Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to Pick a Mate (1946)

gutenberg.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 155 posts

Re: How to Pick a Mate (1946)

#131

Post by matheusmoreira »

Veraticus wrote: post #117
matheusmoreira wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the way cultures and people have changed since time immemorial. Yeah, because some empire came and killed your people off and conquered your lands and enslaved your survivors and erased your culture so they could replace it their own. Not because people wiped themselves off the map because they wouldn't have children.

Cultures are and always have been constantly shifting and changing; conquest is one method of that happening, as you point out, but is far from the only one. Immigration, emigration, catastrophe, technological progress, climate change... all result in the movement of people and the shifting of national and cultural boundaries. No culture is "erased" as a result of this. Even if Japan fails to have children, Japanese…

> Even if Japan fails to have children, Japanese culture and the Japanese nation will continue.

No. Nations are a collection of people with shared ethnicity, land, culture, language, history. If the japanese people disappear, the nation will also disappear. It's not going to magically continue just because the country of Japan is still there. Can't have a nation without its people.

Re: How to Pick a Mate (1946)

#132

Post by Veraticus »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #131
Veraticus wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cultures are and always have been constantly shifting and changing; conquest is one method of that happening, as you point out, but is far from the only one. Immigration, emigration, catastrophe, technological progress, climate change... all result in the movement of people and the shifting of national and cultural boundaries. No culture is "erased" as a result of this. Even if Japan fails to have children, Japanese…

> Even if Japan fails to have children, Japanese culture and the Japanese nation will continue. No. Nations are a collection of people with shared ethnicity, land, culture, language, history. If the japanese people disappear, the nation will also disappear. It's not going to magically continue just because the country of Japan is still there. Can't have a nation without its people.

No. Nations are lines drawn on a map. The people inside need have nothing in common other than geographic proximity.

Japan will exist as long as people live there and call it Japan. It has nothing to do with ethnicity, land, culture, or history.

Re: How to Pick a Mate (1946)

#133

Post by matheusmoreira »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #119
matheusmoreira wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Japanese talk only of extinction of the pure Japan > Japan will persist > with a normal mix of people from around the world > creating a new culture So what you're saying is the actual japanese people will go extinct and all the immigrants who actually have children will replace them and create a new japanese culture. And you see nothing wrong with that at all.

That's typical hyperbole, and not moving the discussion forward. Nobody, not even the Japanese government expects that. They are anticipating a difficulty maintaining their culture against mixing with the world. Which has actually been going on for 70 years now, and continues at a breakneck pace. Japanese people will come to include all sorts of people, who will happily live together and move forward. Without our per…

> Nobody, not even the Japanese government expects that.

Are you sure?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-64373950

> They are anticipating a difficulty maintaining their culture against mixing with the world.

Of course. If you don't have children, then you need immigration from countries that do. That will obviously change your culture.

A nation is made up of people of a shared origin, history, culture, ethnicity, language. If you replace the people with immigrants and they create a new culture, the nation is no more.

> Japanese people will come to include all sorts of people, who will happily live together and move forward.

That's like saying white people will come to include all sorts of people.

Re: How to Pick a Mate (1946)

#134

Post by matheusmoreira »

Veraticus wrote: post #132
matheusmoreira wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even if Japan fails to have children, Japanese culture and the Japanese nation will continue. No. Nations are a collection of people with shared ethnicity, land, culture, language, history. If the japanese people disappear, the nation will also disappear. It's not going to magically continue just because the country of Japan is still there. Can't have a nation without its people.

No. Nations are lines drawn on a map. The people inside need have nothing in common other than geographic proximity. Japan will exist as long as people live there and call it Japan. It has nothing to do with ethnicity, land, culture, or history.

Nonsense.

> nation

> A people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language

There are nations without states. There are also nation states. The latter is more precise than country which does not imply any dominant ethnic group.

Re: How to Pick a Mate (1946)

#135

Post by Veraticus »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #134
Veraticus wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Nations are lines drawn on a map. The people inside need have nothing in common other than geographic proximity. Japan will exist as long as people live there and call it Japan. It has nothing to do with ethnicity, land, culture, or history.

Nonsense. > nation > A people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language There are nations without states. There are also nation states. The latter is more precise than country which does not imply any dominant ethnic group.

