The Theory. Explore Howe & Strauss's methods and theories on the generations and the four turnings What is a Generation? Generational Archetypes · The. Editorial Reviews. licillemidta.cf Review. The Fourth Turning continues the project of mapping out the place of generations in history, a project begun in the. A Casey Research interview with Neil Howe, co-author of The Fourth Turning. The Casey Report. DAVID GALLAND:Could you provide us a quick intro-.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Arabic|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration needed]|
every two generations (at the second and fourth turnings), there is a crisis, either we are approaching the fourth turning, and a secular crisis. An utterly persuasive prophecy about a new American era that begins just after the millennium, The Fourth Turning illuminates the past. The Strauss–Howe generational theory, also known as the Fourth Turning theory or simply the Fourth Turning, which was created by authors William Strauss.
They could always back that up.
And particularly in Southern Europe, in addition to that, you give them an over-valued currency. This, again, has a flavor of the s, and I would argue that the euro to Southern Europe is exactly what the gold standard was in the s.
And then finally, they had to let go, and the U. But this is now the situation for Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece. God knows why Greece has continued to stay on the euro. It has completely destroyed their economy over an entire decade.
They would have been so much better going back to the drachma years ago. But for whatever reason, I think partly because the leaders in Greece have a lot invested in euros, they decided not to do that. But the point is, there is a revolution growing in Europe.
It is a populist revolution. It is, to some extent an anti-democratic and authoritarian revolution, and it is both on the left and the right, and it is directed against the centrist liberal democratic middle. And we see in Northern Europe, it is mostly on the right. They are anti-EU, and in some cases, anti-euro. We saw it, obviously, with Brexit. We actually have a program to get our whole nation going somewhere. So here you have something, this idea of populism, authoritarianism, and I would say, particularly, when you go to East Asia, nationalism, which is going around the world, also shades of the s.
And we have yet to see the biggest manifestations of this. This is still brewing. This is similar to my earlier question. Is this the s? We have government stats which would suggest we are on the road to recovery, the worst is behind us. Today we have EBT cards which give the impression that everyone has the resources they need — there are no bread lines.
Again, this is kind of a repeat of the earlier question, but what makes you think this is the s, or an early stage of the fourth turning versus an extension of the third? From an investment standpoint, that is particularly relevant. Timing is everything. There were no bread lines by and either. That was a V-shaped depression.
We went way down and most of the s, except obviously in , we were picking up a lot faster than we are today. Europe is so close to zero that to talk of recovery you kind of have to put it in quotes.
And I think any talk of Europe being out of the woods, particularly given the state of its banking system, and the enormous reliance they are still having on quantitative easing in Europe, I think would be premature. I also think that Europe is politically in danger. I would say, right now, the specter, the immediate cloud over Europe right now is Italy. Italy has to have another election within the next ten months and right now the Five Star movement is way ahead, and the Five Star movement has been pretty adamant about getting out of the euro, as indeed, Italy probably should.
If Greece were to leave the euro, the EU could manage that. The EU could not manage an economy the size of Italy leaving. Yes, and I would also just raise this interesting thing going on with millennials, and that is, this is a generation that is just tired of the gridlock and histrionics and complete incompetence of the older leadership, particularly the boomers, who are now senior leaders in most countries, including the United States, who absolutely cannot focus on the long term.
They cannot even formulate a long term agenda, much less even have any means of getting it through, or legislated, or even, frankly, articulated, or focus on it. One of the reasons why these authoritarian regimes like China are much more popular in the eyes of millennials around the world than among older generations, is that the younger people feel at least China focuses on the future, invests a huge part of their economic product into the future, and have a plan.
Look at the United States. Look at these countries today. There is some great research now, if anyone is interested in pursuing this, and it was highlighted recently in the New York Times and the Post. There is a scholar by the name of Yascha Mounk of Harvard, who with a partner has done some interesting work on world value surveys showing that young generations today are much less enthusiastic about democracy.
What millennials today want is something that works, something that focuses on the future, something that builds, something that is functional. They are simply not finding it in democracy today.
