Edit: also, the best book I have read on the more modern problem of violence and urban decay in northern American cities is "Devil's Night" by Ze'Ev Chafets http://www.amazon.com/Devils-Night-Other-Detroit-Vintage-ebo...
As an American who hadn't lived aboard I'd read that and think "Wow, that place must be pretty boring". But, living in Tokyo for many years, while I certainly see those elements, especially in business, the reality is I feel more free here than the USA.
You can drink anywhere, parks, streets, etc unlike the "freedom USA". You can party as long as you want. There's no curfews (California has a 2am curfew on liquor so almost all clubs close before 2am. NYC has a 4am curfew, Tokyo has no curfew. Most clubs/bar are open til 5-6am and there are plenty of places to party after). On top of which there are stores/clubs/groups that cater to nearly every interest.
I'm not trying to suggest Tokyo is better. I'm only trying to clarify that "more rules" doesn't directly translate into "less freedom". It could just as easily be the rule "do whatever you want as long as you are responsible about it" where as in the USA as far as I can tell there are way more rules (ie, laws) trying to restrict what you can do. Maybe those are in response to the issues you brought up though where because of diversity people don't feel connected to each other and therefore don't feel a responsibility to be responsible about their activities so laws are added to try to reel them in.
I wonder how that could possibly happen after 350 years of forcible familial separation, extermination of cultural practices, arbitrary rules enforced at crack of a whip and gunbarrel, and prohibition from receiving education.
● And Europeans went through thousands of years of inter-european wars, a plague that killed off 1/4 of the population, 2 world wars, muslim invasions, and mongolian invasions. Not to mention suppressing education and science and causing centuries of dark ages due to religious extremism.
● And Cambodians went through a genocide where Po Pots waged a communist war against all intellectuals, teachers, and high achievers that killed off 25% of the cambodian population.
● And Bulgarians went through 500 years of Turkish rule which included mass killings and slavery and left "its culture shattered and separated from Europe for 500 years". Followed by devastating communism.
● Those educated in more than just American History know that this list goes on and on and spans thousands of years. Everyone's been through hell. Suffering is not an excuse of one's own problems.
Blaming problems on others does not empower a group to fix problems within it's own community. Plus, the groups with the problems we discussed (lack of family structure, culture, education, etc) have them even in countries that did not "separate them for 350 years, exterminate their cultural practices, whip them or prohibit them from receiving education".
Vilifying one group and victimizing another doesn't help anyone. You just did the very thing I described in my original post "Homogenous societies [...] are more responsible for their failures and successes than diverse societies. They have no one to blame but themselves. They cannot pass off their suffering or their problems onto others. [and force themselves to improve]"
I wonder what the achievement rates look like for groups for which that isn't the case, who still live in a country controlled by another group? For example, Kurds in Turkey.
If we take Israel as an example, the way post-Holocaust Jews empowered themselves to fix their own oppression was to create a new country they controlled, win a war of independence defending it, and then emigrate there en masse. A parallel philosophy has at times also been popular among Black Americans, in that case known as Black Nationalism or Afro-Nationalism (subtly different terms depending on the focus), i.e. that Black Americans should control their own destiny in their own country, which requires, as a prerequisite, declaring independence from white-controlled America. But that movement has not been successful, in part because of the lack of any agreement on where the country would be located (various locations in both North America and Africa have been proposed), and in part because the Integrationist philosophy, holding that Black Americans are Americans, not a separate nation, has eclipsed Afro-Nationalism in popularity. There have been experiments in setting up an African-American state in Africa (Liberia), and also attempts to set up Black-controlled enclaves within the United States (one of the goals of the Black Panther movement), but they have been mostly unsuccessful. Actually the viewpoints of the Black Panthers on cultural cohesion and healthy communities sound not too different from what you've been mentioning in this thread.
It is even harder to find people who will write politically incorrect opinions under their real name. Frankly, I would advise against it. The internet is written in permanent ink.
I'm not familiar with the Swiss model, but in Israel:
- You must have gun license, which are strictly controlled and must be renewed every 3 years[1]
- You get a one-time supply of 50 bullets, which cannot be replenished[1]
The 2011 attempted assassination of a US representative renewed the national gun control debate. Gun advocates claim mass-casualty events are mitigated and deterred with three policies: (a) permissive gun laws, (b) widespread gun ownership, (c) and encouragement of armed civilians who can intercept shooters. They cite Switzerland and Israel as exemplars. We evaluate these claims with analysis of International Crime Victimization Survey (ICVS) data and translation of laws and original source material. Swiss and Israeli laws limit firearm ownership and require permit renewal one to four times annually. ICVS analysis finds the United States has more firearms per capita and per household than either country. Switzerland and Israel curtail off-duty soldiers' firearm access to prevent firearm deaths. Suicide among soldiers decreased by 40 per cent after the Israeli army's 2006 reforms. Compared with the United States, Switzerland and Israel have lower gun ownership and stricter gun laws, and their policies discourage personal gun ownership.
[1] http://www.jpost.com/National-News/Israeli-gun-control-regul...
That is, I've never owned a gun. I have a friend who owns something like 15 guns. I don't think it's necessarily accurate to say our gun ownership rate is 7.5. I mean, I think "per capita" almost always means "average (mean)", but I feel like the rate in my example should be 0.5, not 7.5.
It isn't so simple to compare country XYZ to the USA, especially a homogenous society like Switzerland with different military requirements compared to the US with a vastly less analogous population and training.
Gun violence is heavily skewed to poor areas; go to a wealthy area and people leave their doors/cars unlocked -- near zero crime.
Now show me a mass shooter that has not had serious, prior mental health problems.
I'm not sure what that means exactly but I think it indicates a culture of aggression, bullying, anger, self importance, and when coupled with loose gun laws it means lots of guns get fired.
In Manhattan, whilst watching the cockroaches in my hotel room and perusing the brown paper bag full of porn mags I found behind the bed, I heard someone rattling my door quite loudly so I yelled out 'hey', and he replied 'sorry man, i thought it was my room'.
In Virginia I was driving on a side road that I thought should lead back to the 'blue ridge parkway'. I pulled over to take a piss in the bushes, and whilst pissing I noticed a dead deer with a bullet hole in its neck.