1 2 > 
 
   
 

Trump’s modest proposal for sanctuary cities, and the instinct for intolerance

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
15 April 2019 07:34
 

President Trump taunted the city officers of sanctuary cities recently by proposing that illegal aliens be bused to the sanctuary cities, where immigration law enforcement is legally handicapped. And a predictable but interesting thing happened: those city officers did not like the idea, without a single exception, to my knowledge. The mayor of Oakland went on NPR and launched into a speech that began as though she was giving a full set of reasons why she should accept Trump’s proposal, but then she called it an “outrageous abuse of power.”

SCHAAF: Listen. Oakland is a city that prides itself on diversity and inclusion. We are proud of the immigrant community that we have right now. And it’s our job to not build walls but build bridges and welcome all people and celebrate the richness that diverse cultures bring to our city. We also know that immigrants actually make a safer city, despite the lies and the divisive rhetoric that this president continues to drive to separate the American people. We know that data proves that undocumented or documented immigrants commit far fewer crimes. So not only is our community richer and more loving. But it also is safer because we are a sanctuary city and a diverse city.

SIMON: But let me hone this down to the point that’s at issue now. If sometime, let’s say, in the middle of next week, a number of buses arrive in Oakland with 5,000 migrants, do you say, welcome to Oakland?

SCHAAF: I always say, welcome to Oakland. But this is much less about immigration or sanctuary. This is about an outrageous abuse of power. The idea that you could use human beings, families as instruments of political payback to use public resources to exact retribution on your political enemies. This is not America. It is not democratic. And this is what should outrage all Americans, regardless of their stance on immigration or sanctuary cities.

SIMON: I’ve gotten two very complete answers from you to essentially the question, would you welcome more migrants? I haven’t heard a yes.

SCHAAF: I said yes. Oakland welcomes all people.

SIMON: So specifically in this case, if more migrants show up, that’s fine with you?

SCHAAF: My job as a mayor is to welcome people. I don’t build walls. It’s our job to welcome everyone into our city, ensure their safety, ensure that their families can thrive. And that is my job no matter where those people came from or how they got there.

She gave a “yes,” and I would like to see that affirmation put to the test, because her hash of answers was otherwise confusing. Why is it an abuse of power if Trump wants to make her city safer? Seems like a win-win. Oakland of all cities certainly needs that extra safety advantage. What’s more is that it isn’t just liberal myth: after illegal immigrants cross the border, they really do commit less crime than the nation at large. (Their children and grandchildren regress to the moderately-more-criminal Latino mean, but that is both racist and true, so it is a double-whammy and we shouldn’t talk about that.)

I suspect that foreigners settling in the territory of one’s own tribe provokes a defensive reaction as a matter of instinct. A difference between American conservatives and liberals seems to be that liberals don’t so much think of the whole nation as their own tribe. They think American land was wrongfully stolen from Native Americans. They wouldn’t give away their own cities to Native tribes, but they would be happy to see it happen to rural Oklahoma, Arizona, Texas, or anywhere they don’t live. Their own cities and their own neighborhoods are their homologous tribes.

What if open acceptance for diversity happened in the paleolithic? Members of foreign tribes, who are unhappy with the wealth or politics of their own native tribes, set up camp on your territory, hunt your animals, piss in your water, and flirt with your women; and every unhappy foreigner who hears about your tribe would take advantage of it. Acceptance for diversity would not last long as a genotype.

 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  2647
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
15 April 2019 09:10
 

Ignoring the fact that this would be breaking the law…


Trump’s whole argument about the National Emergency is that migrants are dangerous serial-criminal raping terrorists. If he believes that, then it is a blatant violation of his Oath of Office to stealthy dump serial murderous drug-traffickers in unsuspecting cities.
But if he is not actively seeking to put American Lives at risk, it is because he knows that his immigration tactics (they don’t deserve to be called policies) are brutal and illegal mistreatment of helpless people in desperate need.

So either Trump is criminally hurting ‘Sanctuary’ Cities, or he is criminally hurting migrants.

Either case, he is a criminal.

