« Medved Misses on Obama (updated 15feb2011) | Main | Epochal My Dear Watson »

16 February 2011

Comments

Todd Juvinall

If you have seen David Cameron's statement on this you will come away with the man has figured it out. Assimilate or return to your country of origin.

Paul Emery

George

What is "assimilation" as you refer to in this post.

George Rebane

Good question not often asked Paul. I believe that my use of 'assimilation' is in the common sense that I first was taught in the 1950s. To assimilate as an immigrant into a new culture means to learn, accept, and exhibit the trappings and behaviors of that culture. And to do this at a minimum while in the public round of that culture.

The desired endpoint of such assimilation is to draw to oneself no extraordinary attention as being someone strange or foreign to the adopted culture. An assimilated immigrant need never forsake his native culture, but merely practice it privately or when asked to share it in or during an appropriate multicultural event.

Dixon Cruickshank

good piece George I needed that

Dixon Cruickshank

by the way hiding from it will not solve the issue, and that seems to be the issue

example - Penn & Teller, they rag and make fun of everybody, races, cultures everybody, asked about muslims he said it was off limits because he feared reprisials - telling

Paul Emery

This opens a bunch of questions. Who defines what our culture is? Is it white European Christian? Does it mean we have to hide our race or religion to be expressed only in private? Do we have a dress code and not allow any kind of public ethnic expression except during defined holidays? Do we have a dress code for working in public? So much for mid eastern taxi drivers. Do we not share our diverse ethnic, religious and cultural diversity? So many questions.

My grandmother from Greece lived in this country for over 50 years and never learned to speak English because to her it wasn't important. What was important to her was her family, her religion and her Greek culture. She lived the American dream, worked hard and took care of her family and lost a son in WWII in the Battle of the Bulge. That's about as assimilated as you can get.

Do we set a time limit for "assimilation" and who makes the final judgments and what is the penalty for failing to conform. What about Americans of African descent who chose to follow the Islamic path. What about freedom of speech and religion. Does that mean that Asian Americans should not speak their heritage language in public lest they be branded as non-assimilators? What about European descendants who chose to follow other religious and ethnic lifestyles such as Buddism or Sufism? So many questions. Do we have a council of assimilation that makes rules and issues penalty. If it is the threat that you assume there must be some form of forced correction.

This is a big one George. Occasionally we walk on the same side of the street but not this time.

Paul Emery

Oh, and one more George. What about the Native Americans whose relatives lived here before our conquest ?

Todd Juvinall

Speak English, wear levi jeans and eat corn dogs. I have many more ways to describe our culture Paul. George has it totally correct. The dominant culture you and I grew up with is what it is. I know it when I see it. So do you. The reason this debate is taking place is because others have decided they want to maintain their home country culture as the dominant one. Unfortunately the PC folks have forced us to dial 2 for english. No more. We are taking back the country.

Paul Emery

Exactly how do you do that Todd, through legislation and cultural cops? Who decides who "we"is or do we leave it up to some kind of local vigilante enforcers who roam the streets looking for ethnic pockets that refused to be restricted to approved events to express their heritage. And what about freedom of speech. Is that only for the English language? And, no more ethnic food or clothes in malls or street fairs without permission. I can see it now licenses that say " I have permission from the "we" to wear my West African costume to sell my food at this street fair. I cannot congregate with other so dressed ethnics except in approved performances or private celebrations. I promise to change into my levi's as soon as this event is over."

Is this what you see as the future of America?

Todd Juvinall

You can always count on lefty to use extreme examples. Paul, did you not read my post? It was fairly simple. When you come to America you speak English, the cement that starts and makes possible human success here. The dominant culture is in charge. That means the ballot is only in English, the schools teach only in English, the people will become American after one generation. Other cultures can do their annual buffett potlucks and have fun doing their nostalgic dance, but it will not be codified. People will become American if we do these simple things.

George Rebane

Paul, granted that my response to your question was the short definition of assimilation; I could have written an essay. But I'm totally baffled at your interpretation of my pretty vanilla definition. Where did you come up with all that draconian enforcement crap? If you disagree with my view of assimilation, which neither included nor implied any of that, then please provide your own version of assimilation the way you understand people like Cameron, Merkel, Sarkozy, and the lady who lives next door to understand that term. Your response sounded a bit like the usual 'Ready, Fire, Aim!' that one gets from the unthinking left - I don't see you belonging to that horde.

