Generations Hypothesis

[Richard Nixon]

What is your opinion of the Generations Hypothesis of William Strauss and Neil Howe? What will be the crisis that the Millennials will face? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generations_(book) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generations_%28book%29)

[Havet]

i have no opinion. Why is this so important for you to make a thread of it? Let's go back to discuss ideology. Now that's important!

[Richard Nixon]

i have no opinion. Why is this so important for you to make a thread of it? Let's go back to discuss ideology. Now that's important!

It it related to ideology. For instance could the next civic or idealist generation cause a revolution?

[New Tet]

It it related to ideology. For instance could the next civic or idealist generation cause a revolution?

The question is, to say the least, irrelevant.

Revolutions are not "caused" by "idealistic" or "civic" generations. Revolutions are social phenomena that arise out of the inherent contradictions in a people's social and economic relations. It is when the most conscious element of that people become aware of the revolutionary upheaval that its ideological character begins to take shape.

I'm paraphrasing Lenin here who, I think, was paraphrasing Marx and Engels.

[Richard Nixon]

The question is, to say the least, irrelevant.

Revolutions are not "caused" by "idealistic" or "civic" generations. Revolutions are social phenomena that arise out of the inherent contradictions in a people's social and economic relations. It is when the most conscious element of that people become aware of the revolutionary upheaval that its ideological character begins to take shape.

I'm paraphrasing Lenin here who, I think, was paraphrasing Marx and Engels.

And when do people become aware of revolutionary upheavels? During the times of idealists or civic generations. All major revolutions in Anglo-American history: The Glorious Revolution, American Revolution, the Great Awakenings, the abolitionist movement and the American Civil War, the labour movement, the New Deal, and the Hippie Revolution all took place when the above two generations were the young people of society.

[New Tet]

And when do people become aware of revolutionary upheavels? During the times of idealists or civic generations. All major revolutions in Anglo-American history: The Glorious Revolution, American Revolution, the Great Awakenings, the abolitionist movement and the American Civil War, the labour movement, the New Deal, and the Hippie Revolution all took place when the above two generations were the young people of society.

The "Glorious" revolution arose from competing class interest mainly between the aristocracy and the English bourgeoisie, straining against the strictures of feudal limitations on property rights and commerce.

The American revolution was a rebellion of colonial subjects against an empire still operating under a feudal delusion.

The Great Awakening was, in most respects, a religious expression of the material need to keep church and state separate to insure good governance.

The abolitionist movement did not bring about the civil war in America; the issue of states' rights vs federal power did.

The 'labor movement' as such arose out of the industrial revolution (which you failed to mention) and the spectacular growth in numbers of the industrial proletariat.

Far from being revolutionary, the New Deal was a package of economic and political reforms implemented by capitalist politician intended to forestall the possibility of a real revolution.

And, finally, the "hippie revolution" was something hatched by clever Madison Avenue ad men back in the 1960's which, it appears, has taken root in your fertile but immature imagination.

[Richard Nixon]

The "Glorious" revolution arose from competing class interest mainly between the aristocracy and the English bourgeoisie, straining against the strictures of feudal limitations on property rights and commerce.

The American revolution was a rebellion of colonial subjects against an empire still operating under a feudal delusion.

The Great Awakening was, in most respects, a religious expression of the material need to keep church and state separate to insure good governance.

What's your point? For instance are you saying it's not a revolution? :confused:


The abolitionist movement did not bring about the civil war in America; the issue of states' rights vs federal power did.


States rights vs federal power was the underlying cause but slavery was the immediate cause and both issues were interrelated.


The 'labor movement' as such arose out of the industrial revolution (which you failed to mention) and the spectacular growth in numbers of the industrial proletariat.


Yes.


Far from being revolutionary, the New Deal was a package of economic and political reforms implemented by capitalist politician intended to forestall the possibility of a real revolution.

It was still pretty radical for it's time and excuse me for forgetting it was also the time when World War 2 was fought.


And, finally, the "hippie revolution" was something hatched by clever Madison Avenue ad men back in the 1960's which, it appears, has taken root in your fertile but immature imagination.

