Go has no generics. You can either rephrase your program to not need them, or pretend that you're using a less-typed language and write code that can blow up at runtime.
And maybe you have a chance to provide simple example of how program can be rephrased in such way that generic will not be needed?
Many problems need generics to be solved elegantly. Go doesn't have generics. It is completely impossible in Go to write things like user-defined polymorphic container types.
And yet, much of the world runs on code developed in languages that don't have them (C etc.)
Yea, it works, in the sense that the bulk of world finance "worked" running on COBOL for 30 years.
And look how poorly that worked out. People assume software will break all the time, because most of the software they are exposed to does exactly that. It is 2014. There is no excuse for using languages lacking important features from 1973.
And your assertion is that using Generics would lead to code breaking less often?
What problems do you believe that you'd hit regularly that can't be elegantly solved without generics? I haven't used much Go, but isn't its duck typing implementation appropriate for the most common needs of generics?