Culture and Envy
We have a genuine problem. Envy, fear of envy and deflecting envy may be the most dangerous and difficult aspects of human nature for us to wrestle with as we seek to progress toward greater freedom.
As formerly poor and unfree countries open up and allow the potential for personal achievement, the disparity between the opportunities for those individuals and what they see in places like the United States becomes a source of great dissatisfaction. This is a global problem. It is a major factor behind the pendulum swinging back and forth from the right to the left. It is a serious quality of human nature that we have to face if we are to live in a freer world.
People are least happy not when they have very little, but when they have less than their neighbor. Many people, given the choice, would prefer that everyone be poorer than to be wealthier in general but poorer than their neighbor.
Today, with modern communications and media, those neighbors can be thousands of miles away.
The human quality of envy is something that those on the left try to solve by apologizing and leveling our economy towards those countries that are less well developed – and trying to "spread the wealth around" within our own borders. It is the liberal way of appeasing envy; show everyone that you are trying to make them more equal and then they will like you.
But this is the old way, the primitive way, the tribal way.
Mankind has existed for most of our history in small bands or tribes. There is a pecking order to these arrangements, with the leadership significantly above the others in terms of power and prestige. Mankind was also significantly more violent in primitive times, with torture, maiming and genocide against competing tribes more the norm than the exception.
Still, this is a popular approach, used by dictators, monarchies and even the supposedly egalitarian revolutionaries – communists, socialists and fascists. It works like this: Have in place ruling elite who get the power, prestige and the really good stuff, who then force the rest of the people into equal shares of poverty.
The most radical element of the American Revolution was its focus on the individual as the fundamental moral unit. This allowed for an ethic of personal accomplishment to create a meritocracy, where each individual could rise or fall according to his or her own effort and abilities. This cultural creation allows for an unprecedented level of accomplishment, wealth creation and personal achievement on nearly every level.
This ethic of individualism has allowed for us to create a culture of aspiration. Valuing and celebrating success and achievement in America is so fundamental to our national character that I think most of us take it for granted, assuming that this is just a natural quality of humanity in all cultures.
It is not.
Culture is something that is created by people. It includes rules and guidelines, values and priorities; and it can be very different from society to society. America was founded and pioneered by people wanting to get away from their culture of origin, seeking some way of making a better life for themselves personally, and often for their families as well. This act is in itself, all philosophy and theorizing aside, a profoundly individualistic act.
Our culture, and the culture of freedom worldwide, has been created and developed by individualists, whether or not they had even heard of the idea. It still is. (Even many on the left, often in contrast to their stated values, are very individualistic in their daily lives. This is why the progressive's usurpation of the word "liberal" was so strategically important for them. It affirmed the value of liberty if only as an illusion, even as the actual policies acted to undermine it.)
That our founders were brilliant in understanding and articulating a vision and a legal framework for this has been a profound blessing; we could not have strengthened and maintained our culture without them. But even without these ideas and documents and legal framework, we had already built our culture, and have continued to build our culture according to a belief and a vision of individual human worth, and of purposeful, individual development.
It is this cultural strength that has inoculated freedom loving people, more than anything else, against the scourge of envy.
Human nature does not change. It has been the same for millennia and, progressive and Marxist wishful thinking aside, it will continue to be the same for millennia. So how can we – how have we – been able to work around its darker elements and, with some success, encouraged our better angels?
I see human nature as similar in quality to individual temperament. We come into the world with individual temperament styles. One person is more emotionally sensitive while another is more thick-skinned; one person enjoys novelty while another prefers to stay closer to what's familiar; one person is more emotionally expressive while another is more cerebral.
We come into the world with these styles, and to some extent they determine some parameters of how we will function in the world. A person who is naturally averse to novelty is not likely to be an adventurer; a person who is not naturally physically active is not likely to become an athlete.
But that is not the end of the story. A rough guess is that about half of our temperament is fixed and about half is available for adaptation. A more sedentary person can become an athlete – perhaps even a great athlete – if he or she desires it enough to counter their own predisposition for long enough to generate powerful and enduring new habits. A person who is slow to warm up to new people and situations can become a very socially outgoing person – if he or she is willing and motivated to counter his or her temperament.
But it's harder to do this against your temperament than with it.
