Some things in my mind:
1. A prominent person in Singapore was a descendant of a founder of a failed country in Southeast Asia, Lanfang Republic, which failed in 100 years after founding. It died due to conquest by the Dutch empire.
How do we expect Singapore to not follow the footsteps of the Lanfang Republic? Why the Chinese people just cannot thrive together as, well, Chinese?
And why United States, another immigrant nation, can last for 230+ years as an independent republic? (Even proud United Kingdom is nearing 'conquest' by an United Europe, and France was twice almost wholly conquered by Germany).
2. Do you think it is more important to be a natural Aspie who can't survive in our world, or to be a surviving Aspie who is near-NT but lost his Aspie links with the 'subconscious'/unexplainable uniqueness?
Aspies have our own problems. We are too often prosecuted and deprived of opportunities. But would an NT fare worse if they have the Aspies' 'makeup/constitution'?
NTs are so bland, they're easily replaced by others when they leave our world. And Aspies who are too like NTs will be vulnerable to replacement by other NTs, with nothing to offer to the world. Innate focus, talents that are different from the rest of the world, and value-adds... these are some things Aspies have within their minds. Yes, Aspies can survive if they're 99% NTs, but are you sure, with the survival of fittest and, being a 1% Aspie is enough? If we don't retain enough Aspieness that helps us perform better in whatever we do, will it restrict the Aspies' ability to value-add our world?
We can't replicate another Aspie - and his possible contributions to our world.
No comments:
Post a Comment