What do you mean? It was a full social and somewhat politically important. Sexual mores were thrown down and politics became more radicalized.

[Conquer or Die]

The secession of the southern States was justified legally through States rights but morally and politically for the institution of slavery. To say otherwise is to give into racist, reactionary propaganda or generic and nonsensical anti Americanism. Read more history, New Tet.

[New Tet]

The secession of the southern States was justified legally through States rights but morally and politically for the institution of slavery. To say otherwise is to give into racist, reactionary propaganda or generic and nonsensical anti Americanism. Read more history, New Tet.

I beg your fucking pardon?

I was limiting the scope of my responses, not eluding their moral dimensions.

[Richard Nixon]

I beg your fucking pardon?

I was limiting the scope of my responses, not eluding their moral dimensions.

Well he seems pretty well extreme on that. For instance he viciously insulted me for comparing Nat Turner with an anti-abortion terrorist. Just put him on the Ignore List.

[Conquer or Die]

I beg your fucking pardon?

I was limiting the scope of my responses, not eluding their moral dimensions.

You made a bland statement of incorrect reactionary propaganda. Your response is based on a faulty premise so the limitations of its scope are unimportant.

[Misanthrope]

A successful communist revolution will come from industrial capitalism. This mystic garbage is irrelevant, just as irrelevant as the 2012 hysteria and the Mayan calender ending.

[New Tet]

You made a bland statement of incorrect reactionary propaganda. Your response is based on a faulty premise so the limitations of its scope are unimportant.

I stated very clearly that it was not the abolitionist movement that brought about the American civil war but the issue of states' rights.

I know that the dilemma of chattel slavery was very important and that it helped define the contending sides of the war. Chattel slavery was an evil to the capitalists when it came up against their economic interest in having a nominally free wage worker system.

The civil war in United States was primarily a struggle between contending economic models. Lincoln himself said that if he could resolve the issue without having to free the southern slave he would gladly do so.

That's how I see it.

[Judicator]

The question is, to say the least, irrelevant.

Revolutions are not "caused" by "idealistic" or "civic" generations. Revolutions are social phenomena that arise out of the inherent contradictions in a people's social and economic relations. It is when the most conscious element of that people become aware of the revolutionary upheaval that its ideological character begins to take shape.

I'm paraphrasing Lenin here who, I think, was paraphrasing Marx and Engels.

Don't you also need a weak state to have a full blown revolution? Otherwise they can just shoot everyone until the revolution stops.

[Conquer or Die]

I stated very clearly that it was not the abolitionist movement that brought about the American civil war but the issue of states' rights.

Very clearly, you have not read enough history.


I know that the dilemma of chattel slavery was very important and that it helped define the contending sides of the war. Chattel slavery was an evil to the capitalists when it came up against their economic interest in having a nominally free wage worker system.

The fundamental economic interest of the capitalist class is personal accumulation. The "free market" is an ideology created to support accumulation from intellectuals. It is intellectual propaganda for the ruling class.

If you think for a minute that the Civil War was fought by Northern Free marketeers against southern feudalists then you are fucking insane.


The civil war in United States was primarily a struggle between contending economic models. Lincoln himself said that if he could resolve the issue without having to free the southern slave he would gladly do so.

That's how I see it.

Here is something you don't understand: Politics do not exist in a vacuum. Lincoln's election meant no spread of slavery into new territories. It meant unequal slave/free state representation. It meant no compromise or struggle of newly acquired territories. It meant taxation on slave exports. It meant no support for slave hunters in free states. It meant increasing political support for runaway slaves and enfrachisement.

The South's political leaders saw this as being the end of their institution and life and reacted with political violence. Every state engaged in treason announced the political and economic protection of slavery.

Why is it that Lincoln announced the Emancipation Proclamation after the North secured military and political victories? Because the issue was politically stable.

If you ever wonder why Hilferding worked with Schumpeter or why Lenin instituted the NEP then you might begin to understand the huge breadth of politics.