How long until the next Renaissance?

[Cyrano]

The Supreme Court has committed another criminal act -- A barbarian has come to power in Massachusetts -- A group of people called “Democrats” are drowning in confusion -- A man called “the president” speaks inspiring words, but can’t seem to fulfill the promise.

There’s nothing new here. What we like to call “progress” has lost once again.

All that’s happening is the unrelenting continuation of human history. Tyranny has always been the rule rather than the exception. The powerful, the brutal, those willing to do anything to gain and hold power have almost always won. And now, they once again have (seemingly) taken control. The peasants have once again been left to eke out a bare existence.

Over much of the past century, we have come to expect something different. Franklin Roosevelt created the New Deal, a middle class came into existence after WWII, the Civil Rights Act, Medicare, and Medicaid came into being, and widespread prosperity lasted for about 40 years.

Many lived under the impression that this was the normal order of things. But it turns out it wasn’t and never was.

The fantasy started to crack when Ronald Reagan became president. And it completely shattered when Bush/Cheney were appointed to power and totally criminalized the government. What we are now experiencing is not only the end of an era, but very likely, the end of the American Empire.

Looking back over the past few millennia, we know that on rare occasions, a period of sanity comes along. Perhaps much of the past century has been one of those rare eras of enlightenment and we are now doomed to another long nightmare of ignorance and darkness.

I wonder how long it will be until humans see another Renaissance.

[dbonds]

1. As soon as we are willing to put up with the birthing pains...

The pains, of course, will be the collapse of the current corporatacracy. Which means no more American Idol shows.

[cliffordu]

2. And blood in the streets.

Won't be any telethon to watch to avoid getting involved.

[Cyrano]

3. There won't be any blood in the streets

We've been too domesticated.

Even sheep will run when they believe they're in danger. How many who have passports are going to run?

Of course, the next logical question is, "Run to where?" Does anyone really believe that empires go quietly without trying to take everyone else with them? Unfortunately, our empire has the power to do it.

Hopefully, I'm just being overly paranoid. But just because I may be paranoid doesn't mean I'm wrong.

[yurbud]

4. violence is the response they expect and can deal with. Mass non-cooperation

they can't deal with.

[Blue_In_AK]

6. My husband did his part this morning...

Paid off his Bank of America credit card and cut it up. That's three this year. No more Capital One, no more Chase and no more B of A. Woo-hoo!!

[yurbud]

13. I just have one through my credit union that I only keep for renting cars and such

too few rental places take debit cards to make it practical.

[Blue_In_AK]

19. That's what we have now.

My husband and I each have a card through our credit union, and he has American Express. That's it. We feel so ... liberated. :)

[yurbud]

20. It took me till about 40 to pay off the card bills I racked up in grad school.

[bobbolink]

22. That's a crime. It is servitude to make students be chained to debt that way!

congrats on getting rid of it! :toast:

[yurbud]

25. my student loans won't be gone until I'm 56 and that's WITH the new public service forgiveness

[tom_paine]

5. That depends on the environment and Peak Everything

If, as many suspect, the Earth is going to lose 3-5 net billion people in the next 100-150 years, it may be a VERY LONG time, if not never.

Not for humans, anyway. Maybe this ol' gal, Gaia, can ramp up one more time and come up with the next intelligent species to come after the Great Anthropocentric Die-Off.

The Bushies may well get their rapture-esque disaster and death-filled end-times, but since no Cloud Being is likely going to whisk them away from it, they're a-gonna be MAD.

Then, LOOK OUT Liberals, it's Witch-Burning-Time!

[Cyrano]

8. You could be right.

They've been burning us with words for as long as I can remember. I suppose it's just a question of time before the flames becomes a literal reality.

But one thing I really want to know. How come the Cloud Being gave them the upper hand and saw fit to screw the rest of us? ... Upon reflection, I guess the answer is buried in the question.

[Birthmark]

7. If we're lucky...

...centuries. If we're unlucky, millennia. If we're really unlucky/stupid, then we'll have to wait for evolution to breed a new species of intelligent human as H. sapiens will have committed suicide by global warming.

