The theory of societal “turning points,” particularly the concept of the “Fourth Turning,” offers a framework for understanding the unraveling of the old global order and the rise of a new one. This emerging order is characterized by technocracy, and figures like President Trump are playing significant roles in this transition. Trump, in a sense, wields a hammer to dismantle the old structures while simultaneously embracing technocratic principles, even as influential technocrats push forward their vision of a scientifically managed society.
The Rise of the SovCorp
Curtis Yarvin’s Dark Enlightenment theory has gained traction among Silicon Valley’s tech elite. They envision a system where a monarch-like figure holds power, replacing traditional political systems with a corporate-style governance model known as the “SovCorp.” This SovCorp would control land and resources globally, employing Universal Basic Income (UBI) to maintain social order as Western populations gradually decline. This new world order would be increasingly driven by artificial intelligence, eventually evolving into Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and Artificial Super Intelligence (ASI).
The SovCorp concept represents a radical departure from traditional democratic ideals. It proposes a hierarchical structure where decision-making is concentrated in the hands of a select few, ostensibly chosen for their expertise and competence. This raises fundamental questions about accountability, transparency, and the potential for abuse of power. The reliance on UBI as a means of social control also raises concerns about individual autonomy and the potential for a form of digital feudalism, where citizens are dependent on the SovCorp for their basic needs.
The promise of AGI and ASI further complicates the picture. While these technologies hold the potential to solve some of humanity’s most pressing problems, they also pose existential risks. The concentration of such powerful technologies in the hands of a single entity like the SovCorp could create an unprecedented imbalance of power, with potentially catastrophic consequences. The question of how to ensure that AGI and ASI are aligned with human values and used for the benefit of all is a central challenge of our time.
Examining the technocratic movements of the 1930s reveals parallels to these contemporary developments. Early technocrats openly advocated for President Franklin D. Roosevelt to assume dictatorial powers, dissolve Congress, and govern the nation through top-down, technocratic management. They believed that traditional political institutions were incapable of addressing the complex economic and social problems of the Great Depression, and that a scientifically managed society was the only way to achieve stability and prosperity.
This historical precedent serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of unchecked technocratic ambition. While the promise of efficiency and expertise may be appealing, the erosion of democratic principles and individual liberties can have devastating consequences. The 1930s technocrats ultimately failed to gain widespread support, but their ideas continue to resonate with some today.
Technocracy has been patiently waiting for its moment, systematically building infrastructure, gathering support, and vying forpositions of influence. Now, a coup is underway, this time on a global scale. This gradual accumulation of power and influence has been facilitated by the increasing complexity of modern society and the growing reliance on technology. As governments struggle to keep pace with rapid technological advancements, they often turn to experts and technocrats for guidance, inadvertently ceding control over key areas of policy and decision-making.
Brzezinski, Rockefeller, and the Technotronic Era
Did Zbigniew Brzezinski and David Rockefeller foresee the significance of the Fourth Turning when they established the Trilateral Commission in 1973? Their collaboration was sparked by Brzezinski’s book, “Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technotronic Era” (Viking Press, 1973), which predicted the decline of the nation-state and the rise of technology:
“The nation-state as a fundamental unit of man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state.” (p. 246)
Brzezinski’s vision of a “Technotronic Era” reflects a deep understanding of the transformative power of technology and its potential to reshape global power structures. He recognized that the nation-state, once the dominant force in international affairs, was being increasingly challenged by transnational actors such as multinational corporations and international financial institutions. This shift in power dynamics has profound implications for the future of governance and the role of democracy.
The Trilateral Commission, founded by Brzezinski and Rockefeller, was intended to foster cooperation between North America, Europe, and Japan in addressing these emerging challenges. However, it has also been criticized for its perceived elitism and its potential to undermine national sovereignty. The commission’s focus on global governance and its advocacy for closer international cooperation have led some to believe that it is a vehicle for advancing a technocratic agenda.
In essence, our future has been hijacked. The decisions that will shape our lives are increasingly being made by unelected experts and powerful corporations, often behind closed doors. This erosion of democratic control is a major threat to individual liberty and self-determination. It is essential that we demand greater transparency and accountability from those who wield power and that we actively participate in shaping the future of our society.
Historical Patterns and Societal Seasons
History demonstrates that civilizations and societies flourish, decline, and rise again, repeating a cyclical pattern. This pattern, according to demographer Neil Howe, is surprisingly predictable in both timing and trajectory. The cyclical nature of history suggests that we can learn from the past and anticipate future challenges. By understanding the patterns of rise and fall, we can better prepare for the inevitable crises and transformations that lie ahead.
Howe refers to these societal shifts as “seasons” of change, specifically “turning” periods, and has famously argued that America has now entered its Fourth Turning. This concept, deeply explored in his book “The Fourth Turning,” co-authored with William Strauss, suggests a recurring cycle of approximately 80-100 years, marked by distinct generational archetypes and societal moods. Each turning represents a different type of era: a High, an Awakening, an Unraveling, and a Crisis.
The Fourth Turning theory provides a framework for understanding the current state of societal upheaval and the challenges we face. It suggests that we are entering a period of crisis and transformation, where existing institutions will be challenged and new ones will emerge. By understanding the dynamics of the Fourth Turning, we can better navigate these turbulent times and work towards a more positive future.
