While the title sounds jingoistic, this chapter continues the discussion of world history. It continues to address China's economic prowess, touches on the relationship with Wal-Mart, and then delves into the African origins of Western Civilization. The current civilian uprisings against the ruling Oligarchy took hold in Egypt. Western Civilization as we know it began some 6,500 years ago in African Egypt. That is where this discussion really begins.
It is in this chapter where race relations in the U.S.A. is brought up. It discusses how the general population views the issue of race in the nation as of 2007. To say anymore would be to give it all away. It is best you read it for yourself.
Cliff Potts
September 29, 2014
U.S.A.
It bears repeating
that China today is playing
the U.S.
game. While it is a Communist Nation, and over 2000 years old, it is doing what
it can to become a player in the world market. It is learning our language and
fixing their economy to proven technologies so it can sell what it produces to
Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart imports more Chinese goods than all of Western
Europe combined. If an extended recession savagely diminishes
Wal-Mart’s ability to move Chinese products, then China will falter if it does not
have its own developed middle class to sustain economic progress. Does it
really come down to the activity of one retail outlet? Unfortunately, yes, it
does. That is exactly how big Wal-Mart is in the world today. By the same
token, if China
falters then Wal-Mart will be hard pressed to pressed to keep its shelves
filled.
It is in this chapter where race relations in the U.S.A. is brought up. It discusses how the general population views the issue of race in the nation as of 2007. To say anymore would be to give it all away. It is best you read it for yourself.
Cliff Potts
September 29, 2014
The only real threat
to the global economy is China
collapsing in on itself in some form of Social Darwinism meltdown. As a general
rule, 10% of a given nation’s population, in a free market economy, has to be middle
class in order to have a stable economy, a stable social structure, and a
vested interest in supporting the economy and the ruling class or party. Middle
class is literally half way between the wealthy 1% of the population, and
abject poverty. Both extremes exist, and the middle class is a bulwark to
support the status-quo. The middle class in China
numbers between 90 million and 130 million people (roughly one-third to
one-half of the U.S.
population in comparison).
This, of course,
brings up back to Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is viable only so long as it represents a
substantial saving to the working-class population so that they can perceive
themselves as being truly imbedded in the middle class population. This is no
longer happening. Wal-Mart prices are steadily increasing and consuming more
and more of the working-class’ already diminished “disposable income”. In a
truly interesting social pheromone, many of the Wal-Mart employees, who are
themselves at the low end of the economic food chain, spend half their earnings
at Wal-Mart. The firm gives them a generous 10% discount. That of course just
about covers the sales-tax.
Wal-Mart is, of
course, passing on the cost of fuel to the consumer. This would make sense,
traditionally, and historically if a retail firm makes it money on volume of
sales not on the mark-up of the individual item. It is not unusual for a
super-market to have a 2% to 3% mark up. That is not the case with Wal-Mart.
Wal-Mart’s markup is in the range of 30% to 50%; the higher percentage used on
the inexpensive goods coming out of China . At the same time, they are
squeezing out their traditional consumer base and are trying to attract people
who would be far more comfortable shopping at Neiman Marcus.
This new marketing
strategy may be cultural suicide for Wal-Mart. They may pick up some up-scale
customers. Those customers may shop at Wal-Mart as a novelty experience,
However, after a few encounters with Wal-Mart’s typical “associates” these new
customers may find the prices of little relevance as a trade off to better
customer service. The up-scale customer is not as price dependent as the
working-class or middle class shopper. The lower middle class worker is stuck
with lower quality items because higher quality is outside their price range.
Unlike her middle class or working class counterpart, however, the up-scale
shopper will quickly find another place to shop once the Wal-Mart novelty is
over. Where Wal-Mart will go from there is anyone’s guess. More than likely
they will kick off some campaign to bring back the lower income consumer and
begin the cycle again.
