re/ The WW II generation in America, a personal view


Richard Moore

Bcc: FYI

Jim Fadiman wrote:

very fine Richard, hard to shake the notion that we were a good nation ( once upon a time)
   on my side here is a new set of thoughts about being caught in a very old dichotomy, ( it gets interesting after minute 14 or so)

Hi Jim,

Yes, all those John Wayne movies, and James Stewart, always the in-corruptible hero saving the day. And the bold Founding Fathers, crossing the Potomac, defeating the King’s men, and achieving the land of the free and the home of the brave.  “Once upon a time” indeed, a bedtime fairy tale. 

Thanks for sharing the video. You contributions here have been wise but pithy, and the video gives our cyberjournal friends a chance to see you in action, in good form, and talking about something dear to your heart.

Susie Jenkins wrote:

So true!
 Susie in Kona
Sent from my iPad

Thanks Susie. I don’t know what generation you are, but someone from the WWII generation – who lived through the kind of experiences I described – responded, “great essay–on the nose”. I was going out on a limb a bit, based on symptoms that indicated a ‘we fixation’, but I hadn’t gotten direct confirmation at the level of conceptualization.


David Creighton wrote:

You have evoked the sense of We-feeling very well Richard. It is unfortunate that you still don’t believe that climate change is this generation’s great We-fight, for many now say that only a war-mobilization effort will be able to avert the accelerating disasters that We all are beginning to experience (whether we accept the backstory or not). Yes the profiteers wring their hands, and will so long as the profiteering pathology—for what else can we call it now?—persists; which may not be that much longer!

Do you think it makes any difference what you or I think or say about global warming? Do you think spreading the word is going to bring about change? Don’t you realize that the overwhelming majority of people believe in global warming already, of the human-caused variety, and blame it for extreme weather events?

I really don’t understand why you see it as an imperative that everyone sing this tune. Why is that important to you? As regards the science, that really is an absolute joke. I can only describe it a a case of the Emperor’s New Clothes. If you actually look at the climate record, and its relationship to CO2, there’s nothing there to be worried about, apart from the fact that we’re beginning our descent, right on schedule, to the next ice age.

I came across a video by a fellow from the Transition community, John L. Petersen, of the Arlington Institute. He goes through a straightforward, reasonable examination of the evidence – he’s someone I think you could identify with. He sees the same non-link between climate & CO2 as I see, and he talks about “being right for the wrong reasons”. It’s a bit long but one can jump ahead from time to time…
     Climate change, what’s really happening?

The interesting question about global warming, in my view, is why the mythology of human-caused climate crisis is being so heavily evangelized, creating a population of believers, who accept the dogma, and who can’t tolerate heretics – creating what amounts to a religion, a cult even. It’s important for cults to be under threat. That’s an important part of what binds them. In this case, we’ve got the oil companies, and we’ve got heretics. 

It’s a scenario very much like the Garden of Eden story. We have been in the Garden of Freedom, and we are being banished because we tasted of the Tree of Overconsumption. It is both our fault and our salvation that we enter a world of restricted travel, assigned tasks, non-economics, and austerity.

The answer to ‘why’ is actually well known. The story begins with the Club of Rome, passes through the Rio Climate Summit, and plays out with Agenda 21. AGW-mythology will be the sheep’s clothing around the marketing of Agenda 21 as a ‘solution’. 


Helen Basinger wrote:

spot on.
All a big program.

Sharon Almerigi wrote:

Well stated Richard.
  One can only hope that we will experience that same “We” in service of what is best for all or at least the greatest number.

Yes indeed. Only by achieving a ‘We’, a We that can think and act coherently, can real change be achieved. What is needed, in my view, is the right seed, something around which a We can form, and once formed, new seeds can spread. The lesson we can take from the WWII-generation scenario is that it was rooted in collaboration. Working together in a common cause creates bonds, particularly in challenging times, and particularly if you actually achieve what you set out to achieve. 

Tasha Polak wrote:

hi, richard: what an interesting piece. thank you  for  sending this really cogent analysis. i had this thought upon rereading perhaps it’s missing a last paragraph, about the next possible step or stage in this classic Hegelian dialectic you describe. tasha

I suppose this would be a cultural dialectic, from the nation-bound generation, to the don’t-wannabe-bound generation to the ‘next stage’ generation. I can’t say myself. It seems there’ve been a number of ‘next stages’ put forward, Generation X, the online generation, …