It is the same with human nature. With enough encouragement and incentive, individuals can let their more negative impulses and desires subside while bringing their better natures to the foreground. This is how America has been able to limit the tremendously negative forces of envy to a significant degree: by valuing personal achievement and actively discouraging indulging in envy.
Progressives and other mostly left-wing ideologues have long sought to deny or bypass the issue of human nature in order to mold mankind into a "better" being. But their fundamental mistake is their belief that this is something that can be forced upon individuals collectively.
What they miss entirely is that overcoming our personal demons is a supremely satisfying challenge for individuals to meet. Ask a recovered addict what their proudest achievement is and they will likely tell you it is triumphing over their addiction. Ask a person who has taken a troubled life and changed for the better what has been most meaningful in their lives and their own redemption will be at the top of their list.
We need laws to deal with criminal behavior – not everyone wants to improve. But those who would use the force of law to micromanage human behavior with byzantine regulations and penalties ignores that within each of us is the potential to wrestle with and triumph over the negative aspects of our personal nature; and this is a supremely individual undertaking.
And there is another twist: These "negative" elements, under the right circumstances, have their place. It would do us no good to erase envy, greed, violence or self-indulgence from the human psyche. This would be like transforming the world, with all of its terrible risks and hazards, into some sanitized, child-proofed, safety-guaranteed theme park – or worse, a drug induced "peaceful" dystopia of obedience and passivity.
Envy, greed, violence and self-indulgence all contribute to much evil in the world but that evil is in the application and the lack of self-control. It is as though we have all been given firearms at birth, and while most of us learn how to use them responsibly there are those who don't – and it is they who do the majority of harm.
The beauty of a culture of freedom, and the free exchange of goods and services that is fundamental to that culture, is that it has allowed for a healthy expression of greed and self-indulgence through personal achievement's natural rewards – but for the most part those rewards come through free exchange as a result of improving other people's quality of life.
It has isolated the motivation for violence to those who have limited self-control by minimizing the role of poverty in fueling desperation; and it has channeled envy into productive efforts to achieve one's own aspirations, rather than confining many people's options to passively dreaming of having what others possess.
The most effective way so far has been supported by America's founding principles: Open up the ability for individuals to strive for their own personal success. Celebrate achievement. Honor great deeds. And weather the inevitable storms of envy, ride them out, struggle against them as they flow and channel them into encouragement toward personal achievement as they ebb.
It is this cultural strength that will pull America back from the precipice that we face today. It is this cultural strength that has affected the rest of the world in a profoundly positive way. It does not fulfill the visions of perfection held by the progressives and other leftists; it does not bring about the enforced moral vision of some on the right, but it is how we can genuinely continue through our imperfect nature toward a better world over time.
Joel F. Wade, Ph.D. is the author of Mastering Happiness.
Posted by Libertarian Jerry on 03/07/12 05:20 AM
Excellent article Joel,you hit the nail on the head. At the foundation of Socialism is envy,violence and coveting. The only problem is,that in modern day America,all the levers of power are controlled by the collectivists of both the Left and the Right. That unless America abandons totally the monetary tax,regulatory and control mechanisms of the modern day welfare/warfare State nothing will substantially change. This means a complete restoration of property and individual rights. No Income Taxes,no IRS,no Social Security numbers,no "reporting",no Inheritance Taxes,a repeal of the legal tender laws,a complete review of the regulatory powers of the state etc.,etc. The collectivists and statists have spent over 100 years implementing their political and economic paradigm. To dismantle this monster will probably take another 100 years.
Posted by rossbcan on 03/07/12 08:44 AM
... fill in the blanks time again...
JW: "People are least happy not when they have very little, but when they have less than their neighbor."
Right there, you properly place the issue in the realm of the physical, an intelligent appraisal of what is (your physical environment / situation / means) VERSUS what is perceived to be the state of others whom you may CHOOSE to envy (have more than you) or pity (have less than you) or prey upon (rationalize "not fair", seek to forcefully redress imbalance), etc. It is the DIFFERERENCE that spawns CHOICE (goal-seeking):
Click to view link
... so, it is factually established that it is the DIFFERENCES between individuals that is the root of envy and, mitigating this difference IS A GOAL for individuals, groups and "advocates" who seek to profit by redressing "imbalances". The "problem" is viewed subjectively as:
a) - Some have "more" than me, "not fair"
b) - Some want what I have and, seek to "take it"
c) - This subjective "difference of opinion", is a perceived "problem", which I can inflame and make a commission by "pretending to solve" (advocate)
All parties are in competetion, seeking to maximize their situation. There are only two ways to compete:
a) By excellence, providing superior goods / services for which others will voluntarily pay a part of their productivity, increasing physical means (wealth, power, survival)
b) By destroying the competetion, so you will not have to face the terror that "some are better than me", stealing the friuts of labor of others, crippling them with conflict, regulations, etc.
