and tortured???

User avatar
Tom Mazanec
Posts: 4180
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:13 pm

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Tom Mazanec »

I think BB is blaming them for procrastination.
They should have gotten out as soon as Biden announced the pullout.
But procrastinating is easy…I’ve done it myself on numerous occasions.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”

― G. Michael Hopf, Those Who Remain

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 1466
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Bob Butler »

Tom Mazanec wrote:
Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:59 am
I think BB is blaming them for procrastination.
They should have gotten out as soon as Biden announced the pullout.
But procrastinating is easy…I’ve done it myself on numerous occasions.
Correct. They should have started getting people out early.

But gotta go. I have to get my car inspected by the end of August...

John
Posts: 11479
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by John »

** 04-Sep-2021 World View: How 9/11/2001 was a 'Regeneracy Event'

If we consider "trust in government" to be a proxy for "civic unity,"
then the attacks on 9/11/2001 clearly fit the description of a
Regeneracy Event.

The following graph from a Pew Research article shows how "trust in
government" was mostly falling steadily for decades, then spiked on
9/11/2001, but then dropped off again in the following years. (The
graph also shows an increase during the Reagan administration, but the
article doesn't say why.)

Image
  • Trust in government spiked following 9/11 terror attack (Pew Research)


The text of the article is a perfect description of what a "regeneracy
event" is, as it unified Republicans, Democrats and Independents
behind President Bush:
"Just as memories of 9/11 are firmly embedded in the
minds of most Americans old enough to recall the attacks, their
historical importance far surpasses other events in people’s
lifetimes. ...

The importance of 9/11 transcended age, gender, geographic and
even political differences. The 2016 study noted that while
partisans agreed on little else that election cycle, more than
seven-in-ten Republicans and Democrats named the attacks as one of
their top 10 historic events.

9/11 transformed U.S. public opinion, but many of its impacts were
short-lived

It is difficult to think of an event that so profoundly
transformed U.S. public opinion across so many dimensions as the
9/11 attacks. While Americans had a shared sense of anguish after
Sept. 11, the months that followed also were marked by rare spirit
of public unity.

Chart shows trust in government spiked following Sept. 11 terror
attack

Patriotic sentiment surged in the aftermath of 9/11. After the
U.S. and its allies launched airstrikes against Taliban and
al-Qaida forces in early October 2001, 79% of adults said they had
displayed an American flag. A year later, a 62% majority said they
had often felt patriotic as a result of the 9/11 attacks.

Moreover, the public largely set aside political differences and
rallied in support of the nation’s major institutions, as well as
its political leadership. In October 2001, 60% of adults expressed
trust in the federal government – a level not reached in the
previous three decades, nor approached in the two decades since
then.

George W. Bush, who had become president nine months earlier after
a fiercely contested election, saw his job approval rise 35
percentage points in the space of three weeks. In late September
2001, 86% of adults – including nearly all Republicans (96%) and a
sizable majority of Democrats (78%) – approved of the way Bush was
handling his job as president."
-- Two Decades Later, the Enduring Legacy of 9/11
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/20 ... y-of-9-11/
(PewResearch, 2-Sep-2021)

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 1466
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Trigger vs Regeneration Events

Post by Bob Butler »

First let’s make it clear that an essay on supposed regeneracy events is not on Bob Butler’s Perspective. John claims he is enforcing thread perspective, meaning no one can ruin his own threads perspective, but he doesn’t hesitate to ruin other people’s threads with his.

Second, I have already answered this by addressing several would be trigger / regeneracy events. Rather than repeat that, I’ll concentrate as John did on September 11. I’ll ask a bunch of questions on that, then shift to the current crisis and what sort of event would trigger it.

First question, how much unity was really created? With Bush 43 still in power, we were in full scale ‘stay the course’ vs ‘cut and run’ division. I would say the supposed ‘unity’ it did not last the crisis. Now it never does. The long hard slog of war causes second doubts as to whether it is worth it. Still, in major crisis wars, you resolve the crisis. You get it done.

Second, did the government policy mesh with the cause of the unity. No. I remember on September 12 I expressed disapproval at Bush 43’s declaration that he would not let the terrorists shape the conflict, he would not address the underlying causes of the conflict. Excuse me? You want to fight a war without addressing the causes of the war? How much trouble will that get you into?

