A theory.

[Scam of God]

I've been drinking a little, so I'm not even going to attempt to go into this with any real intricacy, but I've been thinking about something pretty heavily recently:

Like Roosevelt, I too believe in a "mysterious cycle in human events", though I do not believe it to be nearly so teleological as, say, orthodox Marxist historicity. In brief, it seems to me, democracies cycle through phases of extreme social oppressiveness and social permissiveness - for instance, the German during the Weimar era was undoubtedly more free than he was a mere ten years later, but probably no more so than a German of the 1960s.

It seems to me that this serves a purpose: the conservative era standardizes the radicalism of the liberal era, so that, rather than being something liberatory or radical or new, the "permissiveness" of the liberal era becomes an accepted part of the norm in the post-conservative era.

I've been thinking about this because it seems to me that America itself is about to enter a dark phase in its history, one which we today find repressive beyond measure. And the more I read about current events, the more it seems likely. But the thought comforts me, at least: though I may be dead when we reach the new permissive era, what seems against the grain today will be fully normative tomorrow. For every action, a reaction.

[Franzl]

I see where you're coming from, but I tend to think we're entering a permissive phase really. Things like marijuana and gay marriage aber becoming much more accepted. The "dark age" were the 80s and 90s, IMO.

[Scam of God]

I see where you're coming from, but I tend to think we're entering a permissive phase really. Things like marijuana and gay marriage aber becoming much more accepted. The "dark age" were the 80s and 90s, IMO.

I wouldn't be surprised to see that reaction against Obama engenders a backlash so severe that it totally destroys at least all forms of cultural liberalness formulated post-1968.

[Mechaman]

I see where you're coming from, but I tend to think we're entering a permissive phase really. Things like marijuana and gay marriage aber becoming much more accepted. The "dark age" were the 80s and 90s, IMO.

I wouldn't be surprised to see that reaction against Obama engenders a backlash so severe that it totally destroys at least all forms of cultural liberalness formulated post-1968.

This is very possible.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I see where you're coming from, but I tend to think we're entering a permissive phase really. Things like marijuana and gay marriage aber becoming much more accepted. The "dark age" were the 80s and 90s, IMO.

^^^

Indeed, cycles can be identified in the History of modern countries, Europe adapting them in a different way than USA. However, I think they don't concern only social issues but also economic ones. And despite this won't please libertarians, I tend to think periods of greater "permissivity" socially speaking tend to correspond to period when Government exerces an important regulation on the economy : Socially left-wing period are also economically left-wing.
The first "progressive era" experienced by both USA, Canada, and Western Europe ran from 1945 to the end of seventies and the beginning of eighties. So I tend to think those cycles last for about 30 years, which means the current economic and social regression is coming to an end.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I see where you're coming from, but I tend to think we're entering a permissive phase really. Things like marijuana and gay marriage aber becoming much more accepted. The "dark age" were the 80s and 90s, IMO.

I wouldn't be surprised to see that reaction against Obama engenders a backlash so severe that it totally destroys at least all forms of cultural liberalness formulated post-1968.

that may be possible, but i think most of the backlash has been based on fears about Obama enabling expensive and intrusive government against the middle class. I don't think the "culture war"issues are as salient as they were with Clinton in the 90s.

[minionofmidas]

That is a not-too-rare pattern, yes.

[The Mikado]

While there's little doubt in my mind that Thermidor's coming (way ahead of schedule, sadly), I wouldn't be too glum about it.  The conservative periods in the 50s and 80s tried to turn back waves from the 30s and 60s, respectively, and did, in some respects, but ended up making their peace with certain social gains, and I feel it'll be the same here.  If the healthcare reform passes, I don't see it being overturned successfully, though it might be scaled-back/retooled extensively, just like the GOP majorities in Eisenhower's first term didn't dare touch Social Security.  The advances in gay rights will be mostly safe, I predict, although I wouldn't be surprised to see an extensive backlash against abortion rights and "promiscuity" in general.