We have pretty much
defined how the United
States arrived at the position of domination
in the globe. Succinctly, it managed to be the last one standing when the
Second World War ended. This was done by beating the Japanese into submission,
and supplying support to England ,
Russia , and eventually France
to defeat the Nazi war machine. A summation of the events in World War Two
could be written as: The U.S. supplied men and weapons to the English and
French, to open up a long western front which became the flat of the anvil upon
which the Soviets pounded the Nazi Reich. This was the plan. It reduced losses
for the United States , England , and France
because the Soviet Union wanted to take
revenge upon the Germans.
This is not to say
the U.S.
did not take heavy losses in World War Two. The U.S. lost some 407,300 military
personal and 11,200 civilians (0.32% of the population as counted in 1939). The
United Kingdom
lost 382,600 military personal and 67,800 civilians (0.94% of the population). France
lost 212,000 military personal, 267,000 civilians, and 83,000 Jews in
the Holocaust (1.35% of the population). The Soviet Union
lost 10,700,000 military personnel, 11,800,000 civilians, and 1,000,000 Jews
(13.39% of the population).[1]
According to The Encyclopedia Britannica:
There
can be no real statistical measurement of the human and material cost of World
War II. The money cost to governments involved has been estimated at more than
$1,000,000,000,000 but this figure cannot represent the human misery,
deprivation, and suffering, the dislocation of peoples and of economic life, or
the sheer physical destruction of property that the war involved.[2]
With the exception of losses in the Pacific (specifically
Pearl Harbor, Guam, and the Philippines ) the U.S. remained virtually untouched.
Within a few years following the war, the U.S. had switched from martial (war
and war equipment) production, to a booming civilian economy of cars,
refrigerators, homes, radios and eventually televisions. This same process took
well over a decade for the Allies and over 46 years for the “Eastern Block”
countries. With Europe, Asia, the Near East, Middle East, Far East, and Africa
shattered or in turmoil, the U.S.
stepped in to rebuild the globe. It did so in a typically Anglo-Saxon
expression that continued as an extension of English policy.[3]
The idea that there is some kind of Anglo-Saxon racial
superiority is a myth. It is, however, a myth which dies a hard death as heard
in the last lines of Tony Blair’s resignation speech on May 10, 2007. Mr. Blair
stated, “The British are special. The world knows it. In our innermost
thoughts, we know it. This is the greatest nation on earth.” While there is
nothing wrong with patriotism, this is the same kind of rhetoric for which the U.S.
has been criticized during the current Bush administration.
There is no discussion on U.S. domination which does not include
race relations. Race relations in the U.S. have never been amicable. The
discussion on the Anglo-Saxon domination is in no way to be misconstrued as an
endorsement of European racial superiority. The recent Anglo-Saxon cultural,
economic and political domination of the globe is simply historic fact. Over
the past 6000 years of human history, there have been many different ruling
cultures and expressions.
At the dawn of Western history, the known world was ruled by
the Egyptians. They ruled the west far longer than the Anglo-Saxon line has
ruled in recent history. Racism, according to a BBC report broadcast in the
early days of the current decade, goes back to the enlightened Greeks who gave
us the ideals of self-determination and the republic form of government. Others
argue that it first appeared in Spain
between 722, and 1492. In some ways it is a relatively new idea. In other ways
it is simply a form of tribal based discrimination. It can be said that India ’s
cast system has its roots in such tribalism. Even there, however, some argue
that racism has its roots in socioeconomic distinctions. According to
Wikipedia’s article on caste, the word is derived from the Roman casta meaning which can mean lineage or
race. While the racist root of the Indian system of institutional
discrimination is well known, it is ignored for the sake of economic
opportunity and corporations ignore this.
The United
States as a constitutional democratic republic
has existed for 220 years. That is just over one tenth of the span from the
year zero to today. Political, cultural, and racial equality is a relatively
new dynamic to the nation’s landscape. Some members of minorities in the U.S.
have successfully taken advantage of opportunities made available since 1964.
