Fourth Turning and national crisis

[nmap]

I regret to say I have not read the book, though I need to.

The linked article considers the cycles our nation has faced in the past, and seeks to discern where it may be headed in the future. In essence, it suggests that the next 20 years or so will involve challenges of the magnitude of the civil war or WWII. It links these to the cyclical nature of generations.

It is rather long; but, perhaps, provides some food for thought.

Boomers - Winter is Coming

[Scimitar]

Interesting Synopsis....

The skies are darkening and a cold wind is beginning to blow. Autumn began with bright skies and warm breezes, but the atmosphere has gotten bitter as swirling winds rip the remaining leaves from the trees. Winter is approaching rapidly and it gives all indications that it will be a bitter, dangerous, harsh time for all Americans. We wish we didn’t have to face the coming trial, but there is no avoiding it. Generational moods are transitioning, and a Crisis will envelop the country for the next twenty years. Courage and fortitude on a level not seen since World War II will be required. The celebrity circuses like the Michael Jackson funeral, Britney Spears comeback tour, and Brangelina’s latest adoption will seem so trite during the coming Crisis. Wearing a blue rubber wristband and putting a yellow ribbon on your Mercedes SUV will not cut it. Previous 4th Turnings in U.S. history have involved total war. Deaths during the American Revolutionary War were approximately 50,000. Total deaths during the Civil War were 600,000. Total deaths during World War II were 73,000,000. How many people will die during the coming Crisis? No one knows the answer in advance. An integrated global economy, combined with nuclear weapons, advanced military killing machines, terrorists, and peak oil appears to be a recipe for death on a colossal scale.

[DinDinA-2]

At least there is a bit of humor to be found...
__________________________________________________ ____________

“I believe it is appropriate to have an 'over-representation' of the facts on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience." - Al Gore

I’d like to know the difference between over-representation and lying.
__________________________________________________ ______________

[Richard]

Sounds like a rip-off of Lord of the Rings - wonder who will play the parts of Sauron and his minions this time.

When discussing cycles in History, I am always reminded of FDRs remarks before the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia in 1936 :

"There is a mysterious cycle in human events.
To some generations, much is given.
Of other generations, much is expected.
This Generation has a rendezvous with destiny."

This Winter Is Coming JQ guy offers some pretty bleak CPA points-of-view - Staff Sr. Director of Strategic Finance and Planning at Wharton School of Business, U of Pennsylvania.

http://theburningplatform.com/

Richard's $.02

[The Reaper]

I recently found myself wondering if the great civilizations, which inevitably fall, realized that their time was over, and when in their cycle they realized it. Did they discover the factor(s) responsible for their demise? Did they try to stop the fall, or just ride it out? Did some make it worse by their actions?

Where are we in our own national cycle?

Are we still rising, or are we now on a downward trajectory? Can the downward trend be arrested or reversed for any significant period?

TR

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by nmap

I regret to say I have not read the book, though I need to.

<<SNIP>>

It is rather long; but, perhaps, provides some food for thought.

At the risk of sounding like a wet blanket...

• The historical analysis offered on the Fourth Turning website <<LINK>> does not inspire confidence in Howe's and Strauss's understanding of American, European, or world history, or how professional historians think about the past.
• The posts on the BB hosted at the Fourth Turning website and Mr. Quinn's editorial are equally problematic.
• A review of the book in question is available here.
• The amazon dot com information on the book, located here has an insightful snippet from a review (apparently of the audio version of the work) for Library Journal. The "Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought" information is also suggestive.

There are significant differences between iconoclastic or polemical works produced by serious historians who have spent decades studying a topic and teleological works produced by those counting on their affluent audiences being unable to tell the difference between gold and iron pyrite.

YMMV.

[Pete]

Oh to be a happy little Psiloi standing in my Epitagma.

Just do what I'm told.

[nmap]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

There are significant differences between iconoclastic or polemical works produced by serious historians who have spent decades studying a topic and teleological works produced by those counting on their affluent audiences being unable to tell the difference between gold and iron pyrite.

YMMV.

And discerning that difference is ever a challenge. A single indicator, lonely and as bare as Pete's Psiloi, can, as you suggest, mislead. And yet, I find the underlying concept of the fourth turning similar to another controversial notion, Kondratieff winter ( LINK ) as well as Elliot Wave theory ( LINK ). Especially in the case of Elliot Wave theory, proponents have had some spectacularly accurate calls - and some embarrassing misses. The lack of rigor and precision does not necessarily discredit the underlying notion.

I mentioned single indicators. Two anthropological works that sound cautionary notes include Diamond's "Collapse", along with Tainter's "Collapse of Complex Societies." Diamond looks at the rise and fall of civilizations through the lens of the environment. In contrast, Tainter has developed the theory of complexity. In his view, a society becomes increasingly complex to deal with problems and continues adding complexity as fresh problems assert themselves. However, the gains from such additions decline. Ultimately, added complexity works to the detriment of the civilization, thus leading (or at least contributing) to its collapse. If you haven't enjoyed these two works, I recommend them highly. Tainter writes like a Princeton Professor - which is, I suppose, appropriate.