[ Edited: 15 April 2019 09:12 by Twissel]
 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  2981
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
15 April 2019 09:12
 
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 07:34 AM

President Trump taunted the city officers of sanctuary cities recently by proposing that illegal aliens be bused to the sanctuary cities, where immigration law enforcement is legally handicapped. And a predictable but interesting thing happened: those city officers did not like the idea, without a single exception, to my knowledge.
...

Seattle’s Mayor Had the Perfect Response to Trump’s Threat to Send Immigrants to Sanctuary Cities
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/04/seattles-mayor-had-the-perfect-response-to-trumps-threat-to-send-immigrants-to-sanctuary-cities/

So if this president wants to send immigrants and refugees to Seattle and other welcoming cities, let me be clear: We will do what we have always done, and we will be stronger for it. And it will only strengthen our commitment to fighting for the dignity of every person. We will not allow any administration to use the power of America to destroy the promise of America.


Trump Wants to Bus Migrants to Sanctuary Cities. The Mayors There Are Fine With It.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-wants-to-bus-migrants-to-sanctuary-cities-the-mayors-there-are-fine-with-it

“The city would be prepared to welcome these immigrants just as we have embraced our immigrant communities for decades,” Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney told The Daily Beast in a statement. ...”

“As a welcoming city, we would welcome these migrants with open arms, just as we welcomed Syrian refugees, just as we welcomed Puerto Ricans displaced by Hurricane Maria and just as we welcome Rohingya refugees fleeing genocide in Myanmar,” said Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel in a statement.

“I am proud that Cambridge is a sanctuary city,” Mayor Marc McGovern of Cambridge, Massachusetts, told The Daily Beast. “Trump is a schoolyard bully who tries to intimidate and threaten people. I’m not intimidated and if asylum seekers find their way to Cambridge, we’ll welcome them.”

That gambit, experts say, is both logistically and legally dubious. And multiple mayors told The Daily Beast that it only makes the Trump administration’s immigration policy look incoherent.

“Humans are not pawns. This is not a game. These are people’s lives,” said Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler. “Portland will continue to protect its sanctuary status in accordance with Oregon law and the U.S. Constitution. We strongly denounce the cruel efforts of this administration to retaliate against sanctuary cities.”

“It’s a sign of the president’s tremendous weakness as an executive and weakness as a leader, and of the degree to which he pales in comparison to all of his recent predecessors,” Mayor Daniel Drew of Middletown, Connecticut told The Daily Beast. “This threat is hollow and more than anything is a sign of the tremendous weakness of the Trump administration.”

In Coachella, the California desert town famous for its music festival, Mayor Steven Hernandez told The Daily Beast that the city already works with outside organizations to ensure that undocumented immigrants are able to integrate into the community. Were the administration to bus in migrants from the border, Hernandez said, the community would welcome them.

 

 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  2981
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
15 April 2019 09:14
 
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 07:34 AM

...
What if open acceptance for diversity happened in the paleolithic? Members of foreign tribes, who are unhappy with the wealth or politics of their own native tribes, set up camp on your territory, hunt your animals, piss in your water, and flirt with your women; and every unhappy foreigner who hears about your tribe would take advantage of it. Acceptance for diversity would not last long as a genotype.

We no longer live in the paleolithic.  There are now almost 8 billion people on the planet and we must evolve in order to live together in peace.  The way of the future is to recognize what we all have in common and embrace our diversity in culture and as a species.  Racism, nationalism, tribalism are remnants of a past we must deal with if we are to overcome these tendencies and look to a better future for humanity.  Time will tell if this can or will be accomplished.

I advise you to closely examine your motives and look at the big picture.  The views you are holding onto will hopefully, someday, become our past.

(You may choose to think that those who respond to your posts see something worth responding to.  That is not the case.  It is just that some people find it hard to refrain from rebutting prejudice.  You have changed no one’s mind here and are wasting your time.)

 

 
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
15 April 2019 09:24
 
Twissel - 15 April 2019 09:10 AM

Ignoring the fact that this would be breaking the law…


Trump’s whole argument about the National Emergency is that migrants are dangerous serial-criminal raping terrorists. If he believes that, then it is a blatant violation of his Oath of Office to stealthy dump serial murderous drug-traffickers in unsuspecting cities.
But if he is not actively seeking to put American Lives at risk, it is because he knows that his immigration tactics (they don’t deserve to be called policies) are brutal and illegal mistreatment of helpless people in desperate need.

