[LMB] Gypsies( and Jews) OT:

Scott Raun sraun at fireopal.org
Fri, 22 Feb 2002 12:38:30 -0600


On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 05:17:30PM -0800, Damien R. Sullivan wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 05:22:35PM -0500, Shalom Septimus wrote:
> 
> > >> Their only criterion of the worth of anything:  "Is it good for the Jews?"
> > >How... charming.
> > 
> > This is my number-one criterion for determining what candidate to vote
> > for. What's wrong with it?
> 
> It's tribal.  I'm cosmopolitan.  I don't like tribalism.   I'm half
> skeptical of American tribalism, and my definition of American is "the
> tribe that takes you in as full members after a hop skip and a jump".
> (Yes, I know much of American history doesn't support that myth.  I
> cling to that which does.)

Just out of curiosity, do you really think this is likely to change in
the next century or millenia?  My wife summarized and read excerpts to
me from a book she was very impressed with - its thesis (as I remember
it) was that humanity is inherently tribal, and that any larger entity
works by convincing the tribes that it is interested in their best
interests.  I was quite impressed.

> "Is it good for the Irish?  Is it good for the blacks?  Is it good for
> the Aryans?"  I don't like this voting heuristics.

Do you prefer the first and most important criteria being "Is it good
for me?"  While I may not like some of the groups, I am - as a general
rule - in favor of people being willing to place a high priority to a
general good.

Actually, I have to take exception to your terminology - I wouldn't
actually consider _any_ of the groups mentioned in the message tribes.
A tribe is a small enough group that you can know everyone in it by
name.  A specific Jewish Temple would be about the right size.  A
street gang.  A splinter group of the IRA.

-- 
Scott Raun
sraun at fireopal.org