Paul Emery


George, when you write that

" Multiculturalism is a Deadly Affectation. We go on spewing the ‘all cultures are equal’ pabulum while no longer defending our birthrights. And that for us in the end will be deadly. Multiculturalism is a Deadly Affectation"

It sure sounds like a call for action. I was only speculating on what that action might be. Ultimately you are not asking for but demanding a change. Using words like "defending our birthrights" implies some kind of forced assimilation. Ready, Aim, Fire? I'm sorry but that's how I interpret your essay.

"An assimilated immigrant need never forsake his native culture, but merely practice it privately or when asked to share it in or during an appropriate multicultural event."

How is the possible fulfillment of your desired process be not much different than the admittedly extreme scenario that I propose would be a consequence of trying to correct this "Deadly Affliction" as you describe it.

Todd, try to use the term "nostalgic dance" at a spiritual gathering of Native Americans. You'll need the calvary.

Todd Juvinall

Paul are you aware the George is from another country? What I find interesting about your position Paul is America has always been a nation of immigrants who over time developed the dominant culture we know. What has chained is the left's codifying the foreign culture through hate laws and PC guilt. We see the affects of other countries bending over backwards to allow foreigners the rights they bring from their home country and from a practical view we see that it doesn't work. You are a smart man, are you so blinded by PC you cannot even describe the historic American culture?

George Rebane

Well stated Todd - yes, I am an Exhibit A when it comes to assimilation. And it required no culture police to bring me to heel as you fear might happen if we returned to honoring mainstream American culture.

And please let's have no one go off on the tangent of describing 'mainstream American culture' as being some calcified fossil that needs to be maintained through state intervention (like the French have attempted with the 'purity' of their language). American culture has been a dynamic since the Pilgrims set foot on Plymouth Rock. But it has been a measured dynamic that has allowed every generation to teach its young the then applicable values and mores. And, as such, it has been stable enough to be discernible to newly arrived immigrants; getting off the boat, we learned very quickly what it was to be an American.

Today we have culturally gone beyond schizophrenia. We tremble with political correctness in fear of 'insulting', 'intimidating', or somehow repelling people from other cultures on our shores. The only thing our culture cops (yes, they are already in place) assure us is that European-derived American culture is to be denigrated at every opportunity. And, I believe, for doing that we will reap the whirlwind.

Todd Juvinall

Well said George. It is like I said before, I know American culture when I see it. Besides, Paul, man, don't you play music created in the American culture?

Paul Emery

So since you used Major Nidal Malik as your poster boy in this piece where would you put Timothy McVeigh, a militia movement sympathizer, who sought revenge against the federal government for its handling of the Waco Siege. He was a former member of the U.S, Army. It seems that the actions of deranged individuals should not be equated as some kind of consequence of our Todd described hate laws and "continued assaults from all quarters on American culture, values, and mores."

Here's from Timothy McVeigh's farewell letter to a friend.

"I know in my heart that I am right in my struggle, Steve. I have come to peace with myself, my God and my cause. Blood will flow in the streets, Steve. Good vs. Evil. Free Men vs. Socialist Wannabe Slaves. Pray it is not your blood, my friend."

How is that different than the rants of Major Nidal Malik and why in any discussion of domestic terrorism aren't they they both evaluated in the same breath? Could it be that McVeigh is a deranged Christian and Malik is Islamic? Why for the sake of your argument do you focus on one culture and not another ?

Todd Juvinall

Pal, we all condemn McVeigh as we do allthe terrorist. The difference is McVeigh was a one of a kind nut while the Nadal fellow was part of the Muslim religion shouting God is Great while he blew small women's brains all over the place. You always use McVeigh as some sort of equivalent terrorist when there is only murder of the innocents that he shares with Muslims.

Paul Emery

Are you saying that Nadal was a representative of a significant number if Islamic Americans?

George Rebane

Paul, with your last comment that does a gratuitous leap from one subject to another on the thinnest thread of relevancy, I will have to excuse myself from this conversation. Either you are not serious in discussing the impacts of unassimilated multiculturalism, or we have again come to the chasm of worldviews (Weltanschauung) that petitions the Great Divide.

Paul Emery

I was actuall;y responding to Todd "Part of the Muslim religion...."

I would like to discuss the topic more but you right from the start used Hasan as your example of how the system is failing by not responding to the connection of his atrocity to radical Islam. It was a major part of your posting so why not respond to it directly. Thinnest thread? Hardly There are so many other examples you could have used.

