America - my thoughts

[Channel72]

Think about it in terms of religion, and the numerous atrocities committed in the name of Christianity. Just being Christian or religious in and of itself is not evil. However, the right combination of ignorance and prejudice can cause your religious inclinations to create all sorts of evils. It is overly simplistic to just waive your hand and say that religion is bad, especially when closer studies reveals it becomes difficult to separate these actions from extant social, cultural, political, economic, and military factors that are intertwined.

Really, the best that can be said about religion is that it has certain positive side effects. It can help ease stress and promote happiness on an individual level, and encourages altruistic activity to a certain extent. However, these things can also be achieved using secular methods, without all the negative things associated with religion, such as dogmatic adherence to arbtirary doctrines, many of which are socially harmful.

Similarly, the best that can be said about nationalism is - again, that is has certain positive side effects, such as encouraging civic responsibility and perhaps reducing antipathy among subgroups. But it's really not clear if this is worth the associated "us-versus-them" mentality that inevitably falls into place alongside a nationalistic spirit. A more general sense of social responsibility to all humanity collectively is obviously preferable, but unfortunately this kind of sentiment is not as powerful as nationalism because it doesn't nicely tap into our pre-existing tribalistic tendancies.

[madd0ct0r]

Another interesting perspective came my way.

We were out in Palm Springs, staying with a couple who are old friends. The husband is an ex-military Texan with two degrees. He hates southern Cali, it symbolizing the decadence and unwillingness to work hard he feels made this country great. Interestingly, his epithet of choice for the narrow minded snooty folks around him is 'white'.
He's itching to move to Asia.

Bit of a change from the San Fran bubble.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Really, the best that can be said about religion is that it has certain positive side effects. It can help ease stress and promote happiness on an individual level, and encourages altruistic activity to a certain extent. However, these things can also be achieved using secular methods, without all the negative things associated with religion, such as dogmatic adherence to arbtirary doctrines, many of which are socially harmful.

My point was more that religion in and of itself is a net neutral; certainly, it has been used to justify good and bad things throughout history. But, for example, did the Conquistadores really need to use God as a justification for the slaughter of the Aztecs, Tainos, Caribs, Quechua, etz.? Although their rhetoric was laced with religious metaphors, and they certainly were fundamentalist in that sense, they were far more driven by "secular" desires such as power, wealth, etc. Hell, even the infamous Inquisition in Spain had less to do with religion and more to do with Isabelle's attempts to centralize power in her court. To me, it just seems like a cop-out to blame "religion," which is such a nebulous concept, when historically it isn't always possible to separate supposedly religiously-motivated actions from more mundane concerns (and this works both ways, for both the good and the bad ... many charities use religion as their supposed "motivation," but altruism and philanthropy are not inherently religious in any way; similarly, for bad things, religion has more often been used as post-hoc rationalization as opposed to a priori reasoning, which you can argue is bad in its own rights, but it is still a different story than many here are trying to weave).

Similarly, the best that can be said about nationalism is - again, that is has certain positive side effects, such as encouraging civic responsibility and perhaps reducing antipathy among subgroups. But it's really not clear if this is worth the associated "us-versus-them" mentality that inevitably falls into place alongside a nationalistic spirit.

The argument I am challenging is that the "us-versus-them" mentality is inherently inevitable in nationalism. As you yourself noted, there are these pre-existing pseudo-tribal urges that are feeding this. Can you really say in all honesty that this extreme xenophobes and other maniacs would NOT act that way if nationalism wasn't a thing? Or that an otherwise moderate human being will somehow turn into one of those extremists via nationalism? Perhaps, perhaps not. I am just noting that, historically, it seems to me like nationalism has been used (as with religion) as post-hoc rationalization for things as opposed to the actual impetus for how those actions began. I mean, do you honestly believe the Patriot Act was only fueled and inspired by loving the USA too much?

As I said, these arguments seem far too simplistic for my taste.

[Channel72]

The argument I am challenging is that the "us-versus-them" mentality is inherently inevitable in nationalism. As you yourself noted, there are these pre-existing pseudo-tribal urges that are feeding this. Can you really say in all honesty that this extreme xenophobes and other maniacs would NOT act that way if nationalism wasn't a thing? Or that an otherwise moderate human being will somehow turn into one of those extremists via nationalism? Perhaps, perhaps not.

