Do Political Revolutions Occur Every 72 Years?

David Nolan is a gentleman who founded the Libertarian Party. He is not a religous man, but on purely scientific and empirical grounds has mentioned the distinct possibility that there may be a cycle in which a major political revolution occurs in the USA every 72 years, and if he's right, 2004 WAS THE YEAR!

You see, in 1788 George Washington was elected our first president. If you add 72 to 1788, you get 1860, the year Abraham Lincoln was first elected. If you add 72 to 1860 you get 1932, or the first year Franklin Roosevelt was elected. Note that these three presidents are rated by some historians as the three greatest presidents in US history. Even people who would disagree with that statement would probably agree that those three presidents were the three most INFLUENTIAL or 'important' presidents. Well, as you've probably guessed, if you add 72 to 1932, you get 2004. In other words, 2004 was a year for a political revolution. Is it a good revolution, or a bad one? Only time will tell. The usual elites will laugh at the notion that George W. Bush will be remembered on the level of Washington, Lincoln, and FDR - but who knows?

Now the potential scientific basis for this cycle may be that when a revolution occurs (such as the end of the American Revolution, which ushered in our nation and hence our first president in 1788) it takes 72 years - which is the approximate life of a man, even today (and the Bible says the life of a man is threescore and ten, or seventy years) - for the last infant born during that revolution and who was thus influenced by it to die off so that a new generation and new ideas can take over. Thus, it may be that the last folks that were influenced by FDR - who believed in guns AND butter, a big social welfare net AND a huge military with a global presence - are just now beginning to die off and a new generation is taking its place.

Perhaps as the brewing resentment against Bush's big spending ways and neo-con foreign policy, he'll do a mid-course correction, folks like me getting elected in 2006 will get him to cut spending and get out of not only Iraq but Korea and other places. George W. Bush DOES show some signs of sincerely wanting to begin to do the right thing on Social Security, usually seen as 'third rail' of US politics. Neos will say that if the 'Iraq model' takes off, it will be a 'good' revolution, whereas some of us might compare that to the socialistic revolutions of the FDR era which were revolutions, but bad ones. The one thing to remember here is that Americans are indeed living a little longer than in previous generations, so perhaps it will be 2006 that will be the watershed year in US politics rather than 2004. In any event, if you vote in this Primary, you have impact since only about 12,000 folks voted for my opponent last time, and perhaps fewer still will vote this time with Strayhorn not running as a Republican. What's for sure is if you DON'T vote, you have no influence, and if you vote in the Democratic Primary, you are voting in a Primary which for the 3rd Congressional District has only one candidate anyway, and where that candidate is likely to lose to the Republican candidate. In the 3rd, the Republican Primary IS the General Election, practically speaking. Don't waste your vote - vote Bob Johnson in the Republican Primary, March 7th.