"And given what has happened in the interval here and all around the world, none of the reports mention radical Islam as a causative or contributive factor to Hasan’s atrocity."

George Rebane

OK Paul, I do believe that Hasan is an excellent example of how our politically correct multiculturalism (PCM) presents a danger to us. And you have underlined my argument. All Americans (citizens) from a foreign culture do not have an agenda of subverting our country - as examples I'll cite Estonians and the Mung who are just grateful to have been welcomed. But significant fractions of some cultures do have other agendas detrimental to American sovereignty - the Mexican and Islamic come to mind, and I have discussed these extensively.

I can guarantee you that if I, as an American Army officer, had put out the kind BS that Hasan did for years, I would have had my security clearances withdrawn instantly and been asked to resign my commission. This incompetent shithead was shielded, promoted, and curried by superiors who clearly share your PCM feelings. The various reports on the massacre I cited confirm the depth of the rot already in place and cooking - PCM is a demonstrably deadly affectation.

When the ragheads do their next atrocity on US soil in the name of Islam, I would like to see the peaceful American Muslims hit the street in protest, and I will join them in solidarity. Until then, I will continue being a Bayesian on the matter.

Todd Juvinall

Paul are you saying the Nadal scumbag was just fine with being a Muslim first and an American second? If you are you have made my point on assimilation. Thanks.

Paul Emery

Appropriate response George. I see no significant difference between Nadal and McVeigh which is the primary point I've been trying to make. The incompetence by the US military in not recognizing the serious problems he had is monumental. I have problems following the relevance of his connection to Islam to his action. That would be like connecting Timothy McVeigh to the NRA or right wing activist groups that he supported and that he considered himself to be a champion for. And by the way if you wish to look at gross incompetence look at the way the FBI ignored all the warning signs before McVeigh pulled the trigger. If he would have been say a Black Muslim he would have been tracked from the time he was a teenager. MvVeigh walked around like when Lee Harvey Oswald walked backed into this country after renouncing his citizenship a year earlier and moving to the USSR. In his mind McVeigh was an activist fighting the good fight It is only deranged individuals that would do what they did and that does not necessarily reflect on the potential actions of fellow believers.

In that sense your example of using Hasan as an example is distracting and not complimentary to the question at hand.

Todd Juvinall

Paul, Nadal made the connection. You can't be serious?

George Rebane

Data indicates that the McVeys number in the very few; Hasans number in the millions if we are to believe the polls and their own claims. I don't think we are making progress on this.

Paul Emery

Todd What I'm saying is that Nadal was a mentally ill obsessed maniac and so was McVeigh. If you attach a greater movement to either of them you're wrong even though they spoke for their grand glorious causes as if they were messianic heroes.

George, I assume we're talking about Americans here since the topic of the blog was assimilation which I would still like to talk about if we can get beyond this diversion. Are you suggesting that there might be millions of Nadal's in this country? this is a pretty important clarification.

George Rebane

Recent (last 5 years) polls of non-American Muslims have revealed that 80+% support jihad against enemies of Islam, and somewhere between 1 - 5% are willing to become jihadists themselves and make the ultimate sacrifice if/when necessary. I don't know how that translates into US numbers, but I'd bet the ranch that out of the 2.5-3 million Muslims in the US (Pew Research) at least 1,000 are actively seeking martyrdom, and several times that would go to the mid-east to get 'training' if they could do it surreptitiously.

Death to anyone looking cross-eyed at Islam seems to be the common denominator for that culture, wherever their members are found. E.g. witness the recent riot in the Irani parliament where half the members called for the execution of another large cohort of their colleagues. I'm not prepared to equate Islam's values in this regard with those of other cultures with which I am familiar - they have their own unique niche in this world. And this underlines one bookend for why I believe unassimilated multiculturalism is a deadly affectation.

Dixon Cruickshank

thats probably pretty close George

Nadal was not a deranged manic, he was not mentally ill, he was a counsulor for petes sake. If he in fact was a raving lunitic wouldn't you think one of his patients would have said he was crazier than he was? - he was just a muslim we mistakenly allowed in to the army and we have mistakenly allowed others in the country.

When push comes to shove there is no moderate muslim - just say'in

Larry Wirth

Aren't the current multi-kulti folks the same libs that distained the Boers and Brits in South Africa and Rhodesia thirty years ago as "settlers." Notwithstanding that the former had been there centuries and the latter for generations?

