AinBmore wrote:
> I seem to have touched a nerve. Hmm. I can concede I know nothing
> in depth about most of the ethnic group conflicts that you've
> listed and then you'll feel triumphant and less threatened and
> I'll escape the "cheap excuse" accusation.
The reason you touched a nerve is because I know your type -- the
criticizing, whining and complaining Boomer or Gen-Xer who has
accomplished nothing but constantly expresses contempt for anyone
else.
And you haven't escaped the "cheap excuse" accusation, because you
haven't contributed a single positive thing.
I said that, from the the point of view of Generational Dynamics,
race is one of a set of demographic factors, such as language,
geographical location, and religion, that determine crisis era fault
lines. You seem to take offense from that, start accusing me of not
being "broadly read," say that I'm being reductionist, and you seem to
imply that race is a more important factor than the others.
Well, someone who's more focused on religion than you might object to
your attitude toward religion. Are fault line wars between religious
groups really less important than fault line wars between ethnic or
racial groups? A Muslim might say, for example, say, "Your
reductionist attitude toward religion offends me, and ignores how
religion 'plays a role in how the society defines itself, its
problems, its aspirations, who the society targets as the boogeyman
that must be enslaved or excluded even though they are an integral
part of the workforce and the culture, or scapegoated for all of
society's problems.'" Let's get into how Christians have enslaved
Muslims, and how Muslims have enslaved Christians. Let's get into why
a Jew has never been President, or why Mitt Romney was rejected by so
many people. Romney's candidacy, if it had succeeded, would have been
as important to society as Obama's is, but Romney would claim that he
was defeated by exactly the same kinds of suspicious and hateful
attacks that you attribute to Obama.
The fact is that everyone has a claim of that type. My mother always
used to complain that when she was a girl, other kids called her a
"greasy Greek."
Furthermore, when you say, "my question does not relate to historical
conflicts between warring groups but more to racial ideology and
oppression," you're making my point for me. Generational Dynamics
specifically rejects ideology and politics as controlling events in
the great generational events. Every crisis war has some cause
having to do with race, ethnicity, religion, geography, or some other
demographic factor that becomes an ideological factor, but the
Generational Dynamics model abstracts those demographic factors into
the concept of a "fault line" that includes all of them.
AinBmore wrote:
> I guess it will take some interest as well as work to put together
> an enriched account for generational theory. I have a day job,
> otherwise, I might attempt it.
That's exactly right. I have to work for a living too -- believe me,
no one is paying me to write for this web site, so I would have to
say that "I have a day job" is just another lame excuse.
But I mean this quite seriously: If you really believe that race can
be worked into Generational Dynamics in a more satisfactory way, then
you could at least write an analytical article suggesting how you
might do it. Also, even if you aren't aware of a lot of other
examples of racial fault lines, surely you know of one or two
somewhere (Persian vs Arab? Turks vs Kurds?) that you could include
in your analysis. Perhaps I'm missing something, and you can fill in
the blanks. It's up to you.
Sincerely,
John
.