SVET Reports
The Current Generational Cycle in Evernomics
We are entering into the first, ‘Aggressive Reforms’ phase of the SVET generational cycle, which will last from the second decade of the twenty first century to the first decade of the twenty second century (roughly, from 2020th to 2100th).
During this phase several successive human generations (including the current ones — Boomers, Gen-X, Millenials and Gen-Z) will be rotating through four 20–30 years-long cycles (‘Aggressive Reforms’, ‘Aggressive Reaction’, ‘Regressive Reforms’ and ‘Regressive Reaction’).
Side note:
Naturally, separate actions of individual representatives of each generations is impossible to foresee (due to a quantum uncertainty principle, among other things). On the other hand, the cooperative game theory (which is opposed to the Nash equilibria) stipulates that in order to win a competition between between groups of players all participants must forge coalitions.
On a macro socio-economic level, it, basically, means that all representatives of one generation will subconsciously choreograph their acts trying to cut a preceding generation’s agents access to a power (in both senses) achieving an immortality through an individual convergence into corresponding institutional constructs (we can also think about that as a manifestation of a quantum entanglement principle on a social level). Evernomics calls it ‘the eternalization principle’.
[For more precise (mathematical) definitions, please, refer to the superadditivity (the value of a union of disjoint coalitions is no less than the sum of the coalitions’ separate values).]
Because of the monotonicity (‘larger coalitions gain more’) Evernomics generational ‘subconscious coalitions’ tend to adhere to those basic strategies, which might be intuitively understood and timely attended by a maximum number of potential players.
The most rudimentary strategy is the one, which implements a diametrically opposed adversarial principle (f.e. ‘offense / defense’, ‘activity / passivity’, ‘pessimism / optimism’, ‘buy / sell’ etc.). In Evernomics the main generation strategy is defined by the 2-dimensional metrics with two axises — ‘Aggressive / Regressive’ and ‘Reforms / Reaction’.
End of side note:
The ‘Aggressive Reforms’ sub-cycle brings a highest level of instability in the society caused by a direct confrontation (often, a kinetic one) between the four major institutional constructs (C1 — C4, each of which controls one of four main sources of power — ideologies, natural resources, labor and information).
At the same time, this cycle emphasis such Evernomics Deeps as a selflessness (Sense), a risk taking (Venture), an invention (Enlightenment) and a purposefulness (Talent). Many Gen-X representatives have become highly successful by using those Deeps principles to over-compete ‘Boomers’ in business and political games.
Most Boomers, who had become prominent during the preceding ‘Regressive Reaction’ sub-cycle (2000–2020) perceived an opposite set of Deeps — a righteousness (Sole), a legitimacy (Valor), a process orientation (Execution) and a loyalty (Tribe).
As a result, we have today many Gen-Z political players which derive dividends by undermining their older superiors on playing on one of the contemporary society’s four major divides — a selflessness /a righteousness, a risk taking / a legitimacy, an invention / a process orientation, a purposefulness / a loyalty.
That is, basically, why we can find the same themes repeating itself in innumerable variations in so many Gen-X speeches, debates, writings and ‘lectures’.
Take, for example, Gen-X representatives proclaiming of ‘The End of More Law’. They are, basically, trying to increase their generational ‘mana’ by joining a growing coalition of players which get advantage of Boomers’ religious believe in a set of clearly defined but already outdated rules or processes (playing on the invention / a process orientation Deeps’ divide).
Let’s take the other, more recent example — so many Gen-X ‘economic analytics’ are now joining together into the chorus, signing the ’20s end with another Great Depression’ verse wholeheartedly.
For this ‘shift of the paradigm’ game, the winning strategy is to play ‘a purposefulness / a loyalty’ divide. During past 20–30 years, when Boomers had stubbornly but mindlessly kept their loyalty to various tribal coalitions and because of that didn’t reacted to changing environmental conditions (in a broader sense), Gen-X were accumulating their frustrations with that dangerous policy.
Now, when the ‘Aggressive Reforms’ sub-cycle begins, Gen-X time has come to challenge Boomers in a fight for power by cheer-leading for ‘a global purposefulness’, or a world-wide, societal acceptance of some sets of all-embracing concepts, conspiratorial theories or new religions.
Accordingly, we can expect that the ‘global catastrophe is approaching, please, hurry to hide under my tent to save yourself’ type theory will proliferate.
Another example of Gen-X gaming strategies would be the ‘downshifting’ or ‘getting out of a rat race’ movement originated in 1990th.
That ideology obviously appeals to a human cortex, making an accent on a sense of the ‘universal well-being’ rather than on ‘a strive for higher purposes’ , which has been an official slogan for all Boomers economic and business policies during the 2000–2020 period (that is playing ‘a selflessness /a righteousness’ Deeps divide).
Of course, those three solitary examples can’t do ‘statistics’ proving to my readers the Evernomics’ generational cycles postulate ‘scientifically’. However, that is not my objective. Evernomics is not a science theory, which needs a laboratory to be tested.
Evernomics is the existence-orientated methodology, which I have been developing during several decades of my career as an investor and an entrepreneur, when I have been living and working in 40 countries on four continents.
I only can hope that it will serve other people as well as it serves me in understanding and navigating the growing complexity of our reality.