Yes it does.
And those things being produced are predicated on people having a certain level of competence. A level of competence that is being sacrificed for diversity.
I can answer that, at least in theory the justice system removes revenge cycles.
In isolation, if someone infringes on you, either one of those 2 scenarios, or anything in between. Violence is really your only option. And a reputation for violence is the only deterrent.
The trouble is if everyone knows this than all acts of violence have to be revenged, now you have a family blood feud that isn't solved untill a marriage 6 generations down the line.
Having a third party ascertain guilt and mete out punishment removes the necessity of retaliatory violence and blood feuds.
Remove the satisfactory resolution and your back to violence though. The supreme authority from which all other authority is derived. But you know that of course. White people seem to be the last section of society to realise that, and also the last section of society that faces punishment for violence.
Robert
I reviewed that episode and agree with you that it sums up the issue. It also hints at a path to a solution or at least a means of coping - The governed Gen Pop needs to engage with the government and use the governments rules against it. (Legislative jiu jitsu) Ranting and bitching are not effective tools. Engage or be governed by the political class.
I would quibble with the "Rule of 500" which is supposedly based on an imaginary research study by "scientists". I would agree with "The Rule of two or more". Any time two or more humans gather, dominance and subservience develops. As the group grows it become more and more complex and widespread. A civil society needs rules to help control these inclinations. Hierarchies need to develop so dimwits, midwits, pseuds, and geniuses can all find a niche.
Another take on the problem:
All-In Summit: Bill Gurley presents 2,851 Miles - YouTube
I am not suggesting that at all.
Do you think there could be another explanation for why PE was added/marketed in these products on the heels of pseudoephedrine being relegated to locked cabinets?
I am not going into the nuances of formulations, but if you think it would be unusual for “them” to throw an ingredient into a product without testing it, I’ve got some news for you.
Hint: in the case of PE, the “tests” for efficacy are inconsequential to its addition to these products.
Also, wait until you find out about some of the tests they DO do.
I’m assuming here that by “diversity” you mean “diversity for diversity’s sake”. Equating diversity and incompetence would be pretty nonsensical. Just like the idea that profit-seeking organizations would actually forego skill and competence for sex and race would be. But it makes for a nice narrative I suppose.