Same folks that call Israelis the same nasty name for moving back into their historic land?

Why, then, are the unassimilated illegal Mexicans and unassimilable Muslims equally condemned as "settlers," which they clearly are?

Larry Wirth

As in "why are they not equally condemned as "settlers."

Paul Emery

This is really getting far from topic. For the sake of moving on let's assume that "Multiculturalism is a Deadly Affectation" what is the remedy?

Mike Sherman

No George, not "will be deadly"....it already IS deadly. The Ft. Hood murders go to show what extremes our leaders will bend to so they can hang on to their disgusting, vile, sickening push towards destroying the base values of American life. The recently released Senate report on this massacre makes it clear how commanders IGNORED the signs and known facts long before he pulled the trigger, and they did nothing. Yet you won’t see any action taken against them. In my opinion, they are just as responsible, they helped the idiot pull the trigger. Appears to be the 'Paul Emery' syndrome, a gross inability to comprehend what the base values of America stand for.

Paul Emery

Mike

Are you willing to to walk through with me the ineptitude of the FBI's and DOJ's handling of the Timothy McVeigh bombing or even 9/11. I contend that ineptitude runs deep and it need not be incident specific.

What does my base values of America have to do with this anyway? It's easy to avoid questions by attacking the person. What I was asking for were ideas for a remedy for what is perceived as a serous problem.

Mike, to you believe you have the franchise for "base American values"?

Paul Emery

Thanks for responding to my question George. There is much more to discuss without much time right now but taking the topic of rewriting childrens history books does that not imply some kind of commission of correctness that will oversea such a process. How does such a process fit into a free society? Does that mean a national standard for approved historical literature for children? If indeed that needs to be done isn't an overall standard the antithesis of a free society and local control especially if it's on a national scale?

Mike Sherman

Mr. Paul Emery, walking through the past won’t help you understand Mr. Rebane’s main point. Yes, I know the DOJ, FBI and just about any federal agency can and do screw things up. I do understand some of the points you made initially in this conversation. Who makes the determination that someone has confirmed? I get it. But your continued debate took the issue beyond the subject at hand - multiculturalism. You seemed to be defending the likes of anyone rejecting American values in favor of their native land. You seem to be supportive of those Hispanics in America that burn the American flag, and fly their national flag atop ours (with ours upside down). You seem to support anyone who has a complaint against America, yet they live here enjoying all the rights that Americans have died for.

George was simply saying that it appears Muslims, residing in host countries, would like to turn that host country upside down in favor of their Muslim beliefs. Remember the woman that insisted she be allowed to wear her face coverings when she applied for a driver’s license (and photo) in Florida? Remember the Muslims that staged an incident at a U.S. airport that captured the media’s attention? The American woman who reported the suspicious circumstances was attacked by the liberal media. There is a trend to make our base values without merit. By trying to let Muslims do their thing, our core values suffer.

I’m with George on this one…..when I see other Muslims attacking those Muslims who are violent against their host country then I will support them. They are not, and their stated goal is to kill anyone who does not go along with their program. Other leaders in Europe have seen the results of opening their doors and allowing Muslim communities in their nations, and the results have not been positive. So now they are speaking to the issue, and liberals don’t like it, wanting to use a broader scope as an excuse for beating the drum of tolerance for other cultures.

When I use the term ‘core values’, let me explain…..back in the 80’s I was listening to KVMR on Christmas Eve. It was late in the evening, when most of Nevada County was sleeping. The DJ was playing Christmas songs from around the world. Some were in English, some were in the native language. It was very interesting, and entertaining. The DJ did a short intro to each song, explaining the country of origin with short tidbits of information about the history of the song that I found interesting and informative. Then he came to an American Christian song about Christmas…..imagine that. Well, the DJ announced a disclaimer I will never forget. He said in essence: “Folks, I must let you know, that the next song is in no way an endorsement of Christianity here at KVMR”.

Why in the world someone would pull a stunt like that? It smacks of a hatred of Christian values, which just happens to be the foundation of America. I call them core values for a reason. There are liberals in this country that have no problem with seeing America brought down. They have a hatred that seems to almost parallel radical Islamic values.

I saw a report that Timothy was seen with two other men in a truck that were never identified. The report said they appeared to be from the middle-east. It was never fully explored or explained. When I saw the speed with which the government executed Timothy McVeigh, it made me wonder…..why the rush? Other mass killers linger for years on death row.