So either Trump is criminally hurting ‘Sanctuary’ Cities, or he is criminally hurting migrants.

Either case, he is a criminal.

Trump was wrong from the beginning to claim that Mexico is “sending their worst.” If he really believed that, then maybe it would be illegal to dump them on sanctuary cities. But his proposal seems to have the consent of all stakeholders, and the illegal migrants would benefit most of all. It is the opposite of “mistreatment of helpless people in desperate need,” because the sanctuary cities are where they would get the best treatment.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
15 April 2019 09:31
 
Jan_CAN - 15 April 2019 09:12 AM
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 07:34 AM

President Trump taunted the city officers of sanctuary cities recently by proposing that illegal aliens be bused to the sanctuary cities, where immigration law enforcement is legally handicapped. And a predictable but interesting thing happened: those city officers did not like the idea, without a single exception, to my knowledge.
...

Seattle’s Mayor Had the Perfect Response to Trump’s Threat to Send Immigrants to Sanctuary Cities
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/04/seattles-mayor-had-the-perfect-response-to-trumps-threat-to-send-immigrants-to-sanctuary-cities/

So if this president wants to send immigrants and refugees to Seattle and other welcoming cities, let me be clear: We will do what we have always done, and we will be stronger for it. And it will only strengthen our commitment to fighting for the dignity of every person. We will not allow any administration to use the power of America to destroy the promise of America.


Trump Wants to Bus Migrants to Sanctuary Cities. The Mayors There Are Fine With It.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-wants-to-bus-migrants-to-sanctuary-cities-the-mayors-there-are-fine-with-it

“The city would be prepared to welcome these immigrants just as we have embraced our immigrant communities for decades,” Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney told The Daily Beast in a statement. ...”

“As a welcoming city, we would welcome these migrants with open arms, just as we welcomed Syrian refugees, just as we welcomed Puerto Ricans displaced by Hurricane Maria and just as we welcome Rohingya refugees fleeing genocide in Myanmar,” said Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel in a statement.

“I am proud that Cambridge is a sanctuary city,” Mayor Marc McGovern of Cambridge, Massachusetts, told The Daily Beast. “Trump is a schoolyard bully who tries to intimidate and threaten people. I’m not intimidated and if asylum seekers find their way to Cambridge, we’ll welcome them.”

That gambit, experts say, is both logistically and legally dubious. And multiple mayors told The Daily Beast that it only makes the Trump administration’s immigration policy look incoherent.

“Humans are not pawns. This is not a game. These are people’s lives,” said Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler. “Portland will continue to protect its sanctuary status in accordance with Oregon law and the U.S. Constitution. We strongly denounce the cruel efforts of this administration to retaliate against sanctuary cities.”

“It’s a sign of the president’s tremendous weakness as an executive and weakness as a leader, and of the degree to which he pales in comparison to all of his recent predecessors,” Mayor Daniel Drew of Middletown, Connecticut told The Daily Beast. “This threat is hollow and more than anything is a sign of the tremendous weakness of the Trump administration.”

In Coachella, the California desert town famous for its music festival, Mayor Steven Hernandez told The Daily Beast that the city already works with outside organizations to ensure that undocumented immigrants are able to integrate into the community. Were the administration to bus in migrants from the border, Hernandez said, the community would welcome them.

All the other mayors are sending the same set of mixed messages that the mayor of Oakland sent, contrary to what the headline would suggest. Maybe their denunciations of the proposal follow merely from their hatred of Trump and not from their implicit fear of illegal immigrants moving in? If they care for the illegal immigrants, then their own cities would be the best place for them, so they can be fed, housed, medicated and protected. It should be treated as a great idea, a win for everyone, regardless of Trump’s childish motivations.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
15 April 2019 09:52
 

I should have read more carefully. At least one mayor did NOT send mixed messages, according to that Daily Beast article. He is the mayor of Coachella. It is a city that is 96% Hispanic.

