Comments within. Thanks, Chris Austin-Lane Sent from a cell phone
On Sep 20, 2010, at 5:53, "ED" <seacrofter...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > No there is no enduring goodness or badness in *any* ethnic, racial, > religious, cultural or national group. > Not even any essential reality to any ethnic racial religious cultural or national group. Like so many apparently differentiated things, these things all flow together at the boundaries. > The conditions the West found itself in was one of military and economic > superiority, and they used that power to exploit other groups - which is what > powerful groups historically have done, driven by Darwinian imperatives. I am personally uncomfortable with applying the idea of reproductive success leading to the origin of species to social phenomena. However humans unarguably have a poor record when given power over others. I have no trouble seeing why this is when I look at myself. But that condition of power has interesting roots in the distribution of wild plants, wild animals and so on. > > If the native cultures had had access to the more powerful technology that > the West randomly had access to, the odds are that mistakes would have been > make. > > No 'mistakes' were made by the West. No 'mistakes' would have been made by > the natives. > Power does not corrupt, it is used to the advantage of those who possess it. > Speaking for myself, I find that I am rather easily corrupted, and just as troubling, blinded, by power. I don't mean the sort of natural power that aging gives me, more knowledge of how things work, more clarity to see what is up in other people, and confidence to do he necessary. I mean the sort of power that allows one to cut off debate and ignore the people affected by a given change. But that too is just a concept. Thanks for asking, --Chris > > > People are people; look to the conditions to explain the differences. > > --Chris > > Yes, and the primary condition is: Which groups have the most power. --ED