[Cyrano]

9. One thing seems certain. No one alive today will be around to see

that next Renaissance.

Then again, who knows. The pace of history may just go into warp drive and we'll still be alive to see sanity reign.

[tom_paine]

10. That would be nice, but it seems doubtful.

Would that there were some good reasons to suspect that.

I could see thinking maybe (absent environment and population issues) 50 years and some awful kinder and gentler nazi-esque overstepping prior to the "comeback".

But man, we haven't even begun to hit bottom. This major "Dred Scott-ish" structural change has yet to be implemeted.

If I recall my history, Dred Scott unleashed tens of thousands of Bushie Slave-Catchers up North to kidnap not just runaways, but every African-American they could find.

A similar whirlwind will blow up through the Northern Midwestern states, but of political Corporate Cash enslaving all of us in new ways.

I hope I am wrong and you're wishful thinking is right.

[Birthmark]

11. Sanity?

I haven't seen that in this country for many years. But it sure was nice.

[Salmonslayer]

12. It is a good question.

I dint think we are that far off from HCR if a more open process is used. I think most Americans would be for some sort of HCR single provider option similar to Canada sans back room deals. Buying votes and special treatment for unions does not sit well with the average American in my opinion. I am not saying how HCR has been handled was wrong, but, I think it was perceived as poorly managed by the average American.

BTW I assume that your list of Renaissance periods were driven by Democrats.

The 1964 civil rights act was primarily supported by Republicans as a percentage of votes, not Democrat's. It was not really the Democrats finest hour. I addition Robert Byrd and Al Gore Sr voted against the 1964 CRA. Robert Byrd is also the only member of congress that has been a KKK member. As much as Byrd seems like a nice guy, I would like to see him replaced with a senator without the racist past.

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/183344.html

Voting Record

House of Representatives:
Democrats for: 152
Democrats against: 96
Republicans for: 138
Republicans against: 34

Senate:
Democrats for: 46
Democrats against: 21
Republicans for: 27
Republicans against: 6


Many sources cite numbers provided by an issue of Congressional
Quarterly. For example, on the web site of the 5th Legislative
District Republican Party for the State of Washington, they state:

"The Congressional Quarterly of June 26, 1964 recorded that in the
Senate, only 69 percent of Democrats (46 for, 21 against) voted for
the Civil Rights Act as compared to 82 percent of Republicans (27 for,
6 against). All southern Democratic senators voted against the act.
<...> In the House of Representatives, 61 percent of Democrats (152
for, 96 against) voted for the Civil Rights Act; 92 of the 103
Southern Democrats voted against it. Among Republicans, 80 percent
(138 for, 34 against) voted for it."

[Cyrano]

15. A Renaissance isn't a Democratic or Republican thing

And by the way, welcome to DU.

During the Italian Renaissance, there were no Democrats or Republicans. The wealthy Medici family of Florence financed so much of it. They had a tremendous appreciation of the arts, architecture, and perhaps even science.

No one would call them Democrats or Republicans. There was no such thing at the time. But their contributions to civilization were beyond measure. Although there were no names for eras back then, they were instrumental in bringing us out of, what we now call, the dark ages.

I wonder if anyone named Gingrich, or Bush, or Limbaugh, or Murdoch, or anyone else of their ilk will ever be credited with helping to establish an age of enlightenment?

Now let's talk about the "math" in your post. In 1964, most Southern Democrats were what are, today, called Republicans. Southerners identified themselves as "Democrats" because Lincoln was a "Republican."

After the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act passed in the 1960s, Southern politicians started switching to the Republican Party. Your ignoring this fact is so disingenuous as to be insulting.

Lyndon Johnson said when he signed the Civil Rights Act, "This will cost us the South for a generation." Turns out to have been more than a generation.

So I'll tell you what. Let's let other DUers examine your "mathematical statistics" in light of what I've just said. Is there any question as to what we're really talking about here?