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
15 April 2019 10:24
 
Jan_CAN - 15 April 2019 09:14 AM
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 07:34 AM

...
What if open acceptance for diversity happened in the paleolithic? Members of foreign tribes, who are unhappy with the wealth or politics of their own native tribes, set up camp on your territory, hunt your animals, piss in your water, and flirt with your women; and every unhappy foreigner who hears about your tribe would take advantage of it. Acceptance for diversity would not last long as a genotype.

We no longer live in the paleolithic.  There are now almost 8 billion people on the planet and we must evolve in order to live together in peace.  The way of the future is to recognize what we all have in common and embrace our diversity in culture and as a species.  Racism, nationalism, tribalism are remnants of a past we must deal with if we are to overcome these tendencies and look to a better future for humanity.  Time will tell if this can or will be accomplished.

I advise you to closely examine your motives and look at the big picture.  The views you are holding onto will hopefully, someday, become our past.

(You may choose to think that those who respond to your posts see something worth responding to.  That is not the case.  It is just that some people find it hard to refrain from rebutting prejudice.  You have changed no one’s mind here and are wasting your time.)

Yeah, not every behavior selected for in the paleolithic needs to be tolerated today. If the behaviors that were selected for in the paleolithic era no longer work to preserve our genes today, then we had best get a head start on evolution and abandon those outmoded behaviors, even if it isn’t easy. But, if the paleolithically-selected behaviors still function to preserve our own genes, then I encourage them, not try to abandon them, because otherwise I live my life observing my own genes getting left behind. The future of America is Latino, and that means Latinos will increasingly outpopulate whites as time progresses, and Latinos are unlikely to accept the white liberal ideals of embracing diversity against human instincts in the presence of full-blooded whites staying disproportionately richer.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  2981
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
15 April 2019 10:56
 
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 09:52 AM

I should have read more carefully. At least one mayor did NOT send mixed messages, according to that Daily Beast article. He is the mayor of Coachella. It is a city that is 96% Hispanic.

You should read even more carefully.  These mayors were not sending mixed messages just because they spoke against Trump’s treating of people as pawns.

Such a plan to suddenly bus people, especially if in large numbers, is not how an immigration/refugee problem/crisis should be handled.  Even when the immigrants are welcomed, they must be housed and provided with aid and support until they can get on their feet.  Plans and preparations are needed to ensure proper treatment.  The issues regarding refugees and immigration are become increasingly complex and Trump is incapable of understanding these, of coming up with any humane and reasonable solutions, or of listening to those who do. 

 

[ Edited: 15 April 2019 11:07 by Jan_CAN]
 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  2981
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
15 April 2019 10:58
 
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 10:24 AM
Jan_CAN - 15 April 2019 09:14 AM
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 07:34 AM

...
What if open acceptance for diversity happened in the paleolithic? Members of foreign tribes, who are unhappy with the wealth or politics of their own native tribes, set up camp on your territory, hunt your animals, piss in your water, and flirt with your women; and every unhappy foreigner who hears about your tribe would take advantage of it. Acceptance for diversity would not last long as a genotype.

We no longer live in the paleolithic.  There are now almost 8 billion people on the planet and we must evolve in order to live together in peace.  The way of the future is to recognize what we all have in common and embrace our diversity in culture and as a species.  Racism, nationalism, tribalism are remnants of a past we must deal with if we are to overcome these tendencies and look to a better future for humanity.  Time will tell if this can or will be accomplished.

I advise you to closely examine your motives and look at the big picture.  The views you are holding onto will hopefully, someday, become our past.

(You may choose to think that those who respond to your posts see something worth responding to.  That is not the case.  It is just that some people find it hard to refrain from rebutting prejudice.  You have changed no one’s mind here and are wasting your time.)

Yeah, not every behavior selected for in the paleolithic needs to be tolerated today. If the behaviors that were selected for in the paleolithic era no longer work to preserve our genes today, then we had best get a head start on evolution and abandon those outmoded behaviors, even if it isn’t easy. But, if the paleolithically-selected behaviors still function to preserve our own genes, then I encourage them, not try to abandon them, because otherwise I live my life observing my own genes getting left behind. The future of America is Latino, and that means Latinos will increasingly outpopulate whites as time progresses, and Latinos are unlikely to accept the white liberal ideals of embracing diversity against human instincts in the presence of full-blooded whites staying disproportionately richer.

