Social Evolution, and Transforming Community Development.
This letter could be to several countries. However, the Western world tends to follow the United States, at least for now. Also, it is the country I am most familiar.
The United States peoples are now understanding the United States is no longer the world leader in most areas. Even militarily its Navy has a fraction of its power due to hyper-sonic missiles ability to sink ships. Flagship aircraft carriers of its Navy are susceptible to one missile sinking it. There are only 11 U.S. aircraft carriers, 11 hyper-sonic missiles are cheap in comparison.
The United States is an experimental country with a primary characteristic that it is diverse or heterogeneous. How does an experimental diverse country adapt, fail, or succeed when it loses its place as the world’s top power and extreme wealth?
For population diversity to work a country needs to have excess wealth. Once that wealth starts to wane and disappear, diversity doesn’t work. Excess income allows for heterogeneous peoples to replace the negative aspects of living in a heterogeneous society with consumption.
In the United States money replaced the social fabric that was at one time provided by common sense, then religion, and before that a collective of homogeneous peoples. This wealth is in many forms, such as easy access to cheap goods through websites, food, entertainment, and other comforts. These things and others will become less affordable. To remove the risk of a population uprising the neo wealthy of the United States will try to create a social fabric within the confines of one’s home, and the metaverse. What will happen now that wealth and power diminish will not be positive. These letters intend to offer an option, a framework, or direction for the peoples that make up North America. That framework is based on homogenic community rather than fiat currency.
The framework
This framework is not warm and fuzzy, often solutions are difficult. Many pieces of what’s written are thoughts of change, and to mitigate worry for the future. This is an amalgamation, to bring the pieces together that many people are feeling. Its necessary to recognize and use homogeneity, with small pockets of diversity, to survive, then thrive as a different Nation.
What this framework describes are states of being for each region of the country, within one nation state. This is the base for a society trying to avoid dystopia. The three states within the state are: the homogenic, the diverse, and indigenous lands. All equal and cooperative with one another. Although it seems the same as the current 'United States', as you will read it is only similar in that both were based on the original federation of Native American tribes on the land.
First, right wrongs
It is necessary to mitigate the overhanging curse that befell the Native Americans of North America. They remain impoverished and quartered to specific insufficient lands. They wish to remain an ethnic group that still exists. For them to branch out and assimilate into the current north American landscape would see their ethnicity and race disappear. There are roughly 20,000 native Americans left with their unique ethnicity. This will continue to decline and see the racial group extinct. This is a problem that has not been solved, and won’t be without a framework that makes sense.
This is the most difficult part of the framework in that large swaths of land need to be given back to their natural inhabitants. Enough so that they can live as they once did, or without outside support. Those who are not native could join them in their lifestyle and live on the land. A recent example is the land repatriated in the Chesapeake Bay area. The land is described as the tribe’s grocery store. Hundreds of plant and animal species the tribe now has as a sustainable resource for food, craft, and medicinal purposes.
However, millions of Americans would need to be willing to rebuild their lives outside these areas. There was research at Princeton University that has shown that this is possible with little disruption. Many Americans live on the coasts, the center of the country might not be necessary but to be indigenous land. Bill Gates owns large swaths of land, perhaps his contribution could provide a large bulk of coverage that’s needed. The economics and logistics are not as much a concern, as is the will to allow for this new framework.
Embracing ethnicity
The second part of the framework is to embrace individual cultures, races and identities. This is also difficult because it is diversity that is used to contribute to the extreme wealth of a small number of individuals and families in the United States. To become less diverse, and allow for homogeneous regions within the country is a threat to the corporate structure that allows for excessive wealth for a few.
What does this mean by corporate structure? It means that the reason for diversity in today’s modern United States is largely to allow for corporations, and the status quo, to function most effectively. It wasn’t always this way, but the state has changed to be used in this way. It is difficult for people of different racial and ethnic backgrounds to use collective strength and push against authority. Thus for the wealthy it is better to have mixed peoples in the workplace. This is the same strategy in stalinist USSR, where peoples were separated from their tribal ethnic geographical regions to break up power centers pushing against the regime.
The diversity system works for the extreme wealthy, but even with this system in place it is difficult for the wealthy to maintain order. Some groups, such as African Americans, have congregated in urban regions and rebelled against the system. Through inclusion promises, DEI departments, policing reform, and massive marketing campaigns, they have successfully subdued the rebellion with little taken from their wealth.
