Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're missing my point. There is no "nation" anymore. We're just a group of disparate peoples, cultures, sub-cultures without a single culture, single language and definable borders. We more resemble a large tax collection territory. I find the culture of the west coast and the northeast, along with a few outposts in the flyover states, as being counter to the rest of us. here in the flyover states. It's time for a divorce. We can live without you. I'm not so sure we can live with you.
What you are saying barely makes sense and I don't understand the cultural borders you mention, but I think I resent your lumping me in with you, if you are.
You're missing my point. There is no "nation" anymore. We're just a group of disparate peoples, cultures, sub-cultures without a single culture, single language and definable borders. We more resemble a large tax collection territory. I find the culture of the west coast and the northeast, along with a few outposts in the flyover states, as being counter to the rest of us. here in the flyover states. It's time for a divorce. We can live without you. I'm not so sure we can live with you.
I totally disagree with your point. We've always been a disparate group of peoples, cultures, and sub-cultures. It's not a singularity of culture that makes a nation. It's the way the larger cultures incorporate the many sub-cultures that lead to a national identity. One of the characteristics of the national identity of the United States is that it is a multicultural country. It always has been. Another characteristic is our size. How big is France? Big enough to fit within the state of Texas? The size of our country, the diversity, is part of our national identity. The technology and wealth we all take for granted, part of our national identity. The power our nation has in the world, part of our national identity. And guess what? That national identity is what you're attacking. We may be able to survive as separate political entitites, be we only thrive as a country when we go forward as a country, united despite our differences. Exactly as we began.
You do realize that these two thoughts of your contradict one another, right?
lol humans make lots of decisions that aren't either in their best interest nor the interest of society. That proves nothing. We're not talking about just behavior, we're talking about the intrinisic feelings of most people and the mental gymnastics they have to do to overcome those feelings.
Racism is ingrained. Prejudice and stereotypes are learned.
You're missing my point. There is no "nation" anymore. We're just a group of disparate peoples, cultures, sub-cultures without a single culture, single language and definable borders. We more resemble a large tax collection territory. I find the culture of the west coast and the northeast, along with a few outposts in the flyover states, as being counter to the rest of us. here in the flyover states. It's time for a divorce. We can live without you. I'm not so sure we can live with you.
Let us find out who is missing the point, or perhaps never had one... so when was the time this was a "nation"?
According to a study by Robin Dunbar at the University of Liverpool, primate brain size is determined by social group size. Dunbar's conclusion was that the human brain can only really understand a maximum of 150 individuals as fully developed, complex people (seeDunbar's number). Malcolm Gladwell expanded on this conclusion sociologically in his book, The Tipping Point. According to these studies, then, "tribalism" is in some sense an inescapable fact of human neurology, simply because the human brain is not adapted to working with large populations. Beyond 150, the human brain must resort to some combination of hierarchical schemes, stereotypes, and other simplified models in order to understand so many people.
But, if you have any scientific evidence (vs. Liberal Arts mumbo jumbo) that it's not, I'm all ears.
No, and I'm sure if you contacted the people who conducted the study, they would tell you quite explicitly how wrong you are. You are trying to rationalize racism, with the pretense that it is inherent to being human. But you cannot actually support that argument, not with this study. Just because people are limited in terms of facial recognition does not correllate to people being limited in terms of race. We can and do differentiate on a host of physical characteristics including color. My mother's skin tone is not the same as the skin tone of my father. My grandmother's skin tone was not the same as the skin tone as my mother's. Color is a way to differentiate, but racism is about assigning other characteristics to someone based on a racial characteristic like skin tone. And the assignment of a range of characteristics is a LEARNED behavior, not an INHERENT behavior. As any sociologist, anthropoligist, or human sciences expert will tell you.
No, and I'm sure if you contacted the people who conducted the study, they would tell you quite explicitly how wrong you are. You are trying to rationalize racism, with the pretense that it is inherent to being human. But you cannot actually support that argument, not with this study. Just because people are limited in terms of facial recognition does not correllate to people being limited in terms of race. We can and do differentiate on a host of physical characteristics including color. My mother's skin tone is not the same as the skin tone of my father. My grandmother's skin tone was not the same as the skin tone as my mother's. Color is a way to differentiate, but racism is about assigning other characteristics to someone based on a racial characteristic like skin tone. And the assignment of a range of characteristics is a LEARNED behavior, not an INHERENT behavior. As any sociologist, anthropoligist, or human sciences expert will tell you.
This is just a bunch of theory. Your theories. lol
I asked for scientific evidence.
And I already said that racism is ingrained while stereotype and prejudice are learned, so you really aren't saying anything new with that.
But, if you have any scientific evidence (vs. Liberal Arts mumbo jumbo) that it's not, I'm all ears.
Actually... that study does not even come close to supporting your claim. If "tribalism" as you call it breaks out in groups larger than 150 (something I actually agree with; I even wrote a paper in grad school on the implications of that fact for large corporations), then it is clearly intraracial, not interracial.
In fact... such conflict will often break out in the same tribe... if that tribe gets to about 200 people in size.
You are confabulating two completely different things.
In fact, "race" is meaningless as a scientific concept... it is certainly meaningless genetically. So how could racism be genetically hard wired if races are not, themselves, genetic?
This is just a bunch of theory. Your theories. lol
I asked for scientific evidence.
And I already said that racism is ingrained while stereotype and prejudice are learned, so you really aren't saying anything new with that.
Um, no. You offered up a study that doesn't support your argument. I pointed out how it doesn't support your position. Racism isn't ingrained, because racism depends upon stereotyping. If stereotyping is learned, then racism is also learned. You can't rationalize that away.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