In the physical realm, providing superior goods / services REQUIRES behaving in a highly structured manner, being organized and maximizing efficiencies within the physical laws of nature. It also requires freedom to make the correct choices, to experiment and find better ways, which also poses the risk of failure, requiring caution and prudence to minimize. If excellence "wins", we will have the "fairness" of equal opportunity. Whether you prosper, or not IS YOUR CHOICE, which is just.
Those of the "destroy the competetion" inclination seek to destroy all factors that contribute to productivity and excellence. If they "win", we will have the "fairness" of equal impoverishment, and, far fewer of us, because shrinking the economy must shrink the population, due to lack of resources to feed them, and a brutal "race to the bottom" competetion of "all, preying on all".
And, competetion is always "over something" (property) and, if the property of the winners (whom, as a monkey see, monkey do species, we all emulate) is not protected, competetion by excellence is NOT POSSIBLE. This fact (basis of western civilization) was once enforced by the "rule of law" before corrupt judiciary rationalized themselves into the false (and dangerous to themselves) position that the law's basic function of predator control in civilization makes it "necessary" (Machiavaillim falsely framed arguments, faux allegation of "proof of a negative") for JustUs to be "master predator":
Click to view link
Justice Defined: We are all free to profit or suffer and learn (adapt to excellence) by facing the consequences of our OWN choices. Injustice is to be forced to suffer the consequences of choices of unaccountable (irresponsible) others..
"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern. The law of liberty tends to abolish the reign of race over race, of faith over faith, of class over class." ~ Lord Acton
Posted by pjmauigirl1 on 03/07/12 11:43 AM
Thanks for an uplifting article.
Listening to BO plans yesterday to help people achieve the "American Dream" of owning a home made me cringe.
What happened to the American Dream of Liberty and Freedom for all? I have to believe this is the dream that continues to bring immigrants from all over the world to this country, not the dream of having better 'things'.
Perhaps it is American citizens born in other countries who don't take the authentic American dream for granted that will help keep our cultural strength alive.
From the very beginning, the people who immigrated to America were freedom loving risk takers who were willing to work hard and sacrifice for what was important to them. I hope there are enough left with that in their DNA to salvage what is best in America. If not, it's a big planet with other places to explore.
Posted by nithsdale on 03/07/12 03:37 PM
It appears that the younger generations are in quandry about facts that the older generations always knew and accepted.
Envy, Greed and Violence! The religions covered those with one word... .COVET! It is a standard in the Ten Commandments Moses gave his people because he saw first hand its effects!
There is no easy solution to this problem now since we have abandonned all moral sayings, embraced the genuine anarchy of our liberated age, and our whole culture is built upon enhancing COVET as the keystone of commerce. We are assailed everyday in all the media with it and have legions of people bent on having something someone else has even if they have to shop til they drop for it! The whole endorsement concept is built on that!
There is no way you can go back to a rational existence now when every week there is a big hoopla about the newest addition to Apple or Dell lines just in tech, how you must have it just to be in!
As you grow older you do get sense but you can't erse the follies of your youth which now is your culture!
Posted by marcopolo on 03/07/12 06:25 PM
Joel, what a powerful and compelling piece of writing. I've not seen the concept so well articulated. Where I hold a differing point of view is only the last paragraph. My view is our cultural strength has diminished to where we will not pull back, rather we've actually begun to go past the tipping point and will meet whatever lies at the bottom of the precipice. That fate is reflected in history, just look at the remains of all fallen empires.I don't fancy myself a pessimist, rather just a well-informed optimist.
Posted by dave jr on 03/07/12 11:13 PM
Envy is relative. It is not about what we have achieved, but what we have'nt achieved as evidenced by others. Residue of psychological thuggery.
Posted by R on 03/08/12 01:52 AM
Very nice piece! The only element I would add is that there will always be neighbors with more or less than you, however the availability of OPPORTUNITY to improve yourself and better your "position" creates Happiness. You have actually stated this in different words, but I thought I would add my "phraseology".
