Social Cohesion

It seems to me that the recent spate of teenage killers is the result of feral children.


If this sounds extreme consider how you might react if your only approval came from peers। Financial pressures ensure that any parents a child might have need to earn and therefore farm them out (literally)। Social norms allow parents to be swapped at will. Schools are not allowed to provide a social setting - sensible discipline and love are flip sides of the same coin. So what constants would someone growing up in these circumstances have? Obviously, those in a similar situation. Friends become the only constant, the only dependable item in an otherwise turbulent time.

Growing up is a process guided by the pressures experienced. Everyone seeks belonging. If that is not forthcoming from the family or society then peer groups are the only alternative to being alone - and being alone is dangerous.

You are much more likely to be aggressive towards a similar grouping similar to yours than, say, a bunch of stamp collectors, who you will not see as a threat. A threat is someone who might set your agenda for you - something a stamp collector is unlikely to do.

To whom is your first loyalty? Your family? Your country? Your gang? What would you think of someone who said they hated being British (or whatever your nationality is)? Would you rather support an ecologically correct foreign government than your own? What about if that government was ideologically opposed to yours - almost at war?

Does it matter anyway?

Of course it does! A cohesive society will obviously be more productive than one tearing itself apart. Civil war always causes poverty and poverty causes more strife - a very vicious circle. The downward spiral can only be reversed by an external threat to everyone. People then start pulling together.

For example, many are wondering why Sunni and Shia are fighting in Iraq when the enemy is supposed to be the coalition forces. Simple, the Sunni and Shia are in competition for the agenda. They see the superiority of Islam as a philosophy over the West - that is not an issue. The problem is one of power within the "gang". So how will it be resolved? Well, that is quite simple too. Suppose some sort of impasse is reached between the two factions because the population has become disenchanted with the carnage. Suppose the West gets it act together and looks at helping the population recover from war instead of appearing to seek revenge for its losses. The West will then become the enemy because they are setting the agenda.

A similar problem exists in Palestine. Fatah versus Hamas is one creed attempting to impose its agenda on the other. This is not a problem for us - we are not in Palestine (unless you are reading this from there, in which case you will have a much better view of the real suffering). This only becomes a problem for the rest of us when the internal squabbling ceases. If Isreal becomes "safe" because a real peace deal is achieved, as it has to at some stage, then the economic and internal political items move up the agenda. Should market forces be more important than equality? Who says whether something should happen - the people, the politicians or the moral leaders?

One gang versus another again. Depressing, isn't it?