len3.8 said:
I wish you would go further and explain why there are differences in the way that those people live, why there are differences in the educational system that they are given. I really think the "Cycle theory" (My label) that you put out there is pretty accurate.
The differences appear to be genetics-based. There are now a multitude of separated identical twins studies which compare IQ, crime rates, education levels, income levels, standardized test scores, etc., and find that such separated twins tend to do about the same regardless of the socioeconomics of their adopted families. Also, similar studies exist which account for mixed-race adoptions, etc., and do correlations between biological siblings and/or parents and adopted siblings and/or parents. In both behavioral tendencies and "performance," the strongest components are genetic.
Therefore, I would conclude that people in such straits are victims of their own biology. Poverty does not cause crime. There are a zillion poor nations which do not have these types of behavioral defects. The causation is the reverse...crime causes poverty. Violent crime is ultimately self-defeating because it precludes long-term endeavors. In Africa, school construction is halted often because people steal the copper piping, telephone systems construction suffers from people stealing the wiring, etc. It's a matter of criminality preventing the type of collective moving forward necessary for a people to thrive. But, this all stems from lack of ability to grasp abstracts such as the future. Stealing wire now helps one now but hurts all putative future students, the next generation, etc.
The ignorance is rampant, it would seem.
Ignorance is usually caused by low intelligence. I have never met a smart person who didn't know a lot. In fact, one of the ways we spot smart people is by how much they know and dumb people by how little they know. The ability to know lots of things is one of the side effects of being smart.
I agree that the education levels are not where they should be.
I went to a blue-collar, rural school. Some kids were smart. Some were dumb. Those who were the latter tended to have less "education," to know less, and were able to do less. It's all a matter of innate attributes, really. You cannot teach a retarded kid to be smart. There's a lot that can be done which isn't, but the fundamental things are still the case. If you aren't 6'6" you probably won't play in the NBA no matter how much you're coached.
I also know to some degree what has limited those education levels.. I think that ignorance does begat ignorance. Failure to thrive has resulted into such a destructive nature, that it has divided into a sub culture... Conditioning is one of the hardest things to erase... It will take a long time....
I disagree. Culture is a reflection of the average attributes of a population. Stupid is as stupid does. One cannot "condition out" lack of intelligence or hereditary diabetes or shortness. These maladies exist and are passed through genes. People look like their parents, are similarly sized and shaped as their parents, and tend to behave like their parents. It is not so much because of examples, rather, it is innate attributes which lead to specific decisionmaking paths. There are many examples of ghetto children who are adopted into rich families. Suffice it to say that, no matter what age they are adopted at, they tend to underperform their adopted siblings.
Smart people born into ghettos get out, become successful, and never look back.
As for "failure to thrive," I think it is a bit unrealistic to expect someone who cannot ultimately learn to read at beyond a 4th grade level to be able to "thrive" in competition with someone who reads at a 12th grade level. Laziness could be blamed, certainly, but industriousness is another hereditary quality. There are animals which could be deemed "lazy" because evolution has led them to it. But, a really dumb person who doesn't see any real "reason" to work would be hard to convince to be other than lazy even if such a rationale were readily obvious to one of higher perspicacity. I do not blame people in some sort of judgmental fashion for supposedly voluntary vices. I think what we have here is an accident of biology which is causing a lot of suffering. And all the finger-pointing and "N-word" dropping in the world isn't going to change what IS. Bloodhounds don't usually win races against greyhounds because the latter are biologically faster. If we assumed that intelligence had something to do with the amount of money a person could expect to make, it would not be hard to conceive of the possibility that those of lesser capability would end up pooled together and those of greater capability would be elsewhere with far larger houses.
Let's also recall that the wealth gap here has defied ALL attempts to remedy it, even with direct cash payments to the poor. Also, look at things like lotteries. They are the government ITSELF preying on poor people, on the relatively less intelligent. The poor smoke, drink, play lotteries, and engage in other self-destructive vices at FAR higher rates than the rich, and this is typically because those who had the brains to realized that playing the lottery was a waste of money. Saving for the future, delaying gratification, taking the three lollipops tomorrow, etc., are things that only make themselves apparent when you have a firm grasp of the abstract.
I notice that you also ask about the education system "given" these classes of persons.
I say to that, well, the school is only as good as the students, isn't it? The teachers, also, but if you filled a school with kids of lower intelligence who were also very violent, you would not tend to outperform the state average on tests, would you? The truly intelligent ghetto children are all in magnet schools, thankfully kept AWAY from their peers. The rest are left to daycare. Most are virtually ineducable. So, their teachers don't even bother trying. And, what teacher would WANT employment in such an environment. Sorry, but these schools are NOT filled with children who are just misunderstood and who really need a white knight savior to come in and "get it" like you see in the movies. That's a ridiculous and racist conceit. The problem is that good teachers, who CAN, go elsewhere rather than endure the threat of violence and the gauntlet of students who are unwilling and incapable of learning. So, you have less qualified teachers teaching less qualified students, who collectively underperform no matter HOW MUCH money you spend. DC should know, we are #1 in the nation in per capita spending on public schools, exceeding $10,000 per student per year, yet turning out a city 40% of which is at 4th grade or below. You could spend $100,000 and not make a difference. The violent kids come to school and be violent and the dumb kids come and be dumb. It's just how they are and you ain't gonna spank it out of them. Their violent dads are in jail, often, because of how THEY were. It'd be nice to believe that this could be taught out, that these things could be squashed, but the movies are just twisted fantasies. Reality is far harsher. And, reality is why people who SHOULD be grateful, peaceful, and thankful are the EXACT OPPOSITE.
They were SHOOTING at those who came to rescue them. What does this sound like to you? What is the first adjective that pops into your head? Driving away someone there to save you? What word sums that up? Sorry, but this behavior is so extremely self-destructive that I do not believe that it could be counseled out. It's just so OVERTLY self-defeating. Think about the parable of the scorpion and the frog.
Pour water on me and I will most likely respond with something more than a stern look.
