TheCZMan (April 6, 2008 at 3:33 pm)

How do you explain the negroes in the US then?They have adopted all the cultural markers they were told to: english, christian, political values etc...They succeed less well than negroes coming from Africa who were brought up a total different cultural background, including language of course.How do you explain the failure of the US society to assimilate them? And now they cant be assimilated and have no culture left on their own, what is their solution?

deidzoeb (March 11, 2008 at 3:49 am)

You see a nation as something that protects people, when it's done right. I see a nation as something intended to keep power in the hands of a few people, while duping everyone else into thinking it's the only way they'll be safe.

deidzoeb (March 11, 2008 at 3:41 am)

Disagreeing with the point that our founding fathers had in mind is not the same as missing their point. Just ask Frederick Douglas re: slavery.The situation I described is more like anarchism or very local governments. Communists would not have wanted cities or counties to have power, because they always felt ppl were too stupid to rule themselves (or they just said that so that one dictator or a small group could run the rest of their countries). So that dog won't hunt.

AmericanFabricator (March 11, 2008 at 3:27 am)

However, I can understand your point of view if the goal is to destroy American sovereignty. Sadly, there are many people in power who want this same goal.

AmericanFabricator (March 11, 2008 at 3:27 am)

If you really think dividing the USA into squabbling ethnic factions will make Americans better off, then you really missed the point our founding fathers had in mind. Their intent was not to form a socialist/communist entity as you used in your examples. You can't have a successful "melting pot" without assimilation. A nation is strong only with everyone on the same page. Speaking a common language is the most important step towards assimilation.

deidzoeb (March 11, 2008 at 3:20 am)

Since the US is an empire right now, that part of it should fall. The people of the British Empire realized at some point that they could have a democracy or an empire, but not both. So they gave up the empire. I hope the US empire will consciously end itself, so we can focus on democracy. That doesn't mean bad things will necessarily happen to US citizens or that we'll become vulnerable, any more than it meant Brits were harmed or vulnerable when they withdrew from India or other colonies.

deidzoeb (March 11, 2008 at 3:14 am)

The world would have been a lot safer place if people didn't feel this idiotic "patriotism" to go join a bunch of strangers who happen to be their countrymen, attacking other strangers who happen not to be their countrymen. Could Napoleon or Hitler or Pizarro have mustered conquering armies if they didn't have a bunch of suckers willing to "fight for their country" (actually fight on behalf of a handful of men who are in power in their country)?

deidzoeb (March 11, 2008 at 3:08 am)

Anyway, nations are arbitrary divisions in the first place. There's no reason that people couldn't govern themselves on the scale of a town or a county or maybe a province, no reason that we need a federal authority telling us what to do. We would not necessarily be more vulnerable to attack if each sovereign self-governing town or county maintained alliances with neighboring towns or counties.

deidzoeb (March 11, 2008 at 3:05 am)

Got any predictions on how soon Canada will fall because of the weakness that is Quebec? China has different dialects, maybe totally different languages. Lots of people will be happy to learn they're going to weaken and fall.

AmericanFabricator (March 11, 2008 at 1:12 am)

It hurts all of us. English is the glue of our social fabric and encourages immigrant's assimilation into our culture and the adoption of our traditions. Different languages divide us. A house divided is weakened and will fall.