This is where your difficulty lies – the desire to preserve your own genes as if these genes should purposely select for whiteness and not survival.  My genes seem to be more content with survival of my species, which is more likely to happen if humans are united rather than divided.

 
 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
15 April 2019 11:18
 
Jan_CAN - 15 April 2019 10:56 AM
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 09:52 AM

I should have read more carefully. At least one mayor did NOT send mixed messages, according to that Daily Beast article. He is the mayor of Coachella. It is a city that is 96% Hispanic.

You should read even more carefully.  These mayors were not sending mixed messages just because they spoke against Trump’s treating of people as pawns.

Such a plan to suddenly bus people, especially if in large numbers, is not how an immigration/refugee problem/crisis should be handled.  Even when the immigrants are welcomed, they must be housed and provided with aid and support until they can get on their feet.  Plans and preparations are needed to ensure proper treatment.  The issues regarding refugees and immigration are become increasingly complex and Trump is incapable of understanding these, of coming up with any humane and reasonable solutions, or of listening to those who do.

It doesn’t seem to be a matter of underestimating the complexity. If Trump is willingly handing off the many complexities to sanctuary city leaders and those city leaders accept it, then there wouldn’t be much of a moral problem on Trump’s part, because there is not much so complex about it. Load up the migrants on buses, make a phone call to Oakland City Hall, go to Oakland City Hall, drop off the migrants in front of Oakland City Hall, and drive back. Repeat. The Oakland city administration then takes care of all the many complexities from that point forward. The mayors are talking to the Daily Beast like they are being bullied, except the mayor of Coachella? Like migrants are being mistreated?

 
Abel Dean
 
Avatar
 
 
Abel Dean
Total Posts:  427
Joined  03-11-2017
 
 
 
15 April 2019 11:32
 
Jan_CAN - 15 April 2019 10:58 AM

This is where your difficulty lies – the desire to preserve your own genes as if these genes should purposely select for whiteness and not survival.  My genes seem to be more content with survival of my species, which is more likely to happen if humans are united rather than divided.

That is wise, because I can think of a good reason to allow non-whites to win the evolutionary race, even if it meant the extinction of whites: whites are most likely to develop adaptive reproducing intelligent robotics that will swiftly kill every human being on the planet to harvest their energy. I know that is probably not what you had in mind, but I can’t rebut it, one way or the other. Down with whites. The survival of non-whites is better than the extinction of humanity.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  2981
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
15 April 2019 12:02
 
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 11:18 AM
Jan_CAN - 15 April 2019 10:56 AM
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 09:52 AM

I should have read more carefully. At least one mayor did NOT send mixed messages, according to that Daily Beast article. He is the mayor of Coachella. It is a city that is 96% Hispanic.

You should read even more carefully.  These mayors were not sending mixed messages just because they spoke against Trump’s treating of people as pawns.

Such a plan to suddenly bus people, especially if in large numbers, is not how an immigration/refugee problem/crisis should be handled.  Even when the immigrants are welcomed, they must be housed and provided with aid and support until they can get on their feet.  Plans and preparations are needed to ensure proper treatment.  The issues regarding refugees and immigration are become increasingly complex and Trump is incapable of understanding these, of coming up with any humane and reasonable solutions, or of listening to those who do.

It doesn’t seem to be a matter of underestimating the complexity. If Trump is willingly handing off the many complexities to sanctuary city leaders and those city leaders accept it, then there wouldn’t be much of a moral problem on Trump’s part, because there is not much so complex about it. Load up the migrants on buses, make a phone call to Oakland City Hall, go to Oakland City Hall, drop off the migrants in front of Oakland City Hall, and drive back. Repeat. The Oakland city administration then takes care of all the many complexities from that point forward. The mayors are talking to the Daily Beast like they are being bullied, except the mayor of Coachella? Like migrants are being mistreated?

