Reply #21: Not to slam an entire gender here, but

[TalkingDog]

there was a reason that in some Native American tribes, that men were in charge of war, while the women were in charge of the overall welfare of the tribe, including the ability to decide if the men were allowed to wage the wars they wanted.


The single-mindedness and compartmentalization possible in the male mind have help the human race reach great heights. But unchecked, it comes with the decoupling of morality from a given activity (i.e. Honey, it didn't mean anything, it was just sex).

When that activity is abstracted and removed from affecting daily life - read: sports fandom and participation it can be a necessary and welcome channeling of that energy. But put that same focus and energy into something that affects a "tribe" and you get a Putin, whose single-minded refusal to negotiate with "the enemy" and the Russian troops focus on "following orders" allowed them to open fire on a school full of children and innocent adults just so the "targets" could be eliminated.

Turning that narrow focus to monetary systems and an entire economy, the results are incredibly mixed. Bill Gates amassed an inconceivable amount of money,but only understood the human impact through the guidance of his spouse. The minute parsing of the idea of monetary policy being "helpful" is based wholly on abstract qualities.

Jung would say that,as a culture we have become pathologically disconnected from our anima, or in simplistic pop-lingo, our "feminine side". The advent of women onto the political and economic scene is crippled by the mental and emotional equivalent of footbinding. Shaping the outlook to view single-minded focus and moral disconnect as helpful, desirable traits.

One reads current economic news with a sense of disbelief, followed quickly by pity and a vague and growing sense of despair.