America is a nation of people from all over the globe, but I’ve never seen any “race” or “religion” be so opposed to our values as I have from the Muslim community. Mexico runs a close second….they claim they want their land back. Their in-your-face attitude smacks of the liberal hippies in the 60’s protesting America’s core values, then going down to the welfare office to collect their free benefits.

Were you one of them Paul? Sure seems like it based on your hammering of George.

George Rebane

Paul, every society writes its own history. Our secondary school history books were 'modernized' and rewritten in the early 80s. My own alma mater UCLA was the lead academic institution in charge of that national project. You are acting as if you believe that today's history books were not written with a distinct government oversight.

My preference is that education again becomes decentralized and a matter of local control. That makes it very hard for progressives to continue doing what they have already done. But the momentum is with the central control that you seem to promote in these discussions.

Perhaps you would like to answer your own questions.

Larry Wirth

Mr. Emery, I'm not wandering off topic at all. The question was, why do libs condemn the "settler" mentality in places where they wish to see "equality" and then turn around and support it in respect of the Muslim population of the US and the illegal Mexican population? The essence of the settler mentality is to replace the existing culture with their own and is equally reprehensible everywhere. And, by the way, not all cultures are created equal, as even minimal reflection would show you.

Paul Emery

George, I cannot agree with you more about decentralizing education. I am a very strong supporter of Charter Schools and was one of the core group that started Yuba Charter School in the mid 90's. They create their own curriculum and chose their own textbooks and receive the same per student funding from the State as do the regular schools. Parents can shop around and chose for themselves which school they wish to have their children attend. I also believe in some form of the voucher system to enable families to send their children to faith based schools and use their government funded allotment to apply to their tuition. I say yes, let's decentralize education and make it based on parental choice.

Along with this decentralization and choice of education then comes the reality that some parents may choose faith based schools or charter options that may be non Christian faith based. Now that's freedom and that's equality. You cannot have it half way. Parental control and diversity of philosophical and spiritual options has to be part of any decentralized system. Of course, we could declare ourselves a Christian nation and not allow any other options but we would then be no different than an Islamic Theocracy just with a different religion.

This is a challenge then about how conservative you are. I say go for it, decentralize education, give the choice to the parents and get the government out of our classrooms.

Mike
Actually I was a Barry Goldwater Conservative early on and a member of the Air Force Reserves for six years. I used to unload caskets off planes returning from Viet Nam. I later became disillusioned with the war after the revelation of the lies told to the American public about the Bay of Tonkin that was one of the phony justifications for the war that costs 50,000 American lives. Also, the libs, as we used call them had better parties and were generally more fun than the conservatives. I never was much of a hippie. I thought they were a little silly but they made good music.

George and I are actually good friends and think he can defend himself quite well against my "hammerings".

George Rebane

Paul, agreed on the schools. And yes, the problem does arise if a local group of, say, Muslim citizens is so insular that they start a school in which they teach their children their scriptural destiny of Islam and exhort them to implement it in the public sphere. But then if such behavior is condoned by non-Muslims, we have come full circle, and re-enter the debate about the deadly affectation of multiculturalism.

This indicates a new area of enquiry. What are the delimiting attributes of cultures which advise their separation into distinct political units? I have not encountered such discussion in the pre-PC era where, I guess, we never thought of notions like Islamic settlements in America. (In Europe, they just chose to ignore their history and the existential Islamic problems in the Balkans, and led the way into PC and socialism.)

Paul Emery

Larry

"The essence of the settler mentality is to replace the existing culture with their own and is equally reprehensible everywhere."

What about Manifest Destiny? Did we not replace the Native American culture with our own because we were powerful and abundant enough to do so and does that not allow for a moral justification for others to do so as well ? I personally do not believe this is happening in the ways outlined in this posting but our histories emphasis on our destiny to possess this land we live on without regard or respect for those who were here before us certainly implies that we have no problem with the idea as long as we are the ones doing it.

Do we have the right to exploit those weaker that ourselves? Good question but we do and continue to do so as do other dominant societies. It sees to be part of the human fabric that no religion or spiritual inspiration has been able to alter.

