The Singapore Solution to Racism

I brought out to the Sacramento City Council a few weeks ago the solution to racism that the territory of Singapore has used lo these many years.  They had the social problem that the many cultural groups were tearing the city apart through racial divisions.  Their government's solution is to integrate the many diverse cultural groups through housing; and they made members of diverse heritages and economic classes to live side-by-side each other.  In other words, they took away the privilege to families to live anywhere they wanted to!  That's my understanding of their proposal.  Importantly, it worked, as segregation dissolved into integration of the races and a playing down of cultural differences.

Now, some years ago, some large US industrial cities tried something like the Singapore Plan for ending segregation, but with complete and utter negative results.  The real estate developers didn't go for it because they actually make substantial lucre by feeding on the fear that groups have for one another.  Specifically, once blacks moved into a neighborhood that was predominantly white, the whites would want out--to another residential location; and meantime, more and more blacks moved in!  And, the demand for housing elsewhere, continues, to the delight of the real estate and construction industries!  The beat goes on based on human fear to maintain their own ways.

Moreover, this mass migration of cultural groups around a city, even a state, may be preferred by those individuals who wish to protect their own cultural heritage and background.  Thus, Scotsmen move to where their kind are already established.  It's the American way dating back to the time mankind inherited the earth!

So, you see, there's a reason to withstand integration among peoples, and another to become unified as one people and one national heritage.  Hooray for Singapore to make a stab at ending segregation and racism on their shores.  But, you need a strong national government to pull it off, I would imagine.

Incidentally, here's an egregious example where business works against the interests and goals of  the greater society.  Yet, what good might come from integration, as bespeaks housing, for the society as a whole?

OLLI Class posits solution to ISIS Problem!

I am a member of OLLI at the University of California-Davis; and I'm taking a class entitled "The Atlantic at the Pacific."  It's structured around current topics taken up in The Atlantic magazine.  And, OLLI (Osher Lifelong Learning Institute) is a membership organization for seniors offering courses on a variety of activities at university centers across America.  In this particular course Brenda Turner and Robert Bakke are our discussion leaders.  The city of Davis, where the University is located, has been described by one of our elderly classmates as "an intellectual safe-haven" (or, words to that effect).

The general topic for discussion yesterday (class meets on Tuesday afternoons) was "Islam in the Middle-East." Though the class is only in its third session, I've noticed that the participants are really sharp and knowledgeable, perhaps egregiously so among OLLI participants nationwide.
Posing a solution to the ISIS situation in the Middle-East is not beyond this class's ken.

Briefly, participants likened the ISIS phenomenon akin to the Christian Crusade movement of the Middle Ages.  As "Marvin" pointed out, what ended that fiasco-disaster, lasting for decades, was simply a lack of continued interest and support from the countries in Europe who had initially shown great enthusiasm. That is to say, the Europeans back home became more interested and more involved in their own activities!

You can imagine what these activities might be in the Middle-East: re-building the countries ravaged by war and economic decay; developing a sound import-export network for the region; creating financial wealth for generations to come; re-shaping cities around educational meccas and artisan colonies--places to plan for carrying out the implied values in a new world order.  The vision is fraught with possibilities for growth and intellectual exuberance exploding in tangible reconstruction of an infrastructure to last for millennia.  That vision must be implanted in the minds and hearts of those already living in the area.  It is the dream of a new and long-lasting direction thereby the local inhabitants should go, based on a dedication towards unity of purpose.


They've got the oil and other natural resources to carry out the project, even as Afghanistan has proved so resource abundant to China.


Other Points made during class session (a session lasts two hours!):
1.  A Religion is a pathway to God and His creative world.
Religious persons may make claims for the pathway he endorses, such as it's the only way to God or those who do not use the pathway he uses will go to hell!  That is to say, he believes his way is the only way.  Exclusivism is simply a belief about his religion and ought not to be regarded as part of the pathway itself.
2.  Science is an invaluable means to bring people of different cultures together.  Therefore, there should be scientific evidence in support of any belief about people, e.g.. whether those of one race or gender are equal to those of the other.   For instance, women were not thought equal to men in intelligence.  Women should be subjected to men, e.g., their husbands; their brothers.  Not until the  possible deleterious effects of childbirth as well as the monthly smells of women's periods could be overcome was it likely that society would deem  men and women equals in ability to do equal work.
Similarly, not until the intelligence studies of blacks from the 1950s on, could it be proven that blacks and whites have equal thinking powers and could thus be truly considered equal in ability.
Note that the Second World War could be construed as founded on faulty science--the belief that Jews were inferior human beings, biologically, and thus ought not to be mixed with the Aryan Race of Nordics.

Constitutional Reconstruction needn't be needed!

In  an OLLI class I'm taking at University of California-Davis (see reference to class elsewhere), we recently took up the reasons for revising or chucking an "active" constitution, i.e., already in use in some particular country.

The usual reason proffered is to resolve a Constitutional Crisis.  That is to say, the country is in such dire straights that society as a whole is at risk of falling into political chaos.  I take it (since I was there) that Russia in the late 1980s took to formulating a new constitution for this reason.  

But now, there are good reasons to come up with a brand-new constitution for 'positive and beneficial' effects upon the society. Both Catalonia of Spain and Scotland of the UK envision an independence state within some confederation of independent states, such as exists in the Russian Federation.  As independents, they can have their own methods of doing things.