"Not understanding" is a rhetorical device used to ask particular questions and make particular statements. I do that al the time. Another entry into that path is "did you ever wonder..."
As you point out, it usually (not always) become pretty apparent that the person that didn't understand or wondered actually has a clue ;)
"Not understanding" is a rhetorical device used to ask particular questions and make particular statements. I do that al the time. Another entry into that path is "did you ever wonder..."
As you point out, it usually (not always) become pretty apparent that the person that didn't understand or wondered actually has a clue ;)
Nepotism is wired in (why wife was talking bout it this morning in connection with her job--how the ranks of the institution she teaches at are now filled with people from India and the office workers are largely East Asian).
We have a preference (extending beyond nepotism) for those like us--either in appearance and secondarily in belief. We socialize and marry with those like us--same socioeconomic status and background.
[Nepotism is wired in (why wife was talking bout it this morning in connection with her job--how the ranks of the institution she teaches at are now filled with people from India and the office workers are largely East Asian).]
A case could be made that this is an example of just what those who try to maintain privilege are worried about. "Once I stop cheating, someone else will start. Thus, I move from advantage not to equality, but to disadvantage."
We certainly are imperfect (especially in society as a whole) in understanding 'human nature', but any time we ignore, wish away, or try to legislate it out of existence we're going to be disappointed.
The idea of fairness of opportunity and education is a specifically American idea. I have know people from India and East Asia and they don't have a problem with hiring people of their nationality, race or social class.
Americans do the same thing but understand it is wrong culturally, which is why the idea of tokenism came about.
My mind goes to the cultural acceptability of bribes comparatively between the US / West and much of the rest of the world. I can't help but wonder if things like that and the viewing nepotism as wrong don't partially explain the west's economic success compared to much of the rest of the world. By no means the only factors, nor even saying major factors, but I'd think they are in the mix.
Having a relatively incorrupt system helps. One of the things people forget, however, is that we were pretty corrupt during most of the 19th century. Especially before the Civil Service Reform.
Many administrative posts in the federal government were part of the spoils system (political appointment). Same with a lot of local offices.
Then there were things like Credit Mobilier.
Open bribes were less socially acceptable.. but they still occurred and they occurred in other less visible forms.
I would argue that it wasn't freedom from corruption that accounts for the success. It was largely a combination of culture and less-autocratic forms of government.
I think you're right. Look at a lot of the kids of musicians, actors, artists, et al, who have all the doors open to them and yet don't have the fraction of the talent the parent has.
"Like seeks like." This is the core principle behind the concept of "assortative mating," and I would propose that it's the core principle behind tribalism, classism, and racism as well. Over-trust of in-groups and under-trust in out-groups breeds assortative mating, but the irony is that it's usually someone who is closest to you who leads you the furthest astray. You think it's some member of a racial or class out-group who will sexually violate your child some day, but then it really turns out to be your brother or a priest at your church. People who seek shelter in the comfort of their ingroups are often betrayed by the same people they thought had their back through common identity or class or ideology. Excessive assortative mating across a wealthy society leads to concentrating the wealth among the wealthy and class systems that persist generation to generation, which is basically where we are with a Gini Coefficient higher than Russia's (A country we consider to be an open oligarchy via this measurement).
Travis have you considered writing fiction? You have excellent macro views of all kinds of human tendencies. You could weave together really nifty motives & flawed characters. Seriously.
"Not understanding" is a rhetorical device used to ask particular questions and make particular statements. I do that al the time. Another entry into that path is "did you ever wonder..."
As you point out, it usually (not always) become pretty apparent that the person that didn't understand or wondered actually has a clue ;)
Nepotism is wired in (why wife was talking bout it this morning in connection with her job--how the ranks of the institution she teaches at are now filled with people from India and the office workers are largely East Asian).
We have a preference (extending beyond nepotism) for those like us--either in appearance and secondarily in belief. We socialize and marry with those like us--same socioeconomic status and background.
It is how you build and maintain a noble class.
[Nepotism is wired in (why wife was talking bout it this morning in connection with her job--how the ranks of the institution she teaches at are now filled with people from India and the office workers are largely East Asian).]
A case could be made that this is an example of just what those who try to maintain privilege are worried about. "Once I stop cheating, someone else will start. Thus, I move from advantage not to equality, but to disadvantage."
We certainly are imperfect (especially in society as a whole) in understanding 'human nature', but any time we ignore, wish away, or try to legislate it out of existence we're going to be disappointed.
The idea of fairness of opportunity and education is a specifically American idea. I have know people from India and East Asia and they don't have a problem with hiring people of their nationality, race or social class.
Americans do the same thing but understand it is wrong culturally, which is why the idea of tokenism came about.
My mind goes to the cultural acceptability of bribes comparatively between the US / West and much of the rest of the world. I can't help but wonder if things like that and the viewing nepotism as wrong don't partially explain the west's economic success compared to much of the rest of the world. By no means the only factors, nor even saying major factors, but I'd think they are in the mix.
Having a relatively incorrupt system helps. One of the things people forget, however, is that we were pretty corrupt during most of the 19th century. Especially before the Civil Service Reform.
Many administrative posts in the federal government were part of the spoils system (political appointment). Same with a lot of local offices.
Then there were things like Credit Mobilier.
Open bribes were less socially acceptable.. but they still occurred and they occurred in other less visible forms.
I would argue that it wasn't freedom from corruption that accounts for the success. It was largely a combination of culture and less-autocratic forms of government.
I think you're right. Look at a lot of the kids of musicians, actors, artists, et al, who have all the doors open to them and yet don't have the fraction of the talent the parent has.
"Like seeks like." This is the core principle behind the concept of "assortative mating," and I would propose that it's the core principle behind tribalism, classism, and racism as well. Over-trust of in-groups and under-trust in out-groups breeds assortative mating, but the irony is that it's usually someone who is closest to you who leads you the furthest astray. You think it's some member of a racial or class out-group who will sexually violate your child some day, but then it really turns out to be your brother or a priest at your church. People who seek shelter in the comfort of their ingroups are often betrayed by the same people they thought had their back through common identity or class or ideology. Excessive assortative mating across a wealthy society leads to concentrating the wealth among the wealthy and class systems that persist generation to generation, which is basically where we are with a Gini Coefficient higher than Russia's (A country we consider to be an open oligarchy via this measurement).
Travis have you considered writing fiction? You have excellent macro views of all kinds of human tendencies. You could weave together really nifty motives & flawed characters. Seriously.
You can only be betrayed by someone you trust.
It all comes down to who do you trust--and we often trust very poorly--for the reasons you note and with the results that you note.