There are lot of opinions, on what it is supposed to be, technical sociological definitions, and political theories.
I won't get into whether they are right, or whether they are wrong.
I am more into Realpolitik, observing the actual outcomes of these stated policy objectives. If you study in-group/out-group relations, the state, can't really "force," different segments of society to accept each other, all it can do, is make laws equal. Which, since at least the late 1960's, they already have been.
Though it can try to indoctrinate, against the will of families and parents, in an attempt to create new epistemological realities, (as the USSR did for over eighty years.) Folks that study the science of in-group/out-group behavior, will note, that this is still, a losing battle. Nature is, and always will be, more powerful than nurture.
What these types of policies really boil down to in the end, IMO, are nothing more than large scale chaos, and vast social balkanization schemes, while there is really, a larger agenda to reorder how the economy, on an international level is worked, according to technocratic principles. It is really a distraction for most of the folks that aren't paying attention to a larger agenda, being foisted upon all parties, while they argue and fight among themselves, and while their common oppressor, destroys all of their previously cherished ancestral ways and means of living before.
For the intellectuals that wheel out, "diversity, equity, and inclusion?" The end game, is complete social control over society, they care very little about civil rights or civil liberties, so, why should they care about, "diversity, equity, and inclusion," in the first place? It is nothing but a cheap distraction to get folks fighting, while the real agenda is enacted.
You won't find nations like China, or Russia, or India, or other more homogeneous nations, quibbling over such silly things. They have real problems to deal with, and solve.
I know, you totally missed the point about false memories and cultural influences. I get it. I tried to make it as simple for you as I could, but clearly, you aren't capable of thinking at that level.
I know, you totally missed the point about false memories and cultural influences. I get it. I tried to make it as simple for you as I could, but clearly, you aren't capable of thinking at that level.
Remarkable how you know with 100% certainty while possessing 0% facts regarding the false memories of others. It's as though you struggle to think on a level that's barely child-like.
They weren't there because it never happened. More often than not, the returning soldiers were the ones doing the protesting. They knew the Vietnam War was utter bullshit.
Because we were imposing a form of government on these people they didn't want. The people we supported were seen as French Collaborators, while Ho Chi Mihn was seen as a national hero because he fought against the French and the Japanese. And the soldiers who got sent over there realized that pretty quickly. So we bombed, defoliated, burned, raped and murdered our way through the country for eight years, knowing damned well the when we left, the Collaborators would be overthrown (which, of course, they were.)
Our leaders knew this, this is why the leaking of the Pentagon Papers was such a big deal. It's why you saw so many returning vets like John Kerry join anti-War movements after they returned.
(My biggest complaint with John Kerry was that he didn't embrace his previous stance, and Bush beat him over the head with it.)
What happened was that much like Germany after WWI, we had a "Stabbed in the Back" myth emerge. We would have won the war, if it weren't for those meddling kids. And the imaginary "Hippy Spitting on returning soldiers" because a part of that mythology.
Because we were imposing a form of government on these people they didn't want. The people we supported were seen as French Collaborators, while Ho Chi Mihn was seen as a national hero because he fought against the French and the Japanese. And the soldiers who got sent over there realized that pretty quickly. So we bombed, defoliated, burned, raped and murdered our way through the country for eight years, knowing damned well the when we left, the Collaborators would be overthrown (which, of course, they were.)
Our leaders knew this, this is why the leaking of the Pentagon Papers was such a big deal. It's why you saw so many returning vets like John Kerry join anti-War movements after they returned.
(My biggest complaint with John Kerry was that he didn't embrace his previous stance, and Bush beat him over the head with it.)
What happened was that much like Germany after WWI, we had a "Stabbed in the Back" myth emerge. We would have won the war, if it weren't for those meddling kids. And the imaginary "Hippy Spitting on returning soldiers" because a part of that mythology.
Because we were imposing a form of government on these people they didn't want. The people we supported were seen as French Collaborators, while Ho Chi Mihn was seen as a national hero because he fought against the French and the Japanese. And the soldiers who got sent over there realized that pretty quickly. So we bombed, defoliated, burned, raped and murdered our way through the country for eight years, knowing damned well the when we left, the Collaborators would be overthrown (which, of course, they were.)
Our leaders knew this, this is why the leaking of the Pentagon Papers was such a big deal. It's why you saw so many returning vets like John Kerry join anti-War movements after they returned.
(My biggest complaint with John Kerry was that he didn't embrace his previous stance, and Bush beat him over the head with it.)
What happened was that much like Germany after WWI, we had a "Stabbed in the Back" myth emerge. We would have won the war, if it weren't for those meddling kids. And the imaginary "Hippy Spitting on returning soldiers" because a part of that mythology.
Oh right, they wanted to be communists. That must be why they set out in rafts and small boats by the hundreds of thousands just to get away from the government they prefered. Only a ******* commie would swallow that logic.
Oh right, they wanted to be communists. That must be why they set out in rafts and small boats by the hundreds of thousands just to get away from the government they prefered. Only a ******* commie would swallow that logic.
Uh, guy, most of them DIDN'T flee. Vietnam has a population of MILLIONS. We are talking about 800,000 that fled between 1975 and 1995 (after which relations were normalized and if you wanted to immigrate, you could go to the embassy.
So maybe 1-2% of the population decided to flee by boat?
I should point out after our own Revolutionary war, 1/3rd of the population resettled in Canada.
No, there weren't. You obviously don't know what a link is.
Uh, guy, most of them DIDN'T flee. Vietnam has a population of MILLIONS. We are talking about 800,000 that fled between 1975 and 1995 (after which relations were normalized and if you wanted to immigrate, you could go to the embassy.
So maybe 1-2% of the population decided to flee by boat?
I should point out after our own Revolutionary war, 1/3rd of the population resettled in Canada.
en.wikipedia.org