The disappointing thing to me about this Thermidorian Reaction is how little it took to trigger it.  "We should make some cosmetic alterations to the health care system!"  "Oh, noes, teh socialism!!!"  That's the thing: Obama was never radical to begin with, and yet his mere presence triggered this massive reactionary wave.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I see where you're coming from, but I tend to think we're entering a permissive phase really. Things like marijuana and gay marriage aber becoming much more accepted. The "dark age" were the 80s and 90s, IMO.

^^^

Indeed, cycles can be identified in the History of modern countries, Europe adapting them in a different way than USA. However, I think they don't concern only social issues but also economic ones. And despite this won't please libertarians, I tend to think periods of greater "permissivity" socially speaking tend to correspond to period when Government exerces an important regulation on the economy : Socially left-wing period are also economically left-wing.
The first "progressive era" experienced by both USA, Canada, and Western Europe ran from 1945 to the end of seventies and the beginning of eighties. So I tend to think those cycles last for about 30 years, which means the current economic and social regression is coming to an end.

     I think periods tend to be more fluid than that in the United States, & can be loosely seen as corresponding to certain prominent political figures:

1930-1950 trend-left (FDR)
1950-1965 trend-right (Joe McCarthy)
1965-1980 trend-left (Eugene McCarthy)
1980-2005 trend-right (Reagan)
2005-         trend-left (Obama)

     Along those lines, the trends towards American conservatism/American liberalism could be interpreted as a result of the stranglehold of those ideologies on the American political discourse.

     Granted I can't say much about cycles in Europe, though Einzige does have a point that societies trend towards more social permissiveness over time. That should not be too shocking given that social permissiveness in the U.S. has some connection to cities, which I suspect resist the movements to the right to some extent.

[The Mikado]

Eugene McCarthy is hardly a good example for the period you mentioned.  He was a crotchety old crank in a period that revolved around youth.

[Smid]

I agree with much of what Mikado has said. I think that each wave is a rebellion/rejection of the previous generation's beliefs. This is mainly because both extreme liberty and extreme conservativism lead to problems (just different ones). Each generation sees firsthand the problems of the previous generation and attempt to move in a direction different to the generation before.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Eugene McCarthy is hardly a good example for the period you mentioned.  He was a crotchety old crank in a period that revolved around youth.

Not true, but to say Gene McCarthy embodies the "trend-left" of 1965-1980 is a little bizarre.

[The Mikado]

Eugene McCarthy is hardly a good example for the period you mentioned.  He was a crotchety old crank in a period that revolved around youth.

Not true, but to say Gene McCarthy embodies the "trend-left" of 1965-1980 is a little bizarre.

Which part of my statement do you disagree with?  He most certainly was a crotchety old crank.  If you disagree with the "revolved around youth," that's more understandable...that was a gross overgeneralization and a poor word choice on my part.

[Vepres]

I see where you're coming from, but I tend to think we're entering a permissive phase really. Things like marijuana and gay marriage aber becoming much more accepted. The "dark age" were the 80s and 90s, IMO.

I wouldn't be surprised to see that reaction against Obama engenders a backlash so severe that it totally destroys at least all forms of cultural liberalness formulated post-1968.

Most of the people opposed to Obama primarily because of social issues will be dead in a few decades.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

I see where you're coming from, but I tend to think we're entering a permissive phase really. Things like marijuana and gay marriage aber becoming much more accepted. The "dark age" were the 80s and 90s, IMO.

I wouldn't be surprised to see that reaction against Obama engenders a backlash so severe that it totally destroys at least all forms of cultural liberalness formulated post-1968.

Most of the people opposed to Obama primarily because of social issues will be dead in a few decades.

Actually all of those people will be dead in a few decades. As will all of the people who support Obama on social issues. What's your point?

[dead0man]

So this time Chicken Little's song tells of "moralfags" (first time I've ever used that....probably the last) that will re-ban abortions and make colored people go to their own, underfunded schools?  Who is going to lead this charge?  The hardcore nutters on the right make a small percentage of our population and are amazingly old to boot.  If you think the 40-60% of the US that is against national health care are exactly like the worst cartoon of a conservative you can think of then there isn't much anybody can say that will fix what is wrong with your head.

