From: lmpm@teal.csn.org (L. M. P. McPherson)
Newsgroups: alt.astrology
Subject: Re: more on baby boomers
Date: 7 Nov 92 06:31:09 GMT
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.

In article <serb.101@polisci.umn.edu> serb@polisci.umn.edu (Scott Erb) writes:
>As someone born at the very tail end of the baby boom (1960), I read the 
>debate between Neptune/Libra and Neptune/Leo people with interest.  What 
>about us Neptune/Scorpio types?  And, perhaps more importantly, how far can 
>one go using Neptune to categorize a generation?  (For instance, I'm also 
>Pluto/Leo, which in that sense would tie me in with many Neptune/Libras).  

Like many English words, the term "generation" is vague and fuzzy. I use
Neptune to define generations because I can see distinct changes in the
nature of values, concerns, and behaviour with changes in Neptune's sign.
Some people use Pluto to demarcate generations, presumably because it is 
the slowest-moving planet. But one could easily define generations as
combinations of Neptune/Pluto (which is really what I do), Uranus/Neptune/
Pluto, Saturn/Uranus/Neptune/Pluto, etcetera, to as brief a time period
as one liked. But if one's concern is with cultural/societal movements
and a sense of identity among a large group of people, then Neptune and
Pluto work pretty well to define such "generations."

>In any event, I hope the original poster was right that Clinton signifies a 
>return to or victory of the Libran ideals -- the mixture in his chart of Leo 
>and Libra might be a sign that he won't suffer indecision in weighing out 
>possibilities.  But aren't these ideals in some sense superficial?  Not 
>wanting to sound like George Bush (who is extremely superficial), but there 
>is a sense that Clinton's bringing people together looks for harmony without 
>an underlying sense of spiritual or at the very least intellectual 
>principle.  I'm not sure if that's good or bad, but it does make it seem 
>less likely that Clinton will be able to move beyond the materialist bias of 
>our culture.

Clinton also strikes me as very superficial -- the consummate politician.
But perhaps he will unwittingly work as a conduit for the will of others,
perhaps because he will do whatever he must to remain in power. (Leos
just thrive on leadership.) He really changed his ways after he failed
to be re-elected as Governor of Arkansas, and the changes helped him
succeed in getting elected the next time around. So he may help realise
the will of the people of his generation, even if his commitment to their
ideals is not overly deep. And now that he has achieved his ultimate
goal, the presidency, his mind may incline to other goals. Even if his
past espousal of the "hippy" ideals was mere lip-service (and I am
not at all sure it was), he might come to embrace those ideals
inwardly after having embraced them outwardly for so long. (In psychology,
this phenomenon is called "cognitive dissonance," or rather the resolution
of it.)

And perhaps Clinton will become deeper, more enlightened, more conscious, 
and more spiritual as his presidency develops. By 1994, Pluto will be 
squaring his Sun, and you know how Pluto absolutely *forces* change!
That transit may deepen him considerably.


Maggie
Newsgroups: alt.astrology