The complexity of the situation matters a great deal.  A city must have the resources to be able to handle a sudden and large number of new refugees.  Plans need to be made, the numbers of refugees each city can accommodate calculated, federal funds provided to support costs not manageable by city budgets alone.  Time for agencies to prepare their volunteers to assist the newcomers, for schools to make arrangements for an increased number of students, etc., etc.  A sudden arrival of large numbers of refugees could create a situation in which it was very difficult for a city/community to provide adequate and humane treatment.  The federal government should not renege on its responsibilities.

Trump has been in power for over two years and yet has failed completely in every aspect of border security and immigration.  And he knows it.

 

 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  2981
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
15 April 2019 12:05
 
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 11:32 AM
Jan_CAN - 15 April 2019 10:58 AM

This is where your difficulty lies – the desire to preserve your own genes as if these genes should purposely select for whiteness and not survival.  My genes seem to be more content with survival of my species, which is more likely to happen if humans are united rather than divided.

That is wise, because I can think of a good reason to allow non-whites to win the evolutionary race, even if it meant the extinction of whites: whites are most likely to develop adaptive reproducing intelligent robotics that will swiftly kill every human being on the planet to harvest their energy. I know that is probably not what you had in mind, but I can’t rebut it, one way or the other. Down with whites. The survival of non-whites is better than the extinction of humanity.

Nah, we humans – all of us – are all equally capable of destructive as well as productive behaviour.  But divisions between peoples and races certainly isn’t productive.  Nope, not down with whites – just down with whites-only.

 
 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15614
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
15 April 2019 12:47
 
Jan_CAN - 15 April 2019 09:14 AM
Abel Dean - 15 April 2019 07:34 AM

...
What if open acceptance for diversity happened in the paleolithic? Members of foreign tribes, who are unhappy with the wealth or politics of their own native tribes, set up camp on your territory, hunt your animals, piss in your water, and flirt with your women; and every unhappy foreigner who hears about your tribe would take advantage of it. Acceptance for diversity would not last long as a genotype.

We no longer live in the paleolithic.  There are now almost 8 billion people on the planet and we must evolve in order to live together in peace.  The way of the future is to recognize what we all have in common and embrace our diversity in culture and as a species.  Racism, nationalism, tribalism are remnants of a past we must deal with if we are to overcome these tendencies and look to a better future for humanity.  Time will tell if this can or will be accomplished.

I advise you to closely examine your motives and look at the big picture.  The views you are holding onto will hopefully, someday, become our past.

(You may choose to think that those who respond to your posts see something worth responding to.  That is not the case.  It is just that some people find it hard to refrain from rebutting prejudice.  You have changed no one’s mind here and are wasting your time.)

Jan, the social structure in the Paleolithic was a band structure. That is, there were individual residence groups ranging in population from say 15 - 50, all part of a larger band of perhaps 500 - 600. Most of the year residence groups would operate on their own, getting together for ceremonial (party) times where there would be intermixing between groups, some families might change residence groups as result of personal conflicts or such, and mate selection could occur. Strangers coming in were likely welcomed, after establishment of who they were, as more bodies to help with survival. Part of the requirements for a band structure to work is general tolerance, which is easy within an environment where the population is sparse. But some people will assume anything to justify their bigotry.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  2981
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
15 April 2019 13:08
 
burt - 15 April 2019 12:47 PM

Jan, the social structure in the Paleolithic was a band structure. That is, there were individual residence groups ranging in population from say 15 - 50, all part of a larger band of perhaps 500 - 600. Most of the year residence groups would operate on their own, getting together for ceremonial (party) times where there would be intermixing between groups, some families might change residence groups as result of personal conflicts or such, and mate selection could occur. Strangers coming in were likely welcomed, after establishment of who they were, as more bodies to help with survival. Part of the requirements for a band structure to work is general tolerance, which is easy within an environment where the population is sparse. But some people will assume anything to justify their bigotry.

Thanks, Burt.  I think it does well for us to realize that cooperation and tolerance were more common than conflict.  It is also my understanding that small groups benefit genetically from ‘breeding’ outside their group.  Genetic diversity being a strength.  Now we just have to extend our larger band to include about 8 billion.

 
 
 1 2 >