Why do we have Racial Unrest today? (#3 of 3)

There is a valid assertion that by providing government assistance that assures survivability and is available for virtually an unlimited period we cause the receiving group to not only become dependent on such support, but to train them to ignore all other potential efforts to be self-sufficient.

But given that such dependence now exists, to discuss whether or not it should have been done is a useless exercise.

To be "given" support over an extended period of time with no requirement or expectation of moving from that support to self-support creates a sense of shame (usually deeply buried) and compensatory attitudes to bolster a sense of self-worth.  For kids without fathers present in their daily lives, they substitute gangs and gang membership.  To support their self-worth, they develop their own sense of right and wrong that supports their own actions, regardless of what those actions are, as "right."  And they totally ignore efforts from "others" to change that view, because to change would necessitate that they acknowledge that their previous actions were not "good" or "right."  Oh, there are some that see the bigger picture, but not many.

It is this unwillingness to change, and the underlying anger that supports it, that creates the real problem for those kids, their neighborhoods, and ultimately for America as a nation.  What can or should be done?

I freely admit that I don't know.

But there are some ideas that might be worthy of at least talking about.

Supposing an organized effort was made to take every single child that did not have a father present and employed out of the neighborhood and put them in a proven, approved foster home that had access to a good school district with support to encourage achievement?

What if the rules on schooling provided not only for school choice, but for schools to be able to bar  disruptive kids from the campus, thus allowing students who wanted to learn the teacher time to enable that desire?

What if disruptive kids were required to be put in a military type, government organization where they were supervised and required to work each day for a menial wage until they came to recognize the advantages of learning?

How about city officials discussing with gangs the possibility of them becoming screening groups for calling in regular Police forces, making them officially responsible for the safety of their community?  That would give them status but also make them responsible...a good pairing for learning to live a useful life.

Are these answers?  Probably not...but it is time we all recognized the very real and difficult problems that our citizens who live in the inner cities have and work to provide good and beneficial options for those there who want improvement.

Unfortunately I don't see our government, at any level, having any real interest in solving the situation.  They just want it to be quiet: quiet summers, quiet desperation, quiet unhappiness.  And that is just an abdication of their respective oath's of office.  Until we demand and see that that attitude changes, we will have to look to private organizations to move forward.  And I hope that all of them, both civic and religious groups, step up...and soon.  Each of us, as citizens of a great nation, should have available to us a path to success.  That path isn't free, and it isn't easy, but it should exist so that every citizen with purpose and motivation can travel forward...and upward.

President Obama...and ISIS

At the moment, many are concerned about the ongoing actions of the group known as ISIS (or, as the current administration curiously labels it, ISIL).  There are really only two major concerns: 1) why the apparent delay or failure of this administration to have a strategy already prepared for a group who's existence and power is no surprise; and 2) what should that strategy be.

The first answer is fairly straightforward. Mr Obama has shown himself to have little or no interest in devoting the hard work necessary to be an effective President. There is a reason all of our Presidents have looked so worn down after their period in the Oval Office. It is hard, worrisome work. Mr. Obama prefers raising money, making speeches (often including totally unacceptable lies and never followed up on by hard work to make promises a reality), and playing golf while enjoying the image and perks of being President. Also, while he might have proven that he can play well with others, he also has shown a very thin skinned inability to work well with others. He simply doesn't want to do the work of being President, and doesn't want to be hounded or found fault with for that lack of work.

The second question is much harder: what to do. This country...and the world, really...has often shown little initial interest in people being subjected to genocidal and other treatment. The Nazi's are on point, and there are many instances on the African continent and in Asia that come to mind. We need a personal threat that smacks of reality or an actual attack to get our attention and inspire purposeful action. I would think that a lot of governmental people are very nervous about the depleted condition of our military, so I think the first step should be a re-evaluation of needs and purposes and a concomitant authorization of funds to make our military capable of responding to any number of threats.

Additionally, our military and Homeland Security should already have (and if not, to quickly develop) plans on how degrade the military abilities of ISIS (or, as the administration prefers to call them, for reasons unfathomable to me, ISIL) and screen those coming to the U.S. (including finally a securitization of our borders so that we actually know who is arriving) to prevent individual terror acts. And finally, it would seem obvious that any comments that are made by the President...or his "people"...should avoid phrases that seem limiting. One doesn't have to threaten; just indicate a willingness to do "what must be done" to protect and defend. Declaring that no military action involving "boots on the ground" may be true...but you are absolutely insane to verbalize it. Let those who would harm us worry about what we will and will not do...don't hand it to them on a silver platter.

Anyone have a better idea?

North Korean questions...and others

No one seems to know what to do in response to recent North Korean acts of war toward South Korea.Of course, that raises the question of why American troops are STILL in Korea so long after a truce was declared...especially in light of the built up state of South Korean military capability.  

But...

does anyone question for even one moment that should America pull out of South Korea and it's treaty obligations, South Korea would be over-run by the North within a year at most?  So, ... the question comes down to, "Why should we care?"

And since Japan, if I remember correctly, is limited to defensive armament that cannot threaten the mainland of either Korea or China, I suspect that it would not be many years before the Chinese and a unified Korea would cast greedy eyes and ultimately successfully take control of Japan.  Again, the question is, "Why should we care?"

And that leads to our European involvement.  While it is unclear what effect a withdrawal of American troops from Europe would have on their security, it is entirely possible that if they perceive a threat from the east an offer would materialize that would cover America's costs of keeping the troops in place.  But the question still must be answered..."why should we care?"  Indeed.

The world expresses resentment to the presence of our troops anywhere in the world.  There is no appreciation, no gratitude, no benefit to America for our soldiers' presence or for the danger to their lives.

The world expresses resentment for our foreign aid, and we apparently cannot prevent it's use for anything the receiving nations wishes.  Foreign Aid is just a way of taking the tax money from poor and middle-class Americans and giving it Rich People in foreign countries.

Membership in the U.N. gives us the privilege paying great sums of our tax dollars so that we can be insulted by the rest of the world, and allow their "Diplomats" into our country to flout our laws with impunity.

What, indeed, is the benefit to the United States of America?  Are we genetically dependent on appearing to "be the Boss?"

Consider:

If we discontinued all this unwelcome involvement, I suspect that we would have the military capability to actually secure our borders, the funds to insure that any attack on the territory of the United States would result in the destruction of the attacker, the money to pay down and eliminate our debt and, with just a little bit of luck, enough left over so that scientists could develop a genome that would result increating a moral, honest politician, the cloning of which would insure that our federal government, like the States and the rest of us, had to live within it's means and not infringe on our personal freedoms....just maybe.