The biggest decline in trust in institutions today, and you see this clearly in America, is in all those institutions we associate with democracy — media, Congress, White House, courts, law, anything involved with what we think of when we think of the term liberal democracy.
Which institutions have not fallen, and have actually risen over the past 20 years? The military, the police, small businesses, interestingly enough. But that is kind of ominous, and I think, when you look ahead, everyone looks in terms of right wing versus left wing, and I think that is a mistake. You really have to look at authoritarian versus liberal democratic.
And right now, I think, when you look generationally, you see an increasing attraction toward the former among young people, who are justifiably impatient. You mentioned Ian Bremmer earlier.
His book The End of the Free Market suggests a greater role for the state, implying almost a Roosevelt era-type expansion of the state. Fourth turnings, historically, as indeed, political crisis, inevitably, is associated with an increase in state power. That has always been true. Every total war, every great crisis, every great collapse, the state comes in the fill the difference. Fourth turnings are a season where problems are resolved.
That is the good news. The bad news is that they are rarely solved without conflict. So, first is the human propensity to kick the can further down the road that thing that leads us to this point in history where we have an accumulation of problems all clustered in a fourth turning crisis?
And if that is the case, we may be in a season of change, but, man, I see a lot of structural problems, issues of unsustainability that are still being ignored, as if the proverbial can is still kind of rolling its way down the road. Despite the fact that you had the economic crisis, no one really thought, frankly, until World War II, that we were out of it.
We went back into it again in We were still a nation in depression on the eve of Pearl Harbor. In we still were away from full employment, we still had very little animal spirits with regard to investment.
So there was a sense of kicking the can down the road then, as well. I do agree with you, and I think that this odd sense today is not just a contradiction, it is almost something bordering on cognitive dissonance, that politics is regarded as so completely unstable and fluid. You think of these futures markets showing what a large share of betters are willing to put their money on Donald Trump not even surviving his first term in the White House, these odds maker bets you see in the British betting markets, for example, and this sense of Washington chaos or gridlock, absolutely nothing happening, and the sense of incompetence around the world in terms of political leadership.
And then on the other hand, this incredible, not only overall loftiness of valuations in financial markets, but the lack of much volatility, partly through financial engineering, but we see in most of these measures of what we call market complacency, which are valuations divided by the VIX, showing complacency off the charts. This is odd. This is clearly unsustainable, where you have such a complete sense of vertigo with regard to our civic and political future, and the sense of utter complacency in financial markets.
I argued after he was elected, before he was inaugurated, that the one thing Donald Trump needs to succeed is a big bear market. He needs stocks to crash, because that way power will gravitate toward the executive, people will demand that he take action, whether it is an aggressive fiscal policy and tax reform.
Right now, no one is acting, because everyone is too complacent. Everything is so great. Why would anyone stick their neck out right now? This is interesting, because in September, my concern coming into the election was that whoever won might get caught holding the bag, the bear market bag. These were my musings in September. He is associated with the free markets. He is associated as a businessman. Do we move away from the free markets on that basis, as people point the finger of blame at the person who is responsible?
Remember, Reagan had a horrible recession early in his first term, as well as a tremendous stock market decline which by August of was down at an all-time low in real terms. That was the bottom.
That was in the first half of his first term. He did get a lot of his legislation through, partly due to the sense of crisis. Volcker was keeping interest rates sky-high, and inflation was screeching to a halt. Things were very painful for a while. And in the last two years of his first term, everything was jumping back up again and in the economy it was morning again in America, and he got one of the great victories in popular vote margins in history in when he was re-elected.
But my point is that you need urgency to create big change. No one on a bright, sunny day when everyone is feeling great, comes in and offers to give up a lot to move forward.
That is only done on a very dark and stormy day. That is certainly one lesson of history. Social Security, itself, an invention of the welfare state in America, which was legislated in , was similarly done at a very dark moment in American history when we thought we had to do something. And there were radical populists out there — there was Huey Long, there was Father Coughlin — my God, if you thought FDR was bad, there were a lot of worse options that people were afraid of at that time.