Now this isn't as nutso crazy as opebo's coming class war where the masters (~1% of the population) will somehow starve the other 99% to death or at least make our lives worse than they are now in the "Bad Place", but it's close.

[patrick1]

Reminds me of The Wanting Seed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wanting_Seed#Cyclical_History

[Mint]

Eugene McCarthy is hardly a good example for the period you mentioned.  He was a crotchety old crank in a period that revolved around youth.

Not true, but to say Gene McCarthy embodies the "trend-left" of 1965-1980 is a little bizarre.

To say there was a substantial "left-trend" in 1965-1980 to begin with is bizarre. By the time Nixon got in we were starting to gut most of the great society other than those cushy middle class entitlements and there was a definite 'law and order' trend underway. Most historians call 1973 the end of the liberal consensus and for good reason.

[Mint]

...make colored people go to their own, underfunded schools?

No need, that's pretty much already the case.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I see where you're coming from, but I tend to think we're entering a permissive phase really. Things like marijuana and gay marriage aber becoming much more accepted. The "dark age" were the 80s and 90s, IMO.

^^^

Indeed, cycles can be identified in the History of modern countries, Europe adapting them in a different way than USA. However, I think they don't concern only social issues but also economic ones. And despite this won't please libertarians, I tend to think periods of greater "permissivity" socially speaking tend to correspond to period when Government exerces an important regulation on the economy : Socially left-wing period are also economically left-wing.
The first "progressive era" experienced by both USA, Canada, and Western Europe ran from 1945 to the end of seventies and the beginning of eighties. So I tend to think those cycles last for about 30 years, which means the current economic and social regression is coming to an end.

     I think periods tend to be more fluid than that in the United States, & can be loosely seen as corresponding to certain prominent political figures:

1930-1950 trend-left (FDR)
1950-1965 trend-right (Joe McCarthy)
1965-1980 trend-left (Eugene McCarthy)
1980-2005 trend-right (Reagan)
2005-         trend-left (Obama)

I tend to view it differently, even though I agree with you that USA have different ideological systems. Still, they often tend to precede Europe ideologically speaking, think to FDR in the 30's or the conservative movement of late seventies.
Plus, there are IMO several phases in a single cycle. See for example : the "keynesian cycle" can be divided in 3 periods :
- The Revolution (1932-1948) : This is the time when massive ideological realignments appear. The old style paleoconservatism still tries to block the movement but it rapidly gets crushed and becomes marginal. Bob Taft loses and loses again. The 1948 is the ultimate proov that the left has won, the right pretty much fade away.
- The domination (1948-1968) : After the final victory of new progressives, the GOP seems to adopt a quite moderate (if not lewt-wing) aproach and the democrats accomplish important progresses in several domains (Great Society, etc...).
- The contestation (1968-1980) : The progressive movement is a victim of its own excesses. With racial riots and anti-Vietnam demonstrations, progressive grassroots turn against a progressive government. The result is a catastrophic dem convention, and the moral majority brings Nixon to power. He however keeps traditional progressive policies. But even though he wasn't himself a conservative, he managed to give conservatives back their lost pride. To following is well-known : Carter governs more to the right of Nixon, Reagan more to the right of Carter, etc. Progressivism is over.

If we try to divide the conservative era in the same way, we could have a "revolution" during the 1980-1988 years, with the 1988 playing a similar role to 1940, then a domination from 1988 to 2008. So today may be the beginning of a new contestation. If teabaggers and all the ultraconservatives go too far, the will manage to undermine the conservative establishment just as it happened for progressives. We'll see...

[Scam of God]

Don't expect the next liberal re-alignment to look anything like the first.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

People shouldn't confuse "left-wing" and "liberal".. In certain ways the 1930s was probably the most socially conservative decade of the 20th Century - a reaction to the liberalism of the 1920s. 

[Antonio the Sixth]

Don't expect the next liberal re-alignment to look anything like the first.

You mean that the next progressive realignment will renounce to rebuild Welfare State and fight against excessive inequalities ? Renounce to government regulations, to redistribution of wealth, to public services delevopment and so forth ? So, how would it be "progressive" ?