Unfortunately, that "opportunity" will not be realized under the Fascist Socialism of our current "Regime".
We must first eliminate the Socialist Left from our government, schools and psyche in order to create that viable society of which you speak.
Thanks and take care!
Posted by speedygonzales on 03/08/12 07:02 AM
Anytime when I smell rotten fish I start looking for head.I must ask all future readers to pardon my American perspective. Perspectives resulting from accidents of birth are, of course, such poor marks on an individual's credibility as a thinker.
Like you and other Americans, I love my country, its wonderful people, its boundless energy, its creativity in so many fields, its natural beauty, its many gifts to the world, and the freedom it has given us to express ourselves. So we should all be angry, profoundly angry, when we consider what has happened to our country and what that neglect could mean for our children and grandchildren.
The data is piling up to confirm that we're Number One, but in exactly the way we don't want to be-at the bottom. Where did we go wrong and what can we do about it?
Jonathan Schell, author of "The Unconquerable World," on how non-violence can topple the greatest of empires. Challenges to capitalism via armed force or elections have repeatedly been tried and failed. It is time for systematic use of nonviolent action to challenge capitalism and build alternatives to it. A comprehensive nonviolent strategy involves nonviolent methods to move towards economic and social alternatives that do not rely on systems of violence. Capitalism is responsible for an enormous level of death, suffering and wasted human potential, including everything from impoverishment of Third World peoples to boredom in factory jobs.
William Jennings Bryan: Imperialism, delivered 8 August 1900, Indianapolis, IN
"When I say that the contest of 1900 is a contest of 1900 is a contest between Democracy on the one hand and plutocracy on the other I do not mean to say that all our opponents have deliberately chosen to give to organized wealth a predominating influence in the affairs of the Government, but I do assert that on the important issues of the day the Republican party is dominated by those influences which constantly tend to substitute the worship of mammon for the protection of the rights of man... Against us are arrayed a comparatively small but politically and financially powerful number who really profit by Republican policies; but with them are associated a large number who, because of their attachment to their party name, are giving their support to doctrines antagonistic to the former teachings of their own party.
Republicans who used to advocate bimetallism now try to convince themselves that the gold standard is good; Republicans who were formerly attached to the greenback are now seeking an excuse for giving national banks control of the nation's paper money; Republicans who used to boast that the Republican party was paying off the national debt are now looking for reasons to support a perpetual and increasing debt; Republicans who formerly abhorred a trust now beguile themselves with the delusion that there are good trusts, and bad trusts, while in their minds, the line between the two is becoming more and more obscure; Republicans who, in times past, congratulated the country upon the small expense of our standing army, are now making light of the objections which are urged against a large increase in the permanent military establishment; Republicans who gloried in our independence when the nation was less powerful now look with favor upon a foreign alliance; Republicans who three years ago condemned "forcible annexation" as immoral and even criminal are now sure that it is both immoral and criminal to oppose forcible annexation. That partisanship has already blinded many to present dangers is certain; how large a portion of the Republican party can be drawn over to the new policies remains to be seen."
Posted by rossbcan on 03/08/12 07:59 AM
If you replace Capitalism with Mercantilism (see DB's def'n), you will be closer to the truth.
This conflating of terms is the same that falsely equated Liberal with traditional (what used to function) free market, ad-hoc libertarian economics and social (dis)organization, in all areas, enforced by the people personnaly and collectively insisting on the fallen "rule of law", also rationalized away by predators, seeking "a better way" (for them):
Click to view link
Posted by Luis Magno on 03/08/12 09:57 AM
"The most radical element of the American Revolution was its focus on the individual as the fundamental moral unit. This allowed for an ethic of personal accomplishment to create a meritocracy, where each individual could rise or fall according to his or her own effort and abilities. This cultural creation allows for an unprecedented level of accomplishment, wealth creation and personal achievement on nearly every level."
Gee! I wonder what went wrong if it was all so perfect in the beginning? Like no slavery and no genicide. Huh?
Posted by Luis Magno on 03/08/12 10:26 AM
The Anglo-Saxon religiously and collectively enforced perspectives of "white supremacism" and "nativist exceptionalism" were there in the beginning and remain dominant sociocultural themes to the present day notwithstanding the great intellectual achievements in the THEORY of individual freedom and liberty. Until uprooted this perverse Anglo-Saxonism will continue to be the scourge of mankind and of the United States.