The way this works is sociological. Diversity creates an environment where the participants focus only on the work around them. Rather than emotional interaction with people. This creates high productivity rates in the workplace. Few distractions from workplace colleagues but company forced events makes time in the workplace only for intense work. Employees are indoors for most of the day with the same people. These people are not those they are likely to relate to. To avoid boredom, having no other option but to focus is on producing more, thus removing the human element. This is the most productive form of labor management for owners and shareholders; To have diverse people not loyal to each other, but to the corporation or institution. It is dehumanizing, and it makes majority shareholders extremely wealthy.
Diversity has a place, but its fleeting
The first two structural redirections create a new country with vast areas where anyone can live a native American ethnic lifestyle. At the same time the state can have homogeneous cities and towns based on ethnic groups. There is a third.
The third group of regions allows for pockets or cities of peoples where it is completely diverse. Although, as has happened in the boroughs of New York City, they will only remain diverse for two or three generations. It is fleeting without immigration. These pockets meld into one group of multi-ethnic people with no identity. One might argue that these people have an American identity. However, that is a social construct permitted due to consumption distraction, not substance based, such as identity from race or ethnicity. American is a word for person with no identity. It has a host of negative psychological and sociological effects that are devastating to a human being. These negative effects then have their symptoms addressed with psychological drugs, addiction, over consumption, comforts, and other coping mechanisms.
Why is this necessary?
So why does the framework need to happen? Because the wealth has gone to the few. People need to work together now. To choose which of the three regions best suit a person, allows them to join one of the communities and thrive. Most of the country’s wealth has already been consolidated with little left for the general population. Future wealth has been set up to continue to congregate to them as well. This would be nearly impossible to change without bloodshed. This combined with the loss of north American hegemony will leave the general population with little. The wealthy hope to overcome this with the idea that people will own nothing and be happy. However, the contrary has shown to be true, with excess psychological illness, suicide, prescription drug use, crime, isolation, depression, low birth rates, and violence. It is more likely the masses realize the wealthy have consolidated the countries current and future wealth, as society breaks down. Society breaking down is described as the current loss of social fabric (school shootings, isolation) and the coming dystopia (the metaverse).
When the non-wealthy population realizes this on a large scale, they will want to act, but most likely not be able. Mass confiscation of wealth and removal of the new bourgeois wealthy will be nearly impossible in a diverse society. Individuals will be less inclined to band together. The old ways of correcting imbalance don’t work well, or at all in diverse societies.
With the new framework, homogeneous cities and communities will be more easily able to withstand homelessness, hunger and poverty. They will be able to help each other, and work together to pressure the wealthy to allow the country’s wealth to be used for its general population. Hopefully this will take place without violence.
Without homogeneity it will lead to chaotic stupor and internal rot. People will be confused and angry and have difficulty organizing outside their ethnic group, resulting in the dystopia of prescription drugs, mental illness and reliance on the metaverse.
The strength that is needed to stop a minority super wealthy class would require people to nearly use bloodshed. The threat is necessary, but the act would not be. The least violent and feasible option is homogeneous groups that can work together to overcome scarcity of resources. These groups can pressure the wealthy within their group, who are no different from them beyond wealth. This has happened in other countries to some degree. It helps to ensure all their peoples have a good standard of living. This can also be done in indigenous communities.
With the third type, the Diverse communities, the wealthy can continue to take advantage of a dispersed form of community. This is one of the few things that will need to be monitored by the collective federation in congress for gross violations.
Racism thrives today
There are some who may say the above three regions aren’t correct morally, or it is racist. Race is a reality that even when ignored, still exists. However, it hasn’t been ignored, and is consistently talked about in media and corporate settings, enabling racism to thrive. Racism thrives as much as any time in the history of North America. It does better fall in line with human rights, and the violence and cruelty has lessened dramatically, but it is pervasive as ever. This new framework eliminates racism.
To force people to be homogenic in a geographic region would be wrong, but that is not what is being said here. Laws would be changed to allow people to choose how they wanted to live. To ask or allow people to congregate with their own ethnic groups is not wrong. It is ok that some people would want to do this. It is also not wrong that there are some people who prefer to not be with their ethnic group, and choose to join another. Human beings often feel most comfortable and free with those to which they most relate, and that might not be ethnically for some. It is ok to feel this way.
What does the framework look like
So, what does that look like. There are some homogeneous groups already. Such as the Amish, Mennonite, Hasidic Jewish, and non-Hasidic Northeast Jewish enclaves. They are more self-sufficient and capable during difficult times. So much so that the American Jewish population is the wealthiest racial group in North America. There are also regions in the US where peoples already follow a basic ethnic history. Such as the large groups of German decedents in Pennsylvania and other states. Some French decedents in the south, etc. These people can find out what their genetic makeup is and embrace the culture of their ancestry. But more importantly they can become familiar, band together, and work for a prosperous region in which they live. The difference from today is they would not be punished for doing this.