And we needed something big, and we came up with it. We did it. We got it done. I just think it is similar. Hoover actually did get the youth vote of his time. In , most of the GI generation, the first batch of the greatest generation we talked about, did vote for Hoover. The Republican party, at that time, was considered the party of science, of technocrats, of smart people, of educated people.
The Democrats were sort of the dumb party at that time. And Hoover was a miracle-worker. He was a man of business, but he was an engineer. He read and wrote Latin. Believe it or not, he had a tremendous reputation going into that election, an election where he got a tremendous majority vote.
Well, I think it is fair to say that Donald Trump did not have all that great a reputation among Millennials even going into his presidency. I assume, because of the arithmetic of the Senate, they really have no chance there. But that is where all of the attention is going to focused. We might lurch back to the left with Bernie Sanders.
But what I would say is, the middle right now is completely unstable, and in fact, and attracts very little enthusiasm. That is to say, it is either going to be a populism of the right or the left.
Let me speculate about, perhaps, your role in big change in D. I know I have referenced your book dozens of times over the years. And in fact, in the book that I published this last year, you made the bibliography. Yes, Steve Bannon and I collaborated on some film projects. Steve Bannon is a culture guy. He is just fascinated by culture, and he is fascinated by how culture changes. He has a very different perspective on political change, which gave him kind of a unique view of the great potential of populism to work in , particularly populism that moved to the left economically, but a little bit more to the right socially.
I think that was something that no one else saw. I will say, too, obviously, that although Bannon, I think, was instrumental in Trump getting elected, it is not clear to me, and it is not clear to a lot of people, that his views, necessarily, are really very influential in the policies that are now being pursued, if indeed one thinks right now that the White House is really directing policy at all.
Erik Townsend. Planning for Community Resilience: A Handbook for Reducing Vulnerability to Disasters. Jaimie Hicks Masterson.
The Simulation Hypothesis: Rizwan Virk. The Myth of Capitalism: Monopolies and the Death of Competition. Jonathan Tepper. Editorial Reviews site. If millennial fever takes hold, The Fourth Turning may be only the first of an impending wave of pseudo-scholarly tracts prognosticating future but imminent!
Those expecting a serious or dry tome might be put off by the authors' taste for bulleted text and catchy phrasings, but can you blame these guys for wanting to make impending peril as exciting as possible? Mixing solid understanding of present generational divisions, with some fairly broad generalizations, Strauss and Howe promise to move from history to prophecy.
Fans of Future Shock , Megatrends , or Powershift will be familiar with the authors' style of writing and not at all put off by the book's reach or style. Their take on history provides an intriguing if not always reliable lens through which to view the past, present, and maybe even the future. After researching historical patterns, the authors Generations: They substantiate their hypothesis by identifying and tracing a repetitive, four-stage historical cycle that, throughout recorded time, started on a high note and ended in hardship.
Narrator Michael Tilford's polished, convincing voice and steady pacing lend an air of legitimacy to the authors' assertions. A brief question-and-answer session between the narrator and the authors at program's end provides an interactive quality that enhances the sometimes methodical drone of the historical analysis.
Like other works of prophecy, The Fourth Turning should circulate well in public libraries.? Mark P. Copyright Reed Business Information, Inc. See all Editorial Reviews. Product details File Size: January 16, Sold by: English ASIN: Enabled X-Ray: Is this feature helpful?
Thank you for your feedback. Share your thoughts with other customers. Write a customer review. Customer images. See all customer images. Read reviews that mention fourth turning strauss and howe steve bannon years ago civil war world war must read great depression baby boomers william strauss neil howe book was written american history thought provoking different generations american revolution united states strauss and neil revolution civil donald trump.
Top Reviews Most recent Top Reviews. There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later. Paperback Verified download. This is the kind of book I should ordinarily despise. It contains a broad arc of history viewed internally and is epic in the worst way possible. And yet, it is incredibly compelling for two reasons: In addition, minor points should be given for turning the spotlight on the financial world as the catalyst for the crisis of In a nutshell, the book advances the view that history roughly repeats itself every 80 years.