Posted by marcopolo on 03/08/12 12:31 PM
Unless you're at least about 120 years of age, you've never seen Capitalism. You've seen statism, and a whole variety of economic systems that took capitalism and made changes "all for the good, naturally" and we haven't been a capitalistic economic system since way before our birth.
When people and enterprises began to subvert the political process that allowed it to intervene in the free market and change the rules, capitalism began to die. When I can get the government to tilt the market in my direction, either through direct intervention, subsidies,and a whole host of regulations to create barriers for entry, we lost the free market which underpins the Capitalist economic construct. Today, everything from equities, PM's, futures, and all market trading is a manipulated game. There are not two parties in the US. It's just the statist's and their cohorts in DC and State Govts, and "everyone else... or us sheep." Corruption and growth of statism has happened under both parties leadership, and one can argue historically since the early 1800's. There is no difference.
Anyone wanting to move to some metallic standard for a medium of exchange (gold has been for around 6000 years) is asking to prevent expansion of empires, wars, pork projects, and all the ills since 1913. Our medium of exchange today is only a promise, one that we have reneged on many times, and one which allows the statists to fund whatever they want.
You're arguing Republican vs. Democrat which is exactly the game they want you to play. Doesn't matter who wins, the outcome, economically for this country is the same. We're toast. Study our history THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE! I thought Ron Paul might have a shot because while he runs on a Republican ticket, he isn't a "Republican" that's why they're afraid of him and he's been marginalized. Democrats don't like him for the same reason, not that he's a Republican but how he wants to change the game.
It takes empires a while to die, but I think we'll see it in our lifetime. We're not yet fully a facist empire, but you can see it from here.
Posted by marcopolo on 03/08/12 12:53 PM
My point of view is not "white" or anglo-saxon supremacy,but rather Western Culture supremacy. That's changing as I write this. Supremacy of culture is moving East, as is economic and military power and isn't white. The judeo-christian ethic of the Western culture is too being displaced. Freedom and Liberty seems to span cultures as Joel points out. Yes, a concept of it was set in writing by a group of white guys, slave owners, and religious zealots. But ignore the authors and read the writing, the intent. They studied history and attempted to craft a construct to allow Freedom and Liberty. Jefferson didn't include in the Bill of Rights, Life, Liberty and Property, as he knew Property meant slavery would be inherent in our founding documents as slaves were property. So, he changed it to Pursuit of Happiness... whatever that means. We weren't there to understand all the compromises made, but they made a damn good run at creating a set of documents that would allow peace, prosperity,individualism,liberty and freedom a chance. What Joel's writing has done for me is to support my notion that I am first and always an American. No stars, stripes, or "citizen of the US" but an American. I love life, liberty, freedom, property,and a chance to "be all I can be." Capitalism is the economic system that underpins all these notions. That's why it's gone, and a bunch of old guys/gals, political hacks all, have repeatedly shredded the writings of all those white guys who gave it the best shot ever recorded in history at unleashing the power of the individual.
Posted by Luis Magno on 03/08/12 02:03 PM
rossbcan also jumps on the word "capitalism". speedygonzales is no doubt referring to "finance capitalism" as it functions today or to "crony capitalism" as defined by libertarian Ron Paul. speedygonzales quotes William Jennings Bryan who speaks of "plutocracy" which is closer to reality. Beside speedy did not capitalize the word. Capitalizing the word and then attributing the capitalized word to speedy is unfair.
And speedygonzales was not "arguing Republican vs. Democrat" by quoting WJB. That is a real stretch.
Instead of quibbling over words and jumping to wrong conclusions we ought to be doing something real about the underlying problems which are elitist Anglo-Saxon support for and continuing promotion of the racist "white supremacist" sociocultural meme and the equally racist "nativist exceptionalist" sociocultural meme also known as "American exceptionalism".
Posted by Luis Magno on 03/08/12 02:49 PM
There are so many factual errors in your post that I hardly know where to begin or even if I should begin. Thomas Jefferson did not write the Bill of Rights. He wrote the Declaration of Independence.
I am a human being. I am ethnoracially European American and sub-ethnoracially Spanish American. I am an American in the sense that I am a (native born) citizen of the United States of America. But I am also an American in its original meaning, i.e., I was born in the Americas.
