5 ms·
I Almost Lost My Career Because I Had the Wrong Passport
- duelingjello 7y agoAccording to Sir John Glubb in The Fate of Empires [0], the average civilization descends into chaos at about 250 years / 10 generations. For the US, that would be roughly 2026. On another measuring stick about the unmooring of sexual relationship conventions, a society declines around 50 years later, according to a recent post [1]. That would suppose about now, around 2020. Furthermore, "fall" of empire maybe too discrete/definitive of a word, "slow decline" or "weakened" maybe more apropos. And what comes next could well be an invasion, overthrow, mass exodus, hermit kingdom, revolution or stalled/irrelevant society. It's hard to point at exactly when something started and when it ended with "living" structures of socio-econo-political orders. 0. http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf 1. https://www.kirkdurston.com/blog/unwin https://www.kirkdurston.com/blog/unwin
- Fjolsvith 7y agoHow long after constitutional republic founding did previous nations last?
- dingo_bat 7y agoIs it because of the origin of her passport or because she flouted immigration/visa rules?
- deogeo 7y ago> Anti-immigrant, ethnonationalist policies are acts of self-destruction, not self-preservation. Depends on the 'self' in question. The Jewish answer to assure their "never again" was to establish a country of their own. Does this not apply to other ethnicities? Because history shows none are safe from ethnic conflict. The Armenians under the Ottomans, and Ukrainians under the Soviet Union, and the Uyghurs under China, and the Bosnian genocide are just a few recent examples. I suppose if one is willing to gamble that their country will be one of the counter-examples, they can get a bit of a GDP increase out of it.
- beerandt 7y ago≥their system of research support and early childhood education for my son allowed me to do the innovative research on tax havens that led to the book and the findings I’d been invited to share with Parliament. This hints at a motivation other than xenophobia/etc, and is the only mention of the authors topic of research in the article. Also: This isn't a case of some starving immigrant illegally coming to a country in hopes of a better life. It's a non-minority, middle class college professor violating the terms of a work permit. That shouldn't change anything, as the law is the law, for everyone, equally. But it seems we've gone beyond the argument of it being morally wrong to deny one a chance to climb out of poverty, and moved on to a direct attack on the sovereign right to regulate work and/or immigration.