Yet, others still suffer the stigma, and have grievous resentment of the sting
of past racial oppression. Many minorities still cry in outrage for unwise
racial innuendos.
Racial equality is so new that there is a fear that this
fragile equity will be swept aside as quickly as it was brought in. Some fear
it is already happening. After 100 years of struggle against racial oppression
(1865 to 1965) the gains are still new, and the details and social expression
of equity are still malleable. Any loss of status (perceived or real) could
begin the decay of gains of the last 43 years. Moreover, minorities in the United States
are still disproportionately impoverished as a percentage of the population.
There is no doubt that there is still a lot of room for improvement in the United States
when it comes to full equality and racial acceptance. But, improvements are
being made.
In the science of criminology there is a theory known as
labeling theory. It is used to explain why a mischievous child can grow up to be
a hardened criminal. The constant reinforcement of the child being told he is
“bad,” “stupid” or “lazy” will result in the child taking on those traits as he
enters young adulthood. This is the very reason why it is now socially
unacceptable to use negative racial slurs. However, in society at large,
labeling theory still plays out with negative effect. Every time a challenge is
made that the predominant culture is acting in a discriminatory manner, the
charge gets less and less sympathy.
If a person is chronically accused of being a racist, or is
striving to keep racism in check, they will get to the point that they become
immune to the reprimand. They will respond to the accuser with personal apathy
if not animosity. They will come to accept the label and ignore any social
stigma attached to the label. Once that occurs the accused loses all ability to
exert any type of control to correct the offensive behavior.
Much of this immunity, or hostility, comes from the frame of
reference. Anyone who began school, or was born, after 1965 has no knowledge of
institutional racism in the United
States . They never saw lynchings. They never
saw “Whites Only” signs, or the “Colored Entrance” off the back alley. They
know nothing about school segregation. They never saw the midnight raids by the
men in white sheets. The only men in white sheets these people know are the
pictures of terrorists from the Middle East .
At best, segregation and discrimination was something that
was committed by their parents or grand-parents. To them, racism is just
another form of political grappling, and in their collective, political
cynicism they are sure that someone is making money from the hustle. Are they
wrong in that opinion? These young men and women who are now addressing their
own relative poverty and diminished economic opportunity have little concern
for the plight of others who are, due to the legacy of state sanctioned
institutional racism, still further down the economic scale than they are. It
is even harder to come to grips with the social inequity due to race when they
see, and hear, through the media, minorities who are better off than they are.
Those minorities may be exceptional people, or they may be gifted tokens of the
American Dream, but the majority uses them as examples of the successes of the
racial equalization in the nation.
The history of rampant racism in the U.S. is fading to a form of dark
mythology for younger Americans. Since racism is outlawed, and no longer state
sponsored, they see it as a social issue of some isolated sub-cultures. The
constant accusations of racism fall on deaf ears in the rising generation; they
have no clue of what they are being accused of except as some kind of slur.
The further the generations get from the era of institutional
racism and institutional oppression, the less effect the criticism will have on
them. It is simply not real to the majority of the Anglo-Saxon citizens. It
does not exist. The only thing that exists to the Anglo-Saxon majority is
socioeconomic class. All issues revolve around economic resources and liquid
assets. This is the real world for the Anglo-Saxon. The only focus is on
acquiring and securing economic resources. There is no other issue. It all
comes down to compete, win, or die. This is the U.S.A. today.
[1]
World War II casualties. (2007, May 10). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.
Retrieved 13:04, May 10, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=World_War_II_casualties&oldid=129797070
[2]
"World War II." Encyclopedia Britannica. 2007.
Encyclopedia Britannica Online.
10 May 2007<http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-53609>
[3]
The final blow came in 1639 when the Dutch (also Saxon in origin and under
Calvinist influence by this time) broke the Spanish at Battle of the Downs. The Anglo-Saxon domination was handed to the United States of America
in 1945. The U.S.
literally was the “last man standing.”
Comments
Post a Comment