That was its original meaning until the Anglo-Saxons stole the names 'America' and 'American' which the Spanish in America had been using for a century before the Anglo-Saxons first landed in Jamestown in 1609, initiated the genocide of the indigenous Americans, started the African slave trade and started calling themselves Americans.
Because of your User ID I presume that you are of proud Italian descent yet you do not mention your ancestral heritage. You have bought into the Anglo-Saxon racist notion of "whiteness". Perhaps you have forgotten or your parents or grandparents never mentioned the fact that Italian Americans were not considered "white" until sometime before the beginning of WWII.
Posted by Luis Magno on 03/09/12 01:40 AM
"To dismantle this monster will probably take another 100 years."
You are wrong on this last count! It could be accomplished in the twinkling of an eye with the right multi-level meme. My perspective is tribal (ethnoracial) AND individual.
Posted by marcopolo on 03/11/12 02:54 PM
You seem passionate about your point of view. It is your's. I have mine. We don't have to share the same point of view. That's what used to make this country great.
As respects factual errors, the late Mr. Jefferson had significant input and writing of passages in ALL the founding documents, not just the Declaration to which he's ascribed as the primary author. Read the Jeffersonian Papers. Much of what we owe him permeates all the founding documents, including getting Property out and "Pursuit of Happiness" in due to the status of Slaves as property. You have to dig a bit to find our real history, not the crap you learned in any level of school you attained.
"America" was named by the map makers after Americo Vespucci-a Venician map maker ( as in Venice,Italy; it was the seat of many great thinkers of the age) sort of mapped out what was then "the new world." He was, proudly, a dago like me (i'm first gen Italian).
The Spanish, who came up through Florida and what today is Mexico, much of the Caribbean, and the American Southwest practiced genocide on a mass scale of the indigenous "Americans" also.
All the Western European cultures did, who at some point viewed themselves as a "world power", much like the US does today.Primarily though on the basis of religion as well as skin color. The Spanish, Dutch, English, French, pick one, all found the native tribes of Africa easy pickings for free labor. Not so much the Italians, as they were too busy fighting among themselves to become a "world power."
My family started coming here in the late 1800's. They experienced some discrimination from the Irish, who were the first great wave of immigrants, but nothing extra ordinary. Just your typical culture clash.
My grandparent didn't know what white was; they thought they were American's of Italian decent, as they lived quite well, established thriving businesses and had customers and friends from a variety of cultural backgrounds, why, even some Anglo's, didn't sit in certain sections of theaters, transportation, etc.
They brought with them the concept of protective services invented in Sicily of La Cosa Nostra (our thing) to ensure opportunity for all Italians in this new land of opportunity. Worked pretty good at the start. Then as Italians mixed into the culture, La Cosa Nostra advanced into it's own realm.
I guess I'm white, as the employment applications I've had to complete in the past have several check boxes for varieties of those of "Hispanic decent" and others,but they have just one box left for the rest and that is for "white." I can't check any other box, as I don't enjoy having any other cultural heritage. So, the powers that be, classify me as "white." Like you I'm proud of my cultural heritage. But, the Western European cultures who at one time were "world powers" comprise the bulk of our current Elite, who govern and control from behind the curtain. Something they learned from Niccolo Machiavelli... another dago!! What I'm not, is a Statist, Collectivist, or "Progressive." I'm a Free Market Capitalist; culture has nothing to do with it; and an endangered species. As Jerry point out for about the last 100+ years the power elite (and they used to be called Progressives) finally were able to gain an upper hand over Free Market capitalism, and it's been down hill ever since. I wish you good health Luis, and I'll see you at the bottom which is quickly approaching for us all, regardless of which box you checked on the application form, what you call yourself; your cultural background.
See, there's the power elite for the last 100+ and then just everyone else. It's hard to not be a sheeple, but hey, so far so good.
Got gold, silver, guns, food and ammunition. I'm ok, you're ok.
It won't happen in the twinkle of an eye,and not as long as 100 years (I'm figuring 5-8 tops) but it will happen, and it will be painful for all. The smallest creature, when cornered and fighting for its life is ferocious. Don't underestimate how far they will go to maintain control regardless of one's genetic heritage. They don't care.
Posted by Luis Magno on 03/12/12 01:27 PM
Thanks for the response.
We are at cultural bottom now. Social bottom will follow. Five to eight years? Maybe. Ethnocultural sovereignty is the solution. Nobody's buying now but the option is on the table.