Interesting analysis to be sure. Would you think that even in the USA there are all three cultures existing simultaneously? We hunt still but raise the animals we "hunt" now. We grow the food we eat on large farms. And we have factories to make goods. The biggest part of our economy services each other. Can this fit into your analysis?

Secondly, how is Obama imposing an agrarian culture in an industrial one. I am missing something there

Well said...there is also another factor...development of the mind...the progressive kind, those attracted to marx, stalin, etc seems to have never developed a connection to one.

Well said...there is also another factor...development of the mind...the progressive kind, those attracted to marx, stalin, etc seems to have never developed a connection to one.

There are only 3 mutually exclusive cultures in the world: hunter-gatherer; agrarian; industrial. Hunter-gatherer culture is defined by foraging and hunting big game, and living off the land. Agrarian culture is defined by extraction of wealth from the earth. That's why every third world society is dominated by agriculture, mining and fishing, and that's where the concept of property rights and inheritance rights in land originated. Industrial culture is defined by extraction of wealth from ideas. That's why, only in industrial societies, do you have intellectual property, along with its protections, viz., patents, trademarks, copyrights, universal education, capital markets, etc. Notice that each of these cultures have the same look and feel around the world. We'd all be more comfortable in London, Paris, Berlin or Tokyo than we'd be in Africa, Latin America or parts of Asia. It's also important to realize that these cultures are mutually exclusive, which means that only one of them can prevail in any geographic area. As it turns out, hunter-gatherer is trumped by agrarian, and agrarian is trumped by industrial. If we look at things from this perspective, then there is no black culture or white culture or any other ethnic culture. There's only hunter-gatherer, agrarian or industrial. The problem with Obama and his ilk is that they're attempting to impose an agrarian culture on an industrial one, and are "surprised" when things don't work, especially when they should have known better. For their stupidity to have persisted for what's now a century can only be blamed on hubris and a complete unwillingness to admit that they made a bad mistake; one cannot conclude otherwise.

One of the things that is not discussed in this drama about slavery is the fact that both blacks and whites were on both sides of that issue. It's generally presented as evil whites enslaving blacks, and good whites and blacks promoting abolition. I believe that it's that way, because it would force blacks to look at their own dirty linen before bashing whites for an institution that they played a vital role in creating. Of course, whites took advantage of that system as well, but when it was introduced to America, slavery was "normal." It had been around for thousands of years, and it wasn't until the founding fathers took on the ideas of the rights of man, and wrote, "we hold these truths to be self evident...," that the idea of slavery took on a different cast. So, we can't judge those folks too harshly, even though what they did then is anathema today. It's also interesting that, immediately after the Revolution, many slave holders freed their slaves, adding to the population of blacks who'd never been enslaved, having been indentured servants early on. Another thing that's never discussed is the fact that the industrial revolution played a decisive role in the elimination of slavery because, rather than extracting wealth from the earth, as is common in agrarian culture, the driver was extraction of wealth from ideas. This was completely incompatible with a slave culture: you can't force someone to think. Thus, capitalism and the industrial revolution were the practical implementers of the ideas of the rights of man. You can also notice that every society that's attempted to impose slavery in an industrial environment failed. Just note Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia as examples. One final thing. The first countries to outlaw slavery, England and the US, are the ones that are the most pilloried about slavery, even in the face of the fact that there are counties TODAY that are still engaged in that institution, and nothing is said about them, not even by a crazy street preacher. It suggests that the two countries most responsible for capitalism and the promotion of the rights of man are held to a different standard than anyone else. Where's the justice in that? It can make one think that it's not slavery that's on trial, but capitalism and the rights of man.

Ain't it the truth! And I went to a high school which bears his name, and, although I didn't know about his racism then, I never did think all that much of him. I understood for a long time that he pushed theLeague of Nations, which to me was a forerunner of the U.N., which Ayn Rand quite rightly denounced and called a "cit-
adel of global hypocrisy".

That is part of the progressive mystique...

I'm surprised that no one that I've read at this site has weighed in on Wilson's interventionist militarism coupled with his fascist-like imprisonment of anyone who spoke or wrote anything in opposition to that militaristic interventionism or his imposition of a military draft. Besides being an unabashed racist, his pursuit of European interventionism (and war) painted the battlefields of France red with (often unwilling) American blood.

Been there, read that...took me a while to shed the the thought of it.

if you read "Creature from Jekyll Island", you will also learn the Wilson was bought and sold by the originators of the Federal Reserve legislation...

True, its the entitlement and arrogance that turns me off, not the blackness. Unfortunately, Obama has encouraged those attitudes particularly in blacks since his presidency began. He has hurt the black people actually

I can c that more attention needs to be paid to learning the history of the world

As some have mentioned here...we shouldn't go nuts with this type of thing...I only celebrate this one case because woodie is the one that rekindled the whole thing. Names and code of arms mean nothing in the big picture.

DE-lite that is...they are the great unwashed!

Correct again...my friend.

I swear...none of my Swedish "Johnson" relatives ever had slaves, a few Englishmen in the wood pile, but no slaves...Laughing

Keep the people down and distracted...been this way for 8000 years or more.

A similar event just occurred at Harvard Law School ("HLS") after over a year of intense politically correct internal arguments. It seems that for over a hundred years the HLS official crest has been the same as the coat of arms of the family of one of the law school founders, a guy named Isaac Royall. Royall kept slaves. The crest has now been officially changed. Guess this means my law school tie (and that of Obama and Cruz) is now a collectors' item. I dare not wear it to any alumni gatherings, however. There is a heavily endowed Royall professorship at HLS and, to my knowledge, that name has not been changed and the endowment has not been returned to the descendants of Royall.

I think the objectionable part of your "culture" formulation is that you appear to be lumping together voluntary belief systems (e.g. islamic, socialist) which anyone can join with or withdraw from with non-voluntary characteristics (e.g. black) as to which nobody can join by any means other than birth and from which nobody can withdraw. Unless, of course, you mean to be denigrating the entitlement culture which is voluntary and which is not exclusively black. If that is so, then why title the culture as "black"?

You are so right. What matters is that that seed of communism which grew under Wilson, continues to take away freedoms from all. This is the Alinsky way of divertinala servitude of all but the elite. Race will not matter, we will all be slaves to government. We will live where they say, eat what they allow, with no property rights at al

It also should have been emphasized that he was a DEMOCRAT everytime his name was mentioned, that would have been done if he had been a Republican!

Hello Olduglycarl,
Wilson's racism was repugnant, yet it has little influence on society today compared to his progressive policies that still adversely impact us, e.g. the sixteenth amendment.
He is at the top of my list of worst presidents.
Respectfully,
O.A.

While they are at it, they might try mentioning that according the census of 1860 sixty percent of all slaves in America were owned by Blacks with two of the largest slave owners being a Black man from Charleston, SC and a Black woman from Charleston, SC. They each owned eighty four. They might also want to care to mention that the first legally owned Black slave in America was owned by a gentleman named Johnson of VA. He was Black also.