Right, but nationalism only encourages these things. It adds gasoline to the pre-existing fire of our tribalistic wiring. We should be encouraging thought patterns and behaviors that fight against the baser aspects of our nature - not simply throwing our hands up and saying "well humans suck anyway, so nationalism can't hurt."

I am just noting that, historically, it seems to me like nationalism has been used (as with religion) as post-hoc rationalization for things as opposed to the actual impetus for how those actions began. I mean, do you honestly believe the Patriot Act was only fueled and inspired by loving the USA too much?

I think we can all agree that economic and political goals are usually behind most religious wars, but again, things like religion and nationalism tend to exacerbate or escalate antipathy between different groups, which only serves to prolong conflicts and increase the body count. For example, the Rwandan genocide would probably have been difficult to pull off without tapping into tribal resentment. Yeah, it was ultimately just a politically motivated power-grab orchestrated by government officials, but then, it's kind of hard to get thousands of people to suddenly start stabbing their neighbors without something like religion or nationalism.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Fair enough. I just think that, realistically, religion and nationalism are just symptoms, as opposed to causes, and that it is more productive to address underlying issues. You know, get medicine for the cold instead of just blowing your nose. But that's just my impression, it's not like I have any empirical backing for this, just a vague impression based on what I know of human psychology.

[Spoonist]

I'd like to argue against that view Ziggy, but I thought that maybe it is a good enough topic to deserve its own thread? I seriously think that all of the things you mention are net negatives and not net neutrals.

[Crayz9000]

I think most large cities have decent public transit.

Enh. I find San Francisco's public transit completely shitty compared to other major cities in the U.S., with the exception of L.A. which I think has one bus and 5 taxis.

Two buses and a half-assed subway. We upgraded.

Two buses, a half-assed subway, and about five light rail lines. It's a pity that the light rail only covers less than 5% of the old Pacific Electric streetcar system and the MTA buses are an absolute disaster.

Then again, compared to Vegas which has a monorail (but only between Strip casinos) and a bus service that makes LA's look terrific...

[Hawkwings]

The light rail in LA isn't bad if you're looking to go long distances. It's that last mile between the rail stop and your destination that's hard though.

Also it doesn't actually go to the airport. At the end of the line you transfer to a bus to get to the airport.

[Ziggy Stardust]

I'd like to argue against that view Ziggy, but I thought that maybe it is a good enough topic to deserve its own thread? I seriously think that all of the things you mention are net negatives and not net neutrals.

I would like to hear that argument. I think it is an interesting issue, and my viewpoints on the matter are fairly half-baked in all honesty. Maybe we could ask a mod nicely to split those posts for us, or I can just start a thread and copy-paste what I wrote so you can respond to it.

[Crayz9000]

The light rail in LA isn't bad if you're looking to go long distances. It's that last mile between the rail stop and your destination that's hard though.

Also it doesn't actually go to the airport. At the end of the line you transfer to a bus to get to the airport.

It's not bad if you are trying to go someplace that's actually along the line. For instance, it's possible to get from the either the San Gabriel or San Fernando valleys to Long Beach entirely by rail/subway now, which is something that hadn't been possible since they dismantled the Pacific Electric Red Cars. It's also a lot more relaxing than trying to drive in gridlock.

The problem is all the area that isn't covered. Want to get somewhere on the coast in between Long Beach and LAX? Hop off the Blue Line and catch a bus. Considering where the Blue Line runs through, that may not be the safest choice during the evening hours. I think the Exposition Line is supposed to help a lot with that, but it's coverage is still very spotty.

At least the Gold Line services the major attractions downtown, like the new shopping district and the Staples Center, Nokia Theatre, etc. But if you want to go to Dodger Stadium by public transit, well enjoy the bus ride. For that matter, going anywhere in the valleys? You're only in luck if you're along the 101 corridor in the San Fernando Valley, or if you're along the I-210 corridor in the San Gabriel Valley.

One nice thing is that for jurors, they offer bus and rail passes as an alternative to mileage compensation. The last time I was called in for jury duty downtown, I was able to take the Red Line and avoid the horrible AM commute traffic entirely. It was perhaps the only pleasant part of my roughly week-long jury duty call (since I wound up getting selected for a jury).