[Salmonslayer]

16. Thx for the welcome

I am aware of the traditional references to "renaissance periods".

I was using "renaissance" in the context the original poster used (or at least as I interpreted it) He/she referred to legislation largely enacted by Democrats as renaissance periods. I would consider real HCR a renaissance period in the same context if it happens.

In a similar context i would consider the creation and adoption of the constitution a renaissance period. Also, oddly enough, the Civil war because it gave so many freedoms they did not have

[Cyrano]

18. You might want to rethink that thanks

I've just finished editing my post to take your "math" into account.

And by the way, I am the original poster on this thread.

[Cybergata]

14. When eveyone refuses to . . .

let corporate interest control everything. When we refuse to buy what commercials tell us to buy & think for ourselves instead of letting "Madison Ave." do our thinking for us. When we refuse to vote for people who take money from corporate interest. When we refuse to go to fight wars that only benefit corporate interest. When we remember the value of a human isn't what he/she has, but what she/he contributes to society. When we follow our natural instinct to work together and help each other. When our tax dollars go to health care not warfare. When more schools than prisons are being build. When we realize that greed is bad. I could go on, but I'm sure I've made my point.

[Odin2005]

17. Not until we throw out all these Blackwater Sforzas and Bankster Medicis.

[Mixopterus]

21. Why a renaissance?

By most modern historical analysis the fall of the Roman Empire was nothing but a good thing, hence the new usage of the term "Migration Period" over the misunderstood term "Dark Age". Contrary to what Victorian era historians would have you believe, there was actually a larger degree of social justice and economic equality in the migration and medieval period than most certainly the preceding period (Hellenistic period was an age of eternal war and anything past that up until the collapse was rule for the rich by the rich at the expense of all) and arguably the decadent age of the Renaissance. There were growing pains, but the societies that replaced Roman hegemony were by and large more fair, and far more interested in the welfare of their people.

In other words: You need a collapse of a rotten system, not a refinement of an old system.

[Cyrano]

23. I understood your last sentence.

But as for the rest of your post, as unfair as this comment may seem, all I can say is, "Huh?"

On edit: Perhaps there was some significance in the words you used. So I will just blame myself for my inability to grasp your meaning, or what it was you intended to communicate.

Could I please ask you to repeat it using different words?

[Mixopterus]

24. I'm not sure what is perplexing

Perhaps you can elaborate?

[Cyrano]

26. Jeeez, I really don't want to say this.

But could you express yourself in English?

Sorry, I don't mean to be condescending or insulting, but I really don't understand what it was you were communicating.

On edit: The use of "sophisticated terminology" tends to obscure meaning. If you have something to say, say it. Stop worrying how "erudite" someone may think you are.

And if that sounded harsh, I apologize. What I'm trying to do is get you to say what you mean. Would you just spit out what you're trying to say in plain English?

[Mixopterus]

27. That was plain English

That is how I speak :(

[BreweryYardRat]

29. I can understand him just fine.

Then again, I'm a history minor, so I actually know what he's talking about.

Maybe you should read a history book or ten?

[Mixopterus]

31. Thank you

I was wondering if by some freak of chance I had spontaneously learned Greek and all my communications were being transcribed in Greek while my consciousness translated them as English :p

Seriously though, the Renaissance is really just a refinement of what were established trends developed during the Medieval period likely spawned by existent traditions in Italy and the good fortune to profit from trade generated by the Crusades while getting bundles of cash because nearly every crusading army that wants to get to the Holy Land has to leave via Italian harbors. A refinement would not be good, we need a reboot.

[timeforpeace]

28. The Renaissance was probably called "hell on earth" by most who lived during those times.

[Mixopterus]

30. This is true

The Renaissance marked a period of gross excess among the rich at the expense of the poor. The Italian merchant families were also famously brutal in maintaining their position, which in the end came at the expense of the Italian states themselves. Oh, it also sparked the schism in Christianity and the most devastating war known to Europeans at that point. It was not a good period and most certainly nothing to strive for.