A bit of meta-commentary on Strauss-Howe generational cycles. It's the Myers-Briggs of American sociology. If you take it too seriously, it becomes indistinguishable from astrology. If you wink at it out of the corner of your eye as a narrative cue/scaffolding it becomes useful
-
-
For example, by the "rhyming" hypothesis, Millennials should be like the Greatest Generation (war+institution building). That's been a pretty weak rhyme. We X'ers should be like Lost Generation, again weak. Z's should be like Silents (Organization Man), again a weak rhyme
Show this thread -
My suggestion, if you like Strauss-Howe, is to take the micro somewhat seriously, the macro less seriously, and pay a lot more attention to actual historical conditioning and non-rhyming bits of it.
Show this thread -
If you're actually interested in long-term historical cycles, maybe look to things like Carlota Perez technological revolutions cycle theory. Or maybe Peter Turchin (not quite as solid). I'm shaky on economic cycles, but I think Kondratriev is somewhat okay, Elliot Wave is not.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.