If you don’t have the intellectual capacity to continue that’s okay. I understand ethnostatists get easily confused by ambiguity and historical fact.

Re: How to Pick a Mate (1946)

#136

Post by matheusmoreira »

Veraticus wrote: post #113
matheusmoreira wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Forcing women to be birthing factories permanently hitched to a man for their own safety and security is a worse outcome than the cessation of economic or population growth. Worse for whom? For women personally, probably. For nations? For the species? I don't know.

I thought nations and the species were composed of women, so what is worse for women is probably worse for them too. Or are women outside of nations and the species?

Come on. Life depends on reproduction to sustain itself. That's completely at odds with the current status quo where both men and women postpone or even forgo reproduction for economic reasons. How are you supposed to have a human race if it doesn't reproduce?

What's good for the individual does not necessarily align with what's good for the collective.

Re: How to Pick a Mate (1946)

#137

Post by Veraticus »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #136
Veraticus wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought nations and the species were composed of women, so what is worse for women is probably worse for them too. Or are women outside of nations and the species?

Come on. Life depends on reproduction to sustain itself. That's completely at odds with the current status quo where both men and women postpone or even forgo reproduction for economic reasons. How are you supposed to have a human race if it doesn't reproduce? What's good for the individual does not necessarily align with what's good for the collective.

There are 8 billion people on the planet and the population is still growing. Concern trolling about the future of humanity itself is pretty dumb given that, don't you think?

Though maybe not quite as silly as claiming that the individual desires of women don't matter but the individual desires of men do, given that there are more women than men. Certainly women's voices compromise more of the collective than men's voices, given there are more women, hmm?

Re: How to Pick a Mate (1946)

#138

Post by Veraticus »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #133
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's typical hyperbole, and not moving the discussion forward. Nobody, not even the Japanese government expects that. They are anticipating a difficulty maintaining their culture against mixing with the world. Which has actually been going on for 70 years now, and continues at a breakneck pace. Japanese people will come to include all sorts of people, who will happily live together and move forward. Without our per…

> Nobody, not even the Japanese government expects that. Are you sure? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-64373950 > They are anticipating a difficulty maintaining their culture against mixing with the world. Of course. If you don't have children, then you need immigration from countries that do. That will obviously change your culture. A nation is made up of people of a shared origin, history, culture, ethnicity, l…

Culture is changing constantly; the idea that there's a fixed point there is absurd, because again, there is nothing inherent to a nation other than lines drawn on an arbitrary map.

White people already do include all sorts of people -- whiteness is, obviously, not a single unified ethnicity, national, cultural, linguistic, or historical background but an aesthetic conception of someone's skin color. Because ethnostatism is stupid and intellectually inconsistent.

Re: How to Pick a Mate (1946)

#139

Post by matheusmoreira »

Veraticus wrote: post #135
matheusmoreira wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonsense. > nation > A people who share common customs, origins, history, and frequently language There are nations without states. There are also nation states. The latter is more precise than country which does not imply any dominant ethnic group.

If you don’t have the intellectual capacity to continue that’s okay. I understand ethnostatists get easily confused by ambiguity and historical fact.

I'm not confused at all. I have no reason to doubt my understanding of things at this time. First you redefined words and contradicted dictionary and encyclopedic definitions of simple concepts and terms. Now you're calling me a stupid, confused, mentally incapable "ethnostatist". This borders on gaslighting.

Re: How to Pick a Mate (1946)

#140

Post by matheusmoreira »

Veraticus wrote: post #137
matheusmoreira wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come on. Life depends on reproduction to sustain itself. That's completely at odds with the current status quo where both men and women postpone or even forgo reproduction for economic reasons. How are you supposed to have a human race if it doesn't reproduce? What's good for the individual does not necessarily align with what's good for the collective.

There are 8 billion people on the planet and the population is still growing. Concern trolling about the future of humanity itself is pretty dumb given that, don't you think? Though maybe not quite as silly as claiming that the individual desires of women don't matter but the individual desires of men do, given that there are more women than men. Certainly women's voices compromise more of the collective than men's v…

> Concern trolling about the future of humanity itself is pretty dumb given that, don't you think?

No, I don't think so. It's still growing for now because there are still countries with birth rates above replacement. It is slowing down though. It's expected to peak and start its decline at the end of this century.

https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/07/1122272

Post reply on HN