AS far as the settlers in South Africa goes I agree that they deserved landed status but the conditions that they allowed to exist for the conquered cultures during their tenure reached a point that when they became outnumbered and once everyone had the right to vote they essentially were pushed out by the rule of the majority. That's what happens when intolerable conditions lead to an uprising. It's not always pretty. Look at the French Revolution for example.

Are all cultures created equal? I don't know but all people are.

George Rebane

There should be no confusion here about the ‘rights’ of Muslims to settle North America vs the rights of Europeans to settle the same continent and push aside the cultures then dominant. Those assertions were not made. We get into the usual muddle about ‘rights’ when we don’t understand that term properly in its operational and existential context. Of course the Muslims can assume an imperative to settle here and become the dominant culture, just as we did a few hundred years ago. And in turn, we have the imperative (and the right under our Constitution) to resist such settlements (the same as the Indians had but could not enforce).

Today we can still resist the Muslims through peaceful means by retaking and strongly expressing western culture and its values in public life. If we don’t do this, then tomorrow we take up our guns and man the barricades. The alternative is too horrible to contemplate. It was ever thus.

Paul Emery

Yes, I agree. Rights is not the proper word. Perhaps moral justification is a better expression. You know, the good old golden rule....Do unto others and all that stuff.

Now I happen to not at all embrace the same scenario that George spouts as to whether Muslims in this country are subject to their calling to rise and conquer in the name of Allah their new homeland. Are there radical factions? You bet but in my opinion they are a tiny minority. Most immigrants are just seeking a better live for their families and strive to walk the earth in dignity.

Do we have enemies in the world? We sure do but that's really another topic. Do we have enemies on our homeland? We sure do but we need not confuse them with those who are trying to make a decent life for themselves and have a different religion.

George, you choose to interpret the religion of Islam according to your sources and study but I can assure you that there are many other opinions about this religion that are quite contrary to yours.

The Hispanic invasion as you describe it is quite a different matter. These are poor and desperate people challenging our national borders. They have been our cheap labor source for years and have come to look on our country as an escape from desperate poverty. I see no easy answer to this except to enact reasonable and enforceable laws to help deal with the situation. Folks from south of the border have fit quite well into the American tapestry in the past but the sheer potential numbers are staggering and perhaps not easily assimilated. These are however individual human beings who just want to improve their lives. Tough problem.

George Rebane

I consider myself fortunate to have Muslim friends and that I have worked with Muslim colleagues for years. These relationships with educated and sharp intellects developed into ones of trust that over many years supported deep and lengthy examinations of Islamic topics ranging from geo-politics to theology. I learned an enormous amount from these sessions, and one thing I quickly found out was that our public PC view of Islam here and abroad is adulturated bullcrap. The problems between our civilizations are deep and real. They will not be solved in our favor if we persist on the present PC course that the progressives have laid out. I try to reflect what I have been taught in my posts.

As most of us commenting here understand, the Mexican problem is unique in the sense of the common border and the history of our takings. However, the purposely porous border that we operated during the 20th century was an enormous contributing factor to the continuance of Mexican misery in their homeland. We were the pressure relief valve to their ruling class, the same as we have been in Africa. I don't need to recount the feedback effects of such a policy, we all know it chapter and verse.

So how do we now turn off that valve so that pressure can build productively to a fundamental transformation of Mexican governance and its three-tiered racial culture?

Paul Emery

Thanks George. Your sources come from the purest place, your own personal experiences. My experiences lead me to a different place as you can probably tell, and one that you probably would not feel very comfortable with. I see the inevitable end of nationalism as we know it today. In my view it has been based on a certain kind of isolationism that allows national boundaries to be containers of wealth, culture and population. With the rise of international financial systems controlling the money and markets globally rather than nationally it will lead to a global decentralized economy that's way beyond any one nations control. To me that means the decline of nation states. It may mean, however the rise of regional independent economies and local control of culture (of which I include education) that may vary widley from region to region.

This is a huge topic and I'm only touching on it because of a lack of time.

George Rebane

Yes, a huge topic indeed, and a very timely one. Your short summary is a plausible path to the future.

Paul Emery

We also need to add the consolidation of media and copyright ownership to international corporate control. With that comes control of the message. It all adds up to a pretty messy form of world government since the interests and power of this clump is way beyond the control of any single national governance.

This makes me appreciate the recent growth of local agriculture and distribution. Y2K may have been a dud but it did mobilize people and raise awareness of our dependence on fragile systems for essential commodities.

Todd Juvinall

Paul, were the international corporations in charge of the protesters in Greece?

