Can anyone lead a mongrel country?
strik...@mail.com
cliches "diverse", "multicultural", etc. America is appx. 69% White
with substantial hispanic and Black populations. These numbers
preclude the descriptive term "nation". Your thoughts please.
Striker
note: Stalin kept Russia together by force of arms and terror.
The former Soviet Union is now about 14 somewhat distinct
states.
Day Brown
> I'm not using the term "mongrel" to be provocative but to avoid the
> cliches "diverse", "multicultural", etc. America is appx. 69% White
> with substantial hispanic and Black populations. These numbers
> preclude the descriptive term "nation". Your thoughts please.
little to do with it. Gypsies and Lapps are just as white as I am, but
have all the same sociopathologies expected in non-white cultures. And
Chinese, Japanese, & Koreans, who are not white, commonly have even less
sociopathology and better education and employment performance than what
passes for white.
The diff is that while the above two white tribes are nomadic, all the
other white tribes evolved as yeoman farmers over the course of the last
10,000 years, as have the East Asian populations.
When couples from these two yeoman cultures from each end of the Asian
land mass marry, nobody worries about how the kids will turn out. In
both cases instinctive resource management skills evolved to survive the
winters entirely off the local resource base. In both cases, there is
respect for the investment private property represents, whereas with the
other cultures, which adapt less well to modern culture were all hunters
and/or nomads, with the instinct that the whole world is free range.
Unless needed as allies, all other tribes were regarded as prey animals.
Of course, every tribe, white or whatever, has social predators as well
as some capable of case and resource management. The critical factor
being the ratio of the latter to the former determining the ability of
the gene pool to manage its own resources and invest properly for future
profits. "Moral Minds" by Hauser, shows how you can test kids at 3 years
to determine whether they can forgo immediate gratification of a small
reward for a much better payoff later.
This is before socialization, so Hauser says it is instinctive. There
are DNA markers and innate hormone levels that indicate which, so there
is also some hope that meds to adjust hormone levels early may help. The
nutrition, especially trace minerals found in "organic" veggies helps.
If what I wanted was stupid kids, I'd raise them on soulfood.
Werner
> I'm not using the term "mongrel" to be provocative but to avoid the
> cliches "diverse", "multicultural", etc. America is appx. 69% White
> with substantial hispanic and Black populations. These numbers
> preclude the descriptive term "nation". Your thoughts please.
>
> Striker
America has been known for diversity. In the past America did not need
to be led. Perhaps the decline started once it began being led.
It was another close election. We find ourselves warring against each
other - - red states and blue; 'them against us'; ‘Left’ vs. ‘Right’;
Republicans vs. Democrats. These forces are just about equal. Each
seeks to take, keep and expand the power to impose values on the
other. Campaign finance laws not withstanding, this election cost much
more than the last. Both sides spent as if in combat and more than
many countries spend on a real war. All else -- other ideas for
example -- is a distraction we can no longer afford in this new war
between Americans. Win at all cost! Tons of money, advertising
campaigns, phone banks, promises, defections, “Get out the vote”
battalions, voter registration shenanigans, vote fraud, hoards of
pollsters, and armies of lawyers have become our new reality. Except
for that other war, the media covered little else and ignored other
candidates.
Why is an election so important? Is it because so much power has never
been so concentrated in so few? If power corrupts, what has happened
to our perspective? Can’t there be more colors than just red or blue?
We keep getting evidence that politics as usual is dysfunctional. So
why do we allow ourselves to see no other choices? Is choice even
possible without diversity? What do you have when you have no choice?
Cars aren’t either red or blue so why must we all be limited by
Republican or Democrat rules?
Prohibitions, limitations and mandates now rule us all. Red voters
hope to impose their values on the blue and visa versa. The red forces
will limit, mandate or prohibit some things while blue cohorts would
do the same to others. No matter the outcome, one half of the
electorate will have gained more power to impose its values at the
expense of the other half. Isn’t that expense becoming unbearable and
unsustainable for all?
Should we be ruled by anyone? Should values be forced on us and
choices restricted by any party? Can’t we try to liberate instead of
regulate each other? Wasn’t America supposed to be about voluntary
agreement instead of forced obedience?