4 ms·

Seriously? You first. Find me a counterexample in history, of the decline of a civilization, which resulted in BETTER treatment of minorities, outgroups, or w

by VLM 8y ago

Seriously? You first. Find me a counterexample in history, of the decline of a civilization, which resulted in BETTER treatment of minorities, outgroups, or weak sub populations. I hate to Godwin the discussion but as a trivial example I don't think the Jews got gassed in Germany because the economy was too strong and Weimar was too politically stable. Generally you don't want to be part of a small outgroup during a societal collapse, the masses will demand somebody gotta be burned at the stake and its not going to be the popular group.

b_tterc_p 8y ago
i don’t think he was doubting you, he was asking for evidence of your seemingly insightful claim. Your points don’t seem to be aligned though. Minorities suffering is not the same as blaming the first coincidental victims of economic downturn.
- VLM 8y ago
  Cool, I get what you're saying, and that is a valid point that there will be cultural variation in the level of "somebody must pay for this" for bad situations. The Great Depression in West Virginia seemed rather wholesome and pleasant as portrayed by "The Waltons", so rivers of guillotine blood in the French Revolution are not a guaranteed outcome. The whole point of this problem being that kids won't have jobs, friends, spouses, houses, and kids, means a happy "The Waltons" outcome is unrealistic to expect, however. If the whole point of the problem, is the opiate of the masses has been taken from some of them, its gonna be a bad one.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  I think it's more that during a downturn the powerful find ways to make some victims blame other victims but not the powerful who are doing quite well. Just look at the latest political developments. Workers think that immigrants are the source of their declining job prospects instead of questioning why the upper x percent take an increasing share of economic output for themselves and even give themselves tax cuts.

by VLM 8y ago

b_tterc_p 8y ago

i don’t think he was doubting you, he was asking for evidence of your seemingly insightful claim. Your points don’t seem to be aligned though. Minorities suffering is not the same as blaming the first coincidental victims of economic downturn.

VLM 8y ago
Cool, I get what you're saying, and that is a valid point that there will be cultural variation in the level of "somebody must pay for this" for bad situations. The Great Depression in West Virginia seemed rather wholesome and pleasant as portrayed by "The Waltons", so rivers of guillotine blood in the French Revolution are not a guaranteed outcome. The whole point of this problem being that kids won't have jobs, friends, spouses, houses, and kids, means a happy "The Waltons" outcome is unrealistic to expect, however. If the whole point of the problem, is the opiate of the masses has been taken from some of them, its gonna be a bad one.
maxxxxx 8y ago
I think it's more that during a downturn the powerful find ways to make some victims blame other victims but not the powerful who are doing quite well. Just look at the latest political developments. Workers think that immigrants are the source of their declining job prospects instead of questioning why the upper x percent take an increasing share of economic output for themselves and even give themselves tax cuts.