And then there are the occasional little items out of left field - Black Swans, if you will. I've attached a paper that suggests we may be approaching the limit for economic gain due to innovation. Let us consider what that means. If we lose those expected gains, the entire underlying premise of our global growth-dependent economy is fatally flawed. Still more problematic, the global economy becomes a zero-sum game. For one person or group to gain something, someone else must lose.


Abstract:
A comparison is made between a model of technology in which the level of technology advances exponentially without limit and a model with an economic limit. The model with an economic limit best fits data obtained from lists of events in the history of science and technology as well as the patent history in the United States. The rate of innovation peaked in the year 1873 and is now rapidly declining. We are at an estimated 85% of the economic limit of technology, and it is projected that we will reach 90% in 2018 and 95% in 2038.

The paper has some math (suitable for intimidating undergraduates ), but is highly readable and only 7 pages long, and is attached.

So...back to the fourth turning. Probably an imperfect theory. But that does not mean it lacks predictive value. Coupled with other indicators, it seems suggestive.

Jonathan Huebner, A possible declining trend for worldwide innovation, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Volume 72, Issue 8, October 2005, Pages 980-986, ISSN 0040-1625, DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2005.01.003.

[Richard]

These offer better odds...

Richard's $.02

[GratefulCitizen]

Originally Posted by nmap

The paper has some math (suitable for intimidating undergraduates ), but is highly readable and only 7 pages long, and is attached.

Jonathan Huebner, A possible declining trend for worldwide innovation, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Volume 72, Issue 8, October 2005, Pages 980-986, ISSN 0040-1625, DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2005.01.003.

From the paper:
"In a simplified model of the history of technology, in which the population remains constant, the rate of innovation is nearly zero at the dawn of civilization and then gradually starts to accelerate. Halfway to the technological limit, the rate of innovation reaches a maximum value and then starts to decline. As the technological limit is approached, the rate of innovation approaches zero, but it never reaches zero, so that the rate of innovation follows a bell curve."

Ummm...
A bell curve (the Guassian Distribution) won't work for this sort of thing.
That is why the peak oilers tossed it as model some time ago.

[nmap]

But Grateful - in the next paragraph, he says:

In a model of technological development in which there is no technological limit, the rate of innovation should increase exponentially with only minor deviations due to the factors mentioned above. As more technologies are developed, people have a wider base of technologies to exploit, and they become increasingly more productive in generating new technologies. Thus, a plot of the rate of innovation over time can distinguish between a world with a technological limit and a world with no limit or with a limit that is so far away that it has little effect.

So the author offers two models - one that supposes a technological limit, and one that supposes no such limit exists. He then examines the data to determine which offers a closer match to the existing data. The data offers a better match to the model that supposes limits.

[GratefulCitizen]

Originally Posted by nmap

But Grateful - in the next paragraph, he says:

In a model of technological development in which there is no technological limit, the rate of innovation should increase exponentially with only minor deviations due to the factors mentioned above. As more technologies are developed, people have a wider base of technologies to exploit, and they become increasingly more productive in generating new technologies. Thus, a plot of the rate of innovation over time can distinguish between a world with a technological limit and a world with no limit or with a limit that is so far away that it has little effect.

So the author offers two models - one that supposes a technological limit, and one that supposes no such limit exists. He then examines the data to determine which offers a closer match to the existing data. The data offers a better match to the model that supposes limits.

I looked at his math.
He is just making adjustments to the Guassian Distribution to make the curve fit the data.

His calculations are fine.
The underlying logic is not.

The choice of mathematical model assumes what is supposedly the conclusion.
When you assume the left side of the equation, you are assuming the right side.

[nmap]

Well, Grateful, I'm confused.

Do you support the no limits model?

[Richard]

MOO - History is not dead - and such modeling is a lot like all the op plans we used to maintain and kept in classified file cabinets - and never seemed to fit the situation whenever something happened. I'll remain a skeptic - and you can worry about what will probably never happen as you've planned because all of the variables were never considered.

Richard's $.025

[nmap]

Originally Posted by Richard

MOO - History is not dead - and such modeling is a lot like all the op plans we used to maintain and kept in classified file cabinets - and never seemed to fit the situation whenever something happened. I'll remain a skeptic - and you can worry about what will probably never happen as you've planned because all of the variables were never considered.

Richard's $.025

Skepticism is generally the wisest course; ideas should be held to account.

Please don't think I lose sleep over these models. I find examining them to be great fun. Perhaps it is not so much worse than playing with dice.

And if I may speculate, I would not be surprised if some of the people involved in creating serious plans had a little fun doing it.