There would also be regions such as New York City. Which would remain diverse for those who wanted to be in a diverse society, if however fleeting. They would also not be punished for doing this. Their struggle would be as it is now, in how to be sure wealth is evenly distributed.
What’s also extremely important is the dialogue and cooperation between the regions. To allow prosperity for all in an equal fashion. Like how Native American tribes had a near federalist system over the North American land they called Turtle Island before the 1400’s.
Regional cooperation
It’s important to understand what this letter is not. It is not saying racial differences should allow people to band together and attack each other. If that is the conclusion one finds, then the above is pointless. The homogeneous groups need to be equal among them. So as not to fall into jim crow era problems where wealth is skewed towards one peoples. It is also not extremism. Forcing an attempt at purity of one ethnic group by having no other genetic variant in a geographic area is unnecessary. There will be very small fringes of diversity even among a homogeneous people. If a group of peoples choose to become more homogeneous by genetics, they can genetically modify their children eventually. That would be up to each individual to decide.
It is also not hatred. Homogeneous groups must cooperate and remain in a cordial federation with the common rights and responsibilities states have now. One ethnic group is not better than another, and thus should share in resources equally. Naturally a larger ethnic group would produce and consume more resources, but not by a ratio outside the size of its population. While hatred cannot be permitted, the punishment and discouragement of homogeneous ethnic groups needs to stop as well.
Denouncing centralization
There should also not be an elite central governing class that will attempt to say it deserves more luxury than other groups because they ‘govern’. This is what communism is, and it is equally the most unacceptable thing a peoples can do as fascism.
This letter is also a plea to avoid fascist qualities and behaviors seeping into North American countries. Fascism is much more possible due to the technological advances we have had in the past 20 years. For example, surveillance of people’s movements and finances is dangerously heading towards reality. This is one of the largest threats to humanity, and must not be allowed to happen.
It is likely I will write more letters regarding the changes mentioned above. They may contain more detail on how to accomplish a new framework; or why it is a beneficial and necessary path. To reiterate, this is not an excuse to ostracize, harm, or increase inequality among racial and ethnic groups. Income and wealth inequality are at extremes with current policies. Current policies don't work at stopping an elite super wealthy class and a majority poor, current policies need to stop. An update is needed to stop creating a poor and doesn't know it class. This framework would help to change that. Although the path forward seems to promote wealth inequality, that is not the truth. The path forward requires a re-balancing of wealth to help those who are too far outside the mean. It would be done with societal structure rather than bloodshed. People are more likely to help others closest to them. Similar to how the Chinese people have all but been pulled out of poverty to a moderate standard of living in a short period of time. Allowing North American peoples to separate themselves from each other, with laws that enforce equality, is the only way that this path forward will be acceptable to all.
Reject extremism
There will be comments, questions and challenges to the path forward. That is a good thing. It will give topics to research, discuss, and write, to help guide and alleviate challenges. What isn’t helpful, but also might happen are emotional outbursts and knee jerk reactions. Those are usually based on lack of understanding, or a strong desire for something to be what it can’t.
Emotionally charged thoughts, behaviors, and actions are usually, but not always, pursuing an incorrect outcome or direction.
Media conglomerates or journalists might not like some topics written. They will attempt to discredit broad topics by finding any errors in minor details. If there are errors in minor details, the framework is malleable to minor changes, and can make slight alterations to adapt to unforeseen circumstances.
Framework execution
The path forward requires an incredible amount of thought, analysis and thorough conclusions. It must not be like the end of the civil war. This was where societal structures and laws were left to wherever the chips fell. That just creates one hundred years of social, legal, and financial battles. Execution is the most important, with details that don’t allow for manipulation, or opportunities for bad actors to take advantage of change. Which is why the monitoring by a group of elected individuals from all regions is necessary. This can be a committee created within the already available senate.
A last dangerous piece of concern is that the readers of this document use the steps to thwart the framework. They would do this by doing the opposite of each step. They would try to ensure a purely diverse country that mirrors the current inner-city New York or Chicago. This would ensure the eternal existence of the small wealthy class, and everyone else who will be poor and not know it. That scenario would likely lead to dystopia and conflict that never ends. Cooperative regions within the three outlined groups allow for the best base for the individual to thrive, within the boundaries one wants for ones self.
Steps.
There could be steps added later, as solutions to difficulties are needed with any transition.
The details of the implementation are the most important of this composition.
Dennis Clarke