Bin Ladin did not like how Saudi Arabia royals worked to maintain the wealth with the west at the expense of the people. The Taliban went more with a moral position, not the democracy, human rights and equality of the Enlightenment, but the religious position of Islam. Bush refused to address these, and had an agenda of his own in a bunch of Neo Cons and big oil people.

It reminds me somewhat of the American Revolution. The royal side was into colonial imperialism and complained about the tactics of the opposition. The Americans refused to wear red uniforms and stand in the open, thus proving themselves dishonorable. The Americans might respond with a hearty ‘well, duh…’ Red uniformed people standing in the open was a style of combat the major powers could win with. The Americans went with a style they could win with. Much later, in this age of insurgent proxy wars, the advantage went to the side that had the warriors hiding among the people. Tanks, uniforms and air superiority was the style of combat that favored the established powers. So what do the rich and faction powerful do? Declare a war on terror. Fight against a set of tactics. Declare that they will always be against the poor and oppressed. That they lost and messed up the Middle East in the process might tell you something. You can’t ignore the underlying cause of the conflict.

I didn’t see it all at the time. I could see the unity being thrown away by not addressing the underlying cause of the conflict. I could not foretell that twenty years later the long hard slog would be given up on, exactly how the once united effort of America would be forgotten.

Next question. Was September 11th a shocking military event comparable to Lexington, Sumpter or Pearl Harbor. Let’s say yes. The mood of the time was strong and memorable. The only quibble was that in the past there had been a long build up and debate. September 11 came more by surprise.

Did the event address or illuminate what had been debated and compromised about in the unravelling. I would say no. The big government vs small government with overtones of respecting science, supporting elites and structural racism were not addressed by September 11. Thus, the upcoming crisis would not be resolved by the fallout of September 11.

Did September 11 bring out the progressive perspective of this pending crisis. No. Quite likely, it didn’t have to. It was the British who marched on Lexington, the Confederates who fired on Sumter, the Axis that invaded in so many places. Somehow, the trigger event is often pushed not by the progressives who want to solve a problem, but by the conservatives who wish things to remain the same. I see the conflict of and after September 11 was between two conservative factions led by Bin Ladin and Bush 43.

Now the issues that built over the unraveling were twain but related. The progressives would have it that big problems must be addressed by big government, that science must be respected, and that Covid, the environment, infrastructure and structural racism are among the problems. The conservative insisted these problems aren’t, with elitist and racist overtones.

I would expect the trigger events to center on these problems. Anything that doesn’t is just a distraction. The current clear triggers are the murder of George Floyd and the conservative rejection of fighting Covid. The January 6 insurrection does follow the Floyd event. Both are related to systematic racism. January 6 was more blatant, violence directly intended to stop a constitutional function.

But do Covid, Flloyd’s government sponsored murder or the January 6 insurrection begin to compare with Lexington, Sumter or Pearl Harbor? Not really. Among other things, does a true military trigger lend itself to a oops I didn’t mean it response? There are reds claiming that the insurrection was just a tourist visit? In the Industrial Age committing to violence was more blatant, obvious, an act that could not be forgiven and forgotten. Nobody walked away from their commitment just because their effort failed.

But in the Information Age change, as illustrated by the suffragettes, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King, showed how a culture could be changed through protest and legislation. Does this also change the nature of the trigger? If there is only going to be legislation leading to resolution, do you want to commit a violent act? Will murdering minorities, encouraging more US deaths by Covid than occurred in World War II, or violent insurrection just increase the protests and make the legislation feared happen sooner?

It does seem to me that a crisis addressing the unraveling debate and compromise did take place, but the crisis intensity was triggered by smaller events that reflect culture change by legislation. If no large scale war is going to take place in the crisis, could the crisis be triggered by less than the full scale violence we have seen in the past?

Now this site is concerned with a hypothetical trigger and conflict which hasn’t happened. The clearest example might be China starting a war against somebody. This isn’t profitable. They wouldn’t win by it. It is not existential to the US. In order to invade they would have to first win a sea war and control of the Pacific to supply any invasion, which seems very unlikely at this point. It does not address the big issues the US addressed in the unraveling. This is not the worst problem the culture faces. This is not the center of the long expected crisis.

