Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (173408)	7/12/2006 10:53:05 PM
From: RinConRon	Respond to of 794327

It certainly begs a parallel to our southern border.

To: D. Long who wrote (173408)	7/13/2006 5:20:45 AM
From: NightOwl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 794327

The goals of the barbarians are irrelevant really, and so is whether they are successful in achieving any goal. They are a danger simply because they introduce disorder into the system. Constant, unnervating, institution-bending disorder. It may be a pointless distinction in a world of nation states, varied religions, and incompatible cultures... but I try to think of them as an excess of sub-35 year old males who have no faith in the civil order... instead of "barbarians." We have them in the developed West too, and the term "barbarian" always suggests an "other" or "outsider" to me. But instead of pandering to them (for the most part) or thinking of them as invaders, we label them as "gangs," "hooligans," "skin-heads," "criminal organizations," etc. These days, we fill our jails with them. In too many other countries their numbers are such that the political/social institutions must find a way to pander to them or fall. Historically, one could argue, this kind of dysfunctional population mix has been rebalanced by minor & major wars that reduced every one's young "gangs" to a manageable level. But since WWII political, scientific and ethical developments have successfully, and most intentionally, tried to eliminate that cycle. You could also say that Rome had no such developments... or, at the least, those that they had were relatively weak and slow of pace. Surely it took a couple of centuries before the Christian "gangs" had to be pandered to. In any case I am convinced that building more prisons is as short sighted a solution to the rise of gangs, as say... opening the borders to them. Perhaps worse. I certainly can't claim to know. But it's beginning to look like the Boomer generation lost the formula for instilling faith in our civil order... along with the Berlin Wall... in the semi-cold wars to fend off the Marxist gangs. Perhaps a case of too much love... and not enough war? <vbg> Personally, I blame the insane "war" on drugs and all the conflicted interests accumulating wealth on Wall Street and the DC Belt Way for this... but that's just me. No doubt there is more than enough blame for everyone to get a fair share. And in the end, it's probably an ordinance of nature that history's cycle can be delayed but not denied. 0\|0