1675

Another entry for The Grid.

Much of what is described below is summarized from Charles C. Mann's great book 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Crisis - 1675 - King Philip's War

There are a number of reasons why the native Americans might not have immediately resisted encroachments of European settlers after 1492. There appear to have been enough of them to have effectively prevented settlement, if desired.  It's likely that the original settlement attempts by Vikings failed due to just such resistance. It was many years before firearms would be as accurate and quickly loaded as bows and arrows, and steel armor would not have been sufficient when (as initially happened) the new arrivals were outnumbered hundreds to one. 

The Europeans who followed Columbus, however, could count among their advantages the diseases of the old world.  When the Mayflower arrived in Plymouth, it was barely two years after an epidemic had nearly wiped the area clean of any natives that might have resisted. The elimination of whole towns destabilized the native political landscape. Massasoit, leader of the Wampanoag tribe, thus had ample incentive (and little choice) to ally with the Pilgrims against the other local tribes. 

Massasoit continued the productive but increasingly uneasy peace with the Plymouth Colony  for about 40 years, until his death in 1661. His son Wamsutta (who had been given the English name Alexander, as in "the Great") ruled for only a year before he suddenly died after visiting with English officials. Metacomet, Massasoit's second son (known also as Philip, as in "of Macedon") , was suspicious of the timing and may have believed that his brother was poisoned.   Over the next ten years, "King Philip" would begin to organize a rebellion against the colonists. After years of simmering disagreements, unyielding combat would began in 1675.

The effort had some successes at first. Through the winter of 1675, King Philips's forces were able to force the colonists from outlying settlements and concentrate them in their larger towns. The natives' store of food and other supplies were limited, however, and they were greatly outnumbered by the colonists. By summer of 1676, Metacomet's forces switched from offensive to defensive operations, and many of his allies deserted him. He was forced to hide in Assowamset Swamp, near Providence, Rhode Island. On August 12, 1676, he was shot and killed by John Alderman, a Wampanoag who had allied with the English.  His death ended the war, although a few minor skirmishes followed.

During this short period of just over a year, perhaps 800 colonists and 3000 Native Americans were killed. Looking only at the number of casualties, King Philip's War appears to be an easy win for the colonists. However, the colonial losses were a significant percentage of all the English colonists in the new world, and was probably a personal loss for every colonist remaining. For the first time, the colonists had a common experience that was not shared by their fellow English in the Old World. King Philip's War can thus be seen as the start of a distinctly American personality.

Prevail

The famous high-water mark description in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas shares an important word with the 1984 commercial for Macintosh. And it turns out that's an early word in Al Gore's Turning Point article in Rolling Stone as well:

Our energy would simply PREVAIL.

...we will ultimately prevail...

We shall prevail!

While Hunter Thompson (born 1937) was Silent, that bit of prose was all about the counterculture and What The Sixties Meant.  Al Gore is practically the Platonic ideal of the Boomer. While Steve Jobs didn't write the 1984 commercial, it's still such a dose of revolutionary exuberance that it seems very much a Prophet sentiment. Even if (or because?) Big Brother is saying those words, scant moments before a sledgehammer flies through his telescreen.

"Prevail" carries the tone of inevitability and eternal success. It takes confidence to pull it off - people may think you are bluffing, unless you really believe it. Gore, at least, seems to have that confidence, only a few years after An Inconvenient Truth.

Hunger

Let's just say it again: The Hunger Games is such a Crisis novel/movie/universe, and Katniss is such a Hero. She volunteers to save her sister at risk of her life,  gives her (likely-Nomad) mother the what-for after the Reaping, and changes the world just through trying to survive. Nomad Haymitch - winner of the games 24 years before - displays Bad qualities so perfectly while also being the best hope of Katniss and Peeta, with his practical and honest assessment of the situation and what is really needed to have a chance. The victory is won through the teamwork of the two District 12 tributes, plus of course Katniss' working with Rue - while the Careers work together as well.

Then the events of the first part lead into a massive change in the way the world works, in part with a "revival of civic authority," as "people begin to locate themselves as part of a larger group." No coincidence, again, that it is happening roughly 80 years after the Treason that started the Games in the first place, placing these events where a new Crisis would be expected.

Green

Also included in Al Gore's Turning Point article in Rolling Stone is a reference to the Green Tea Coalition. One of the worst political puns ever, it is an "unholy alliance" between the anti-government Tea Party and the Sierra Club. They have particularly worked against the Koch brothers, who have been opposing rooftop solar generation. The Sierra Club wants more solar, the Tea Party wants less government intervention in the market (as the Koch brothers are pushing for, in order to preserve their monopolies) - it works.

One could look at How We Really Know We're In The Crisis and see ... nothing that sounds quite like this. Maybe "Cultural Expression Finds a Community Purpose" as plenty of these folks see this as a group effort. It does seem significant that there is a definite decision, here, to triumph over a common enemy through teamwork.