Now I can’t possibly get you concerned with real issues that are actually happening. You are too focused on imaginary problems that haven’t happened. Just, in your spare time, you might look at the real problems facing the culture?

John
Posts: 11479
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by John »

** 07-Sep-2021 World View: Trolling
Bob Butler wrote:
Mon Sep 06, 2021 9:15 am
> First let’s make it clear that an essay on supposed regeneracy
> events is not on Bob Butler’s Perspective. John claims he is
> enforcing thread perspective, meaning no one can ruin his own
> threads perspective, but he doesn’t hesitate to ruin other
> people’s threads with his.
Let's remember how this situation came about. In fact, let's repeat
an exchange we had in the Generational Dynamics thread in the other
forum:
Bob Butler 54 wrote: > But one who uses the power of the moderator to block criticism of
> his opinion has no right to grumble about censorship.
John J. Xenakis wrote: > You don't post opinions. You post troll garbage. Like Sean Love,
> your objective is to be as destructive as possible. You're a
> human wrecking ball. You've pretty much destroyed this thread
> with your troll garbage. But I'll be damned if you're going to do
> the same to the news thread in the Generational Dynamics forum.
> Fuck you. However, you're welcome to post all the troll garbage
> you want in the Strauss-Howe thread, where it belongs. Have
> fun!
You repeatedly made it clear how contemptuous you were of all the
members of this forum. You repeatedly accused the members of this
forum of having "tribal thinking," and if they would only give up
"tribal thinking," then they would agree with you, the only
"enlightened" member of the forum.

So I had to deal with the fact that you were trying to destroy the
forum and that you were insulting to all other forum members. I tried
several things, and we finally settled on this "polyticks" thread.
Other members know what you think of them, and so anything you
say, even something neutral, is interpreted as insulting and
toxic, and liable to start an argument. So I have to move pretty
much all your posts into this thread.

So now you're whining because I posted something about the Regeneracy
in "your" thread. That's laughable on so many levels, starting with
your own history in trying to destroy other threads.

But no one completely "owns" a thread, even me. You'll have to put up
with other people occasionally posting in "your" thread, unless you
want me to change the permissions on this thread so that you're the
only person who can post into it.

Furthermore, my post on the Regenercy IS relevant to this thread,
since it was discussed recently.

Silly me, I thought that you'd actually be pleased to have someone
post something relevant to you in "your" thread, and I thought you
would find it interesting.

Apparently I was right about that, since you found it interesting
enough that you've written an entire Dostoyevsky novel in response.
Bob Butler wrote:
Mon Sep 06, 2021 9:15 am
> Now I can’t possibly get you concerned with real issues that are
> actually happening. You are too focused on imaginary problems
> that haven’t happened. Just, in your spare time, you might look at
> the real problems facing the culture?
Actually, I do focus on the real problems. I don't spend much time
worrying about the issues important to you, like whether there are ten
genders or twenty genders.

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 1466
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Conservative Perspectives Ending

Post by Bob Butler »

John wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 9:40 am
So I had to deal with the fact that you were trying to destroy the forum and that you were insulting to all other forum members.
Not trying either of those things. I was trying to get people to pay attention to the currently ongoing crisis. Instead, all are focusing on imaginary wars that have never happened and are unlikely too. Care to set a date for your 'predictions'? We are getting towards four score and seven years past World War II. China has a bit more time until a generation since the end of their revolution. Would you consider either date? Do you prefer 'someday eventually'?

I suppose getting people to address real problems would be held as destroying the forum. Nobody here is addressing real problems. My original observation is once the crisis is resolved, the conservatives have to accommodate their worldview for the result of the crisis. Kings, slaves and isolationism, gone. Suddenly, conservatives puff out their chests and pretend America was their idea. I am curious how that process might work. Here at least it is by pretending that the crisis doesn't exist and never did.
John wrote:
Tue Sep 07, 2021 9:40 am
Actually, I do focus on the real problems. I don't spend much time worrying about the issues important to you, like whether there are ten genders or twenty genders.
Where have I obsessed on gender count? That feels like another one of your lies.

I do see the conservatives as holding their worldview and culture superior and attempting to limit the freedom of others by forcing their point of view. This would include stepping on people's preferred sexual behavior. Thus, I do disagree with the conservative attempt at enforcing their culture. I just don't obsess on the specifics.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests