Recessivists hope for what the sane and sober progressives would consider a Dickensian nightmare . . .

Party on!

Hasn't conflict and war always been present in every generation? I mean if you start from the American Revolution, then you have the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars and the American war of 1812, the conquest of the the Spanish territories in Western America, the Crimean War, the American Civil War, Bismark of Germanies wars of German unification from Denmark, Austria and finally France, the Boer War, the Spanish American War, the Russian-Japanese War, the Turkish massacres of its minority citizens at the turn of the 19th century through to the 1920's (at least), WWI then WWII, Korea, Vietnam.... that's off the top of my head, and as far as I can tell, those are each major conflicts in every generation since the founding of America. War and confict just seems to accompany mankind like background noise, if you look hard enough (well not even all that hard), its always there.

Perhaps there is more of a generational tie to economic situations (booms and busts), but I don't know if I can be convinced that generations are more or less prone to War, it seems that all humankind is prone to War at any time.

N

MAXROT,

Most historians feel that WW2 was just an extension of WW1. WW1 was adjudicated harshly and was the direct cause of the conditions that allowed Germany to start up aggressions again. Think of it as a very long, drawn-out, phase-shift.

I know Dan Gainor's trying to dismiss that study by saying that it had only 92 subjects, but that's not a terribly small study. It's nice when you can have thousands of subjects, but that's somewhat rare. By contrast, the paper that led to the autism-vaccine scare had only 12 subjects (and they were cherry-picked, and the doctor was getting paid to find a particular result, etc.).

Um, Thom, Jimmy Carter wasn't President in 1976. Either you have the year wrong, or Gerald Ford is the one that let the Indians practice their tribal religions.

@rladlof, I can agree in part about WWII being an extension of WWI, in a lot of ways Germany was provoked into it by the terms imposed upon it by the Allies. Some of the harshest of terms being championed by the French, who had the loudest voice at the table since it was their land that was most renowned for the war. I would say there is even an argument that if America had stayed out of the war, that the end of that war would have eventually ended in a draw, perhaps a year or two later than it did. But WWII didn't just involve the Europeans, there were major Asian countries at War, even prior to Germany invading Poland. Russia was hostile to its neighbors prior to Germany invading it, Finland and Poland can attest to that. Italy under Mussolini was acting aggressively too, though ineptly in Africa. The Spanish Civil War was a fascist war (a war Germany happily tested it weapons in) vs a Republic government.

All in all, yes you could make an argument that the two wars were really one, but I look at WWI as a War that dissolved the last vestiges of Royal Families powers in Europe. WWII was the War that decided what would replace those power vacuums. I don't think that could have happened without the end of WWI and then the building of the new experimental governments that took place after it. Basically I would say the near 20 year period between the wars was more than just a breather for Germany and Russia to regain their strength, it was a period of social upheaval throughout Europe, Russia and Asia because of the massive reworking of the world power structure brought on by WWI. I'd say there were definitive reasons why the wars were separate. Or on the flip side, I could make arguments as to why WWI was nothing more than the continuation of the Franco-Prussian War, since the French made alliances with as many countries it could against Germany and long nursed its grudge against Germany for the loss of the Alsace-Loraine regions of Eastern France in that war.

One of the major reasons why historians sort of lump WWI and WWII together though is because there wasn't the usual separation of time between major wars, there was little time to reflect upon the causes and results of it. A lot of documentation that is later sorted through years after such an event were lost to the second war. Now you done it, you got me babbling about WWI, sorry.

But anyway, it matters not, WWI was fought by the Lost Generation, and WWII was fought by the Greatest Generation (whatever that means) back to back generations, and that was my initial point to Thom, war doesn't seem to skip generations because of how it affected the prior generation.

N

Promises, promises!

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/12/27/obama_promises&source=newsletter&utm_source=contactology&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Salon_Daily%20Newsletter%20%28Not%20Premium%29_7_30_110

We are now entering the slave class.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/FROM-MIDDLE-CLASS-TO-SLAVE-by-lila-york-101227-329.html

Normalcy Bias

Americans in the United States of Mortal Sin suffer from what is called – normalcy bias. Americans have never had to really suffer as other citizens in other countries. We will never or we can never learn. We will not listen. It may be naivete, ignorance, or outright arrogance. Americans tend to believe that nothing bad can happen to them. America’s collapse and destruction will be of epic proportions. Let us make no mistake that our manifest destiny is to die as a people and as a country.

Hooray for the "Think and Grow Rich" reference. What a great book!