George Rebane

Hopefully, as I have made clear over the years, my concern with global "consolidations" is that it will lead to bureaucracies (public and private) having centralized control over societal functions that arise from 'systems' about the operation of which they have no clue. And attempting to exert such control (for good or ill) winds up causing extensive misery and mischief.

For these reasons I have always favored distributed knowledge and distributed control. The extra benefit from such approach is that it implements variety and a competition of ideas from which all may then benefit. After all, that is the methodology adopted by Nature in processes such as evolution, and more observably in the operation of colonies of critters, and even a single tree.

Paul Emery

Well spoken George. I have many of the same concerns. How will free markets as desired in the Tea Party credo fare with increased globalization?

I use this description of globalization for the purposes of this discussion.

http://www.investorwords.com/2182/globalization.html

George Rebane

Unfortunately the Tea Party movement is no further ahead on this issue than is the GOP. They are hoping against hope that the good old days will return when the recession is over (actually, the smart ones know that chaos will come first). The Dems are selling protectionism which will hasten global breakdown and possibly bring on WW3. But then it is hoped that the survivors will form some form of global government which has been the socialist goal since Napoleon's day.

What is a people to do when their strong suit has been commoditized???

Paul Emery

I should ask for more detail because I share the apocalyptic
scenario you describe so let's just leave it at that for now.

It seems to me that economic globalization and ownership of patents, copyrights and media outlets by international corporations pretty much wraps it up as far individual nations having any real control over their destiny, except for regional matters. That to me is global government. How do you propose we distribute knowledge and control within this reality?

Paul Emery

Major typo I meant to say

I should ask for more detail because I don't share the apocalyptic scenario you describe so let's just leave it at that for now.

George Rebane

Paul, it's interesting that you label my implied scenario "apocalyptic", implying(?) that if the historical talents and commercial dominance of the US are equalized or normalized relative to other economies, then that is our apocalypse. My thought instead is that we will go through an enormous readjustment that may mean a noticeable (significant?) reduction in our QoL. There may or not be blood in the gutters when that happens. The readjustment will happen, and we can skip the plausible 'how it will happen' for now as you suggest.

As far as distribution of knowledge and control in the afteremath, my suggestion or ideal in these pages has been the evolution of sovereign nation states into confederacies consisting of large numbers of relatively small (under a million) semi-autonomous provinces following more or less the Swiss model.

Each such jurisdiction would be culturally very homogeneous and would adopt its own political and economoic model. Movement, trade, and tourism among these cantons or provinces would be free, and societally ten thousand flowers would be encouraged to bloom and compete as models for QoL for all to see.

Discouraged (how?) would be the cancerous settlements of foreign cultures in the sense that it is happening today. In short, multiculturalism would be inhibited, and that would necessarily impinge on personal liberties as it already did before we all started blindly celebrating diversity. I hope this gives enough of a bare skeleton of my preferred brave new world.

Paul Emery

Would you consider Chinatown in San Francisco a "cancerous settlement" ?


"apocalyptic",

You stated WWIII as a possible outcome of protectionist economic policies proposed by the Dems. That's why I used the reference.

"Semi-autonomous provinces following more or less the Swiss model"

I think we need to return to local government in whatever form might work.

Not a bad idea especially if it incorporated geographic and environmental boundaries as guidelines, but it will never happen. The Civil War sealed the deal for federal control over States. That's why I thought the message of prop 19 was worth supporting.

George Rebane

SF Chinatown, cancerous settlement? not on your life. We recall that in the 19th century the Chinese were ushered and kept in their ghettos by the US. They wanted to assimilate in the worst way, and many/most did, even at the turn of the last century by buying land and becoming farmers and inland merchants. China never had a culture embodying a national policy or religion that taught worldwide settlements. (The movie 'Flower Drum Song' comes to mind.) Not sure how you drew that connection to Islam.

Historically protectionist policies have been the seeds of conflict between nations. One of the reliable chestnuts of diplomacy has always been 'When goods stop crossing borders, armies will.' For example, our trade inhibitions against Japan in the 1930s fomented Pearl Harbor. We will continue very good relations with China as long as they lend us money and we buy their stuff - and if that ever stops, watch out.

Paul Emery

George
I'm confused about your message on this.
This was your definition of assimilation as expressed earlier in this post

"To assimilate as an immigrant into a new culture means to learn, accept, and exhibit the trappings and behaviors of that culture. And to do this at a minimum while in the public round of that culture.