Further, every 80 year period is characterized by the arrival of Artists silent generation in this cycle , Prophets boomers , Nomads Gen Xers and Heroes millennials. Previous incarnations of this cycle ended with the war of independence, the civil war and world war II. This naturally sets up the denouement for this cycle which the authors expect to occur in the time frame.
Each cycle is divided into turnings: From the book's perspective and Neil Howe's subsequent blog posts, we entered the Fourth Turning in There's nothing spooky or mystical about these cycles and turnings: Other cultures may either be too stable or too chaotic to follow this type of pattern. Prior to the arrival of Donald Trump and despite the eerie portend of the financial crisis, I would have dismissed this book.
Now, it looks positively prophetic. Is there any doubt now that the combination of i income inequality, ii the economic problems of the white working class, iii the culture wars, iv multiculturalism and globalism, v the ravages of identity politics and postmodernism and vi terrorism is not going to be a combustible mix over the next decade?
And that these will simultaneously distract us from combating global warming - the clear threat of the next era? While I find it hard to download into the notion that the US will face an existential crisis as predicted by the book , there's definitely merit in the view that the next ten years will probably have the capability of shocking us however jaded we may be at the present time.
Kindle Edition Verified download. Overall, this book was very good, thorough and well-written. The only complaint I have is that it gets pretty repetitive at various points. I understand that this is to drive home the point and to relate the past to the present, but at some points, it seemed like just filler.
The content of this book is astounding. I just picked it up this year and the book was written over two decades ago. The breakdown in American politics and society that the authors mention for the unraveling era are alive and present. Young activists look back at the previous High as an era of cultural and spiritual poverty. The mood of this era they say is in many ways the opposite of a High: Institutions are weak and distrusted, while individualism is strong and flourishing.
The authors say Highs come after Crises, when society wants to coalesce and build and avoid the death and destruction of the previous crisis.
Unravelings come after Awakenings, when society wants to atomize and enjoy. This is an era of destruction, often involving war or revolution, in which institutional life is destroyed and rebuilt in response to a perceived threat to the nation's survival.
After the crisis, civic authority revives, cultural expression redirects towards community purpose, and people begin to locate themselves as members of a larger group. The G.
Generation which they call a Hero archetype, born to came of age during this era. They say their confidence, optimism, and collective outlook epitomized the mood of that era. Four turnings make up a full cycle of about 80 to 90 years,  which the authors term a saeculum , after the Latin word meaning both "a long human life" and "a natural century". Therefore, a symbiotic relationship exists between historical events and generational personas. Historical events shape generations in childhood and young adulthood; then, as parents and leaders in midlife and old age, generations in turn shape history.
Strauss and Howe describe these turnings as the "seasons of history". At one extreme is the Awakening, which is analogous to summer, and at the other extreme is the Crisis, which is analogous to winter. The turnings in between are transitional seasons, the High and the Unraveling are similar to spring and autumn, respectively. Both of these are defining eras in which people observe that historic events are radically altering their social environment.
Awakenings are periods marked by cultural or religious renewal, when society focuses on changing the inner world of values and private behavior the last American Awakening was the "Consciousness Revolution" of the s and s. During Awakenings, an ethic of individualism emerges, and the institutional order is attacked by new social ideals and spiritual agendas. Roughly halfway to the next Crisis, a cultural Awakening occurs historically, these have often been called Great Awakenings.
The cycle of Crises corresponds with long cycles of war identified by such scholars as Arnold J. Toynbee , Quincy Wright , and L.
Ferrar Jr. Thompson and George Modelski. Klingberg , and the economy Nikolai Kondratieff as well as with long-term oscillations in crime and substance abuse. In essence, generations shaped by similar early-life experiences develop similar collective personas and follow similar life-trajectories. The authors describe the archetypes as follows: Prophet[ edit ] Abraham Lincoln , born in