Understanding the Generational Archetypes
Strauss and Howe identified four recurring generational archetypes that play a significant role in shaping these turnings:
Prophet Generation: Born after a crisis, these individuals grow up as coddled children during a High. They mature into self-absorbed young adults during an Awakening and emerge as moralistic leaders during the next Crisis. Examples include those born after World War II, such as the Baby Boomer generation.
Nomad Generation: Born during an Awakening, these individuals grow up as under-protected children during an Unraveling. They mature into pragmatic young adults during a Crisis and become resilient elders during the next High. Generation X fits this archetype.
Hero Generation: Born after an Unraveling, these individuals grow up as increasingly protected children during a Crisis. They mature into energetic and community-minded young adults during the next High and become powerful, but often inflexible, leaders during the subsequent Awakening. The Millennial generation is considered a Hero generation.
Artist Generation: Born during a High, these individuals grow up as overprotected children during an Awakening. They mature into sensitive young adults during an Unraveling and become thoughtful elders during the next Crisis. Generation Z is currently fulfilling the role of the Artist generation.
These generational archetypes interact with each other in predictable ways, shaping the course of history and influencing the societal mood during each turning. Understanding these dynamics can help us to anticipate future trends and navigate the challenges of the Fourth Turning.
The Four Turnings in Detail
Each turning is characterized by a distinct societal mood and set of challenges:
The First Turning (The High): This era follows a Crisis and is characterized by strong institutions, social cohesion, and a sense of collective purpose. People generally trust the system, and there is widespread optimism about the future. Post-World War II America serves as a prime example of a High.
The Second Turning (The Awakening): This era is marked by a spiritual rebellion against the established order. People begin to question authority, and there is a growing emphasis on individual expression and personal values. The 1960s and 1970s represent an Awakening.
The Third Turning (The Unraveling): This era is characterized by individualism, social fragmentation, and a weakening of institutions. People lose faith in the system, and there is a growing sense of cultural decay. The period from the late 1980s to the late 2000s can be seen as an Unraveling.
The Fourth Turning (The Crisis): This is an era of upheaval and transformation. Existing institutions are challenged, and there is a sense of urgency and existential threat. This turning often involves war, economic collapse, or other major crises that reshape society. We are arguably currently in the early stages of a Fourth Turning.
The Fourth Turning is a time of great uncertainty and risk, but it is also a time of great opportunity. It is a time when we can rebuild our society and create a more just and sustainable future. However, this requires a clear understanding of the challenges we face and a willingness to work together to overcome them.
Technocracy as a Solution?
The rise of technocracy can be seen as a response to the perceived failures of traditional political and economic systems during the Unraveling and Crisis phases. Proponents of technocracy argue that scientific and technological expertise can provide more effective solutions to complex societal problems than traditional political ideologies. They believe that decisions should be based on data and evidence, rather than on political considerations or popular opinion.
However, technocracy also raises concerns about the concentration of power in the hands of unelected experts and the potential for a loss of individual freedom and democratic accountability. The SovCorp model, with its reliance on AI and UBI, further amplifies these concerns. The potential for bias in algorithms and the lack of transparency in decision-making processes can undermine public trust and lead to unintended consequences.
A key challenge is ensuring that technocratic systems are accountable to the public and that individual rights are protected. This requires establishing clear ethical guidelines and oversight mechanisms to prevent abuse of power. It also requires fostering a culture of transparency and open dialogue, where citizens can engage with experts and challenge their assumptions.
The Role of Technology
Technology plays a central role in the unfolding of the Fourth Turning, both as a driver of change and as a potential tool for control. The rapid advancements in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and other fields are creating unprecedented opportunities and challenges for humanity.
On the one hand, technology can be used to address pressing issues such as climate change, poverty, and disease. Renewable energy technologies, precision agriculture, and personalized medicine hold the potential to improve the lives of billions of people. On the other hand, it can also be used to create new forms of surveillance, manipulation, and control. Facial recognition technology, social media algorithms, and autonomous weapons systems raise serious ethical and societal concerns.
The key is to harness the power of technology for good while mitigating its risks. This requires a proactive approach to regulation and governance, as well as a commitment to ethical principles and human values. It also requires fostering a culture of innovation that is both responsible and inclusive.
The Path Forward
Navigating the Fourth Turning requires a critical understanding of the historical patterns and societal forces at play. It also requires a careful consideration of the ethical and social implications of new technologies. We must learn from the mistakes of the past and avoid repeating them. We must also be willing to embrace new ideas and approaches, while remaining grounded in our core values.
Finding a balance between technological progress and human values is essential for ensuring a future that is both prosperous and just. This requires a commitment to democratic principles, transparency, and accountability. It also requires a willingness to engage in open and honest dialogue about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. We need to foster a sense of shared responsibility and work together to create a better future for all.
The current transition presents a pivotal moment in human history. The choices we make today will determine the shape of the world for generations to come. It is imperative that we approach this moment with wisdom, courage, and a deep commitment to the common good. We must strive to create a society that is both technologically advanced and ethically sound, where human rights are respected and individual freedoms are protected. The future is not predetermined; it is up to us to shape it.