Is psychosis the only reasonable basis for grievance?

???????????????????

Well, if you go by Eric Erickson, you could grow and develop in the most ideal way, passing through the various stages in serial order, starting - Trust, autonomy, initiative, industry, identity, intimacy, generativity and integrity.... wow! But there's a flip side to it, and that is, if you don't actually master the above mentioned developmental tasks, then you tend to develop one in direct conflict to that stated. ... mistrust, shame and doubt, guilt, inferiority, role confusion, isolation, stagnation and despair. ... in that order.

One doesn't have to become psychotic on grievance, .................

Ummm what does this have to do with theatre?

My personal opinion is that there is only one race...the human race. I don't care what color you are, what country you come from or who your ancestors are...ultimately we all come from the same place and we all bleed the same color. Some people just choose to not use their brains. I choose to live my life the way I want to live it which is respecting everyone. I suggest you try doing the same. You would be a much happier person and people might show you a little more respect. You have to give respect in order to get it.

The only correct statement was Freedom isn't free. You are right. People made sacrifices for everyone's freedom in this country. In world wars, civil rights movements and even right now in Iraq and Afganistan. People are dying for you. Do you really think you are honoring those people? Not only that, but the only real Americans are the ones who have grown up on the Indian reserves. They are the real Americans. The rest of us are just transplants from different countries too.

Freedom is fought for, but respect has to be earned!

seeing that even as is conflict a mathematical equation? the easy purpose of any warring get jointly is to inflict maximal harm on the enemy even as minimizing its own casualties. replaced into there something proportional about the U. S. conflict in Iraq ? Or about Iraq 's invasion of Kuwait for that matter? Or about Russia 's contemporary conflict adverse to Georgia ? Israel is doing precisely what the different u . s . has finished contained in the previous. it truly is how conflict works. would a British citizen ***** that "too few" British infantrymen are being killed in Iraq ? probable not. And on a more beneficial trouble-free note: Palestinian military inferiority isn't a demonstration of moral superiority. Palestinian insistence on resorting to violence inspite of this military weak point is a demonstration of negative judgment perhaps - yet that's by utilising no skill a demonstration of moral distinctive feature. Being militarily weak does not make the Palestinians good.

I SEE NO RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THIS QUESTION AND IT'S CONTENT BUT ANYWAY!

'Black' and 'white' are colour labels that were chiefly invented in the last milenia by 'whitish' people mainly under a doctrine of 'Social Darwinism' and 'Unilineal evolution' in an attempt to legitimate 'white' colonisation of the globe. This mythology argues that hunter gatherers were the earliest form of people, then pastoralists and then industrialists and was and is * still used to legitimate the colonisation of the world by industrial nations. The version of it which purported to grade people in terms of skin colour placed Eastern Europeans at the 'top' followed by Southern Europeans, Middle Eastern peoples, East Asians, South Asians, Native Americans (Northern and Southern), Polynesians, Africans, Melanesians, 'Australian' Aborigines, and Tasmanian Aborigines at the very bottom of some gradient of human evolution that was meant to legitimate people higher up the hierarchy exterminating people further down. White people are the ones who started labelling everyone by colour including 'ourselves'. I totally agree that identifying people by colour is problematic - but then this is the inheritance that comes with the stolen continents we now kid ourselves we possess.

I have finally read the Erikson link and it seems to concur with my opinion of 'whiteness' as a cultural vacuum. Of course modern society has lost much of the formalised initiation stage that existed in most, if not all societies. It seems to be an observation across a number of Indigenous cultures that white people appeared on their shores like ghosts hence the name for ghost sometimes became the word for white people. Have a look at what Kevin Annett says about this subject of white people as ghosts - victims of former acts of genocide who become future oppressors in new lands and then appropriate Indigenous identities in an attempt to define themselves and deny this genocide:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-663739620...

By the way I still don't understand what you are actually asking or what your quote has to do with it.

* To quote the comments of an Indonesian soldier currently involved in the invasion of West Papua on August 12th, 2008 at 3:27 pm:

"New Guinea offers unparalleled opportunity to witness peoples only recently emerging from the Stone Age with traditions of cannibalism, which some suspect may even still be practised in the remotest areas today. Besides the obvious attraction of being eaten alive, Irian Jaya has plenty of interesting things to do and see for those that manage to survive the headhunters’ cooking pots.” (see indonesiamatters link).

Source(s):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darw%E2%80%A6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unilineal_e%E2%80%A6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_%E2%80%A6

http://images.google.com.au/imgres?imgur%E2%80%A6

http://www.indonesiamatters.com/2014/fla%E2%80%A6

When you meet a non white person that is caring and thoughtful as me, everything is cool. If you are uncool and they are uncool, everything is uncool, but don't become uncool because they are, it only makes things worse. Be an individualist and know one person at a time.

of course not

Absolutely not...