Confirmation

A few different things going on, so a couple of other notes from the Crisis before going back to the Al Gore article:

A previous post mentioned Manhattan Project workers going skiing. Although it doesn't include the specific photograph referenced there, Nuclear Secrecy has a post that is probably related to it. It points to local television coverage of film footage found in early 2012.

Guardians of the Galaxy had a very good opening weekend: 94 million dollars worth. Evidently Star-Lord is a late Gen-Xer, born in 1979 or close to it, and the film goes primarily with the Nomad story. As might be expected based on the "bad" attributes of the title characters.

There were occasional showers in the Los Angeles area today. It is supposed to be a Mediterranean climate, so summer humidity and showers are not at all common. This could be because of global warming, or could be short-term variation - detailed weather records based on direct experience only go back about one hundred years. While there is evidence that climate change is real and is human caused and is based on the burning of fossil fuels, there is that concern that confirmation bias is not limited only to the deniers.  It can seem like everything that happens is taken as evidence for Anthropogenic Global Warming... unless everything that happens is evidence against it.

Really, it's probably part of the Crisis itself that there will be disagreement - over the real problem(s), over the appropriate solution(s), over who is engaging in ad hominem and who is ignoring obvious evidence  - until such time as the options collapse to the specific problems that can be fixed, the specific solutions that can be implemented, and the evidence can be generally accepted.

Solarization

In a recent article in Rolling Stone, Al Gore notes some good news with regards to climate change: Solar energy is being used more and more as generation costs decrease. Some countries are "skipping" the carbon-based part of energy generation as they go from burning wood and manure directly to installing and using solar cells for electricity.

(Yes, certainly, those are carbon-based energy forms. They don't release previously sequestered carbon dioxide, though, but only what was stored when the grass-which-became-manure and the trees were grown, in the recent past. They are carbon neutral over a short time period.)

There is actually quite a bit in there to mention. To start, Dick Morris, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore had all read Generations in the lead-up to the 1992 election. Dick Morris specifically mentions that Clinton choosing Gore as a way to solidify their appeal as a generational bloc. It seems at least possible that Gore is incorporating a generational perspective here.

One possible reason for the sudden drop in solar prices: Investment in solar companies by people who either thought it was important, or thought other people thought it was important. That Solar Bubble started in the early days of the 21st century as governments in Europe and elsewhere supported green energy.  When it popped, companies went bankrupt, investors lost money, but the equipment had been purchased and was available for reuse.

While this is speculative, it does seem likely that equipment for creating solar cells is very specific to that use, not easily repurposed. If so, anyone purchasing that equipment (at a discount) from bankrupt companies would have used it to create solar cells. If the price for the equipment was lower, the effective cost of creating the cells was lower, and the minimum sales price as well.

This can be tied together to note that simply having enough people willing to invest, in a sufficiently efficient market, can bring about change - even if those people lose money, on companies that can't manage to continue as going concerns.  The generational model gives a way in which that might happen - and might have happened in this case.

Heroics

The following inference floated out of a quick view of the How to Train Your Dragon animation world: The hero begins as an outsider trying to fit in who transforms the world without directly trying to (at least at first.) 

Is this a common Hero attribute? Examining a few recent and well known texts:

Luke Skywalker in Star Wars (The original, that is, later renamed A New Hope): YES. He’s trying to get a few droids working one day, rescuing a Princess the next, streaking over a massive battle station and reinvigorating a nearly extinguished warrior tradition soon after.  Seems to match when looking only at this, although he later appears to fit the Prophet mold better - at which point he is acting with much more direction and determination.

Anakin Skywalker: UNCERTAIN. Similarly fits about as well as Luke does, but not in a good way. As Luke appears (eventually) to be a Prophet, Anakin naturally would be of a Hero generation. The existing movies don't work well in the Saeculum model, though.

George Bailey in It’s A Wonderful Life: YES. Saves Bedford Falls from an alternate reality as Pottersville despite spending at least half of his life trying to leave it behind. That might not quite count as a transformation, although the point is that the world would have been quite different without him.

Katniss Everdeen in The Hunger Games trilogy: YES. She volunteers to save her sister, and does what’s needed to “win” for her own survival. Soon after - and evidently without her involvement, much less desire - she is the symbol for change across the continent.

Harry Potter: YES. Outsider trying hard to fit in, without understanding of how the world works, but with a number of advantages that allow him to transform from a world with the threat of Voldemort to one without him or other Death Eaters.

Wall*E: NO. Fits as well as the others, which is unfortunate, as previous analysis suggests he’s an Artist rather than a Hero. It doesn’t fit well for The Apartment (noted here as having similarities to Wall*E), though.

Indiana Jones: YES. He's a Nomad, and does not fit this description. His efforts lead to a largely unchanged world, and everyone is happier for it.

Captain America (and The Winter Soldier): YES, in both. 

Still, it might be that this is a common way to structure a story, so there shouldn’t be too much read into it.