Knowing that the US is probably one of the most segregated countries, this makes me smile :-)
I don't think that's accurate. Europe is almost entirely European, Asia is almost entirely Asian, Africa is almost entirely African. Even Wisconsin at 86.5% white is less white than most European countries. And Milwaukee itself is 40% black and 17.3% Latino.
The countries that come anywhere close to the US on diversity are predominantly the other countries in the Americas.
Of course Asia is full of Asians; but they represent an incredible diversity of ethnicities. In some areas, they are geographically mixed, in others not.
Moreover, if you can bisect Asians into Japanese and Koreans etc. then you can bisect whites into Irish and German, Latinos into Colombians and Venezuelans, blacks into Jamaicans and Haitians etc. And if you're going to play that game then why aren't the racially segregated areas still internally diverse in the same way? Certainly they are as much as the countries that consist almost entirely of that category of people are.
My original comment was to explain how the statement, "Knowing that the US is probably one of the most segregated countries . . . " is incorrect.
This has to be sarcasm, right?
If not, this view is very wrong because it views diversity in a manner that's purely and literally skin deep.
Which means there aren't a lot of people of any race who are culturally Japanese in Africa or culturally African American in Europe.
The category "white people in America" has that level of cultural diversity inside of it. It includes millions of first generation immigrants from all of those places. Plus millions of people descended from those cultures who over the past centuries have developed them into something uniquely American, melding them in a thousand cities with the cultures of all the other immigrant populations that have come here since then.
And we can't pretend that no country in Europe has ever sinned. Or any country anywhere for that matter.
Segregation is probably a more chronic problem there than it is or was ever here.
But Saint-Denis is not a rich neighborhood.
It's what the French call a "banlieue."
Literally translated, the word means "suburb," but
it has come to be associated with the depressed, mostly
immigrant neighborhoods on the outskirts of the city
where unemployment is high and opportunity scarce.
"If you look at the situation of people, you
understand the path they have taken to become a
terrorist or whatever you call it," Villain told
CBS News correspondent Vladmir Duthiers. "Exclusion
makes the terrorist, in my opinion."
.
.
.
The French government does not keep statistics
based on race or religion, but surveys have found
unemployment is as high as 30 percent in these immigrant
neighborhoods.[1]
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/paris-banlieues-seeds-of-terror...
Segregation in France is absolutely nothing like what you see in America where, outside three or four major cities, different races, no matter how rich or poor, are absolutely cordoned off from one another and do not ever attend the same schools [1]. If you actually go to Saint-Denis you will find everything from Russian Jews to Moroccan Muslims to Nigerians to good ol' fashioned ("from before Napoleon took over the world") French families. It's an extremely diverse hood, the kind you'd only saw 30 years ago in America's largest cities.
[1] https://www.vox.com/2018/3/5/17080218/school-segregation-get...
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/16/segreg...
If that’s the case then I disavow all things “modern.” Nothing exciting to me at all about putting up walls between me and the people I actually see in person.
Maybe this is why I deleted my facebook a few years back, call when a few texts become a back and forth conversation, push for meet ups, and don’t use Tinder. I really don’t want to live in a world where the majority of our human-to-human communications is tapping on glass.
You baby-boomers need to speak for yourselves only and keep me out of it.
(Assuming you mean "modern" as in contemporary. If you mean the more canonical "modern", sorry for the react.)
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [email protected] and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.
- the media
— the capitalist class
Regarding the chances of arrest, that makes sense to me. I suspect the police are rationally responding to the likelihood of violence.
Regarding the fellows who are considering mass murder, I suggest you notify the police.
Nowadays, physical proximity means less and less. Relationships are even becoming less integrated. Yes you can interact with other people, but only as coworkers and paid professionals. Don't cross any weird lines. Even asking someone to engage in friend activities is getting more rare as most people prefer online friends, since they have more in common with them. The throughly modern American asks "Why would you need to be in physical proximity to someone anyway unless it was necessary for work? That's so creepy!". Lately, Tinder and friends have really stripped the last actual need for non-work physical proximity with any indivuals who have not been pre-screened via the algorithm.