The desired endpoint of such assimilation is to draw to oneself no extraordinary attention as being someone strange or foreign to the adopted culture. An assimilated immigrant need never forsake his native culture, but merely practice it privately or when asked to share it in or during an appropriate multicultural event."

So why wouldn't the Chinese as demonstrated by their public expression in Chinatown be part of your concern. Are you saying that intact ethnic communities such as this are actually OK?

George Rebane

There is no concern about Chinatown's (or any other towns) in America because they are not exclusive enclaves of global movements based on a single culture, religion, or nationality that has a stated goal of world domination. In fact, these unique ethno-centric enclaves are designed specifically to draw in non-Chinese visitors and cater to them.

I apologize if my "China never had a culture embodying a national policy or religion that taught worldwide settlements." didn't say it well enough for you to understand.

What "public expression" of the American Chinese is a concern that draws a parallel with the Muslims?

Paul Emery

George

Even a brief look at San Francisco political history will show the political clout of the organized Chinese community to fund and effect local and State politics. Also, the Chinese had such settlements worldwide in virtually every country so I don't embrace your clarification. Many Chinese in Chinatown speak little or no English, have their own publications and economic institutions. For years they sent money home to help their families. I have no problem with this and embrace the cultural diversity that the Chinese and other cultures bring to our nation. So according to you it's OK to express your ethnic culture as part of a tourist exhibition but it's obvious Chinatown and the Chinese institutions in San Francisco are much more than that.

So, for purposes of clarity, your concerns seem to be primarily Muslim communities who, according to you, have a stated goal of world domination. Are their any other cultures you put into that category or can we leave it at that? It seems to me that Latinos are interested primarily in having a decent place to live and do not embrace worldwide domination.

George Rebane

Political clout in SF does not spell the desire for world domination. We don't remove Old Glory from classrooms in order not to impune Chinese sensitivities, but we do that and more so that we don't accidentally enrage a local Muslim for whom your death is the only thing that will assuage Allah and bless his earthly sword.

"...Muslim communities who, according to you, have a stated goal of world domination." No Paul, not according to me, but according to the declarations of multiple Islamic activists groups and the broad sentiments of the Arab street as continue to be confirmed by reputable polling institutions such as Pew Research. It is only the progressive politicians and their pocketed lamestream media who seem to be totally blind to what the rest of the world knows and accepts. Have I erred in not counting your membership in that group?

The only Latino problems we have are the corrupt governments which anchor their economies to eternal misery. And, of course, the Reconquista declarations of Mexican activist organizations in the US. I know of no global goals that Latinos have. Our problems rise mainly from history and proximity.

Paul Emery

Well now that you've narrowed the scope of the dangers of diversity we can move on to something else. Are you aware of our local history when we tried to ship the Chinese back to China after they outlived their usefulness building the railroads? The White Labor Club in Truckee tried their best to eliminate Chinese communities by boycotts and burning them out. There is a book "The Chinese Must Go" by Nevada City Historian Wallace Hagaman. Here's more about this Golden Moment in Capitalism from the era that you seem to take nostalgic admiration of.

http://www.sierrasun.com/article/20041128/LIFE/111280007

George Rebane

Paul, I am indeed aware of the attempts to ship Chinese workers back to their homeland. But I do think you have your "Golden Moment of Capitalism" more than a bit confused. No capitalist - then or now - has ever wanted to get rid of cheap labor. It is the socialists and their labor organizations (aka unions) that have sought to limit open markets in labor. They have used every means possible including murder, rape, pillage, fire, and even (as in this case) racism to protect their favored workers.

Perhaps clearing up this misconception of what motivates free market capitalists may reduce the difference in our worldviews.

Todd Juvinall

Paul I am coming in a little late on this but I think I get your jist. Yes it was terrible to treat the Chinese and other Asian people's as they were treated. My personal experience is in our area the Chinese assimilated into the dominant culture and ran some stores and did real estate. I went to school with a few and I had a crush on one beautiful girl.
I do understand why FDR, a democrat, placed 120,000 Japanese in concentration camps but I personally 70 years later, am sorry for it. The times were different. What I see is this regarding the Chinese. They assimilated into the dominant culture and do not preach the death of the infidel. I have yet to see a Chinese American strap a bomb around himself and yell whatever the Islamists yell before murdering men women and children.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad