American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition
-
Diversity, the integration of people with widely diverging cultures, colors, and persuasions, is not always good. Nor is diversity always the best idea for a group or nation that wants to cohere in its traditions and remain functionally intact. It has become a glib aphorism, almost received scripture that "diversity is our strength," but the reality does not bear that out, and I have seen no evidence that it is always true. Quite the contrary.
Sohrab Ahmari, the author of The Unbroken Thread, opines that when a population devoted to specific traditional ideals that emerge from their religious or ethnic heritage gets too diverse, that population fractures and loses cohesion. Introducing diverse foreign ideologies into a close-knit population can destroy it more easily than enhancing it. If a group of Mennonites or Amish, for example, were to encourage diversity of faith and practice, it would risk the disintegration of their unique culture.
The same is true of most Christian churches, ethnic groups such as Sons of Italy, Hasidic Jews, and groups like our armed forces. Such diversity of ideas would promote not cohesion and expansion, but fragmentation. As for a "diverse" military, if America cannot agree on a common idea in her defense — equality, freedom, and liberty for all — she cannot defend herself against a common enemy and is doomed. CRT (diversity by another name) among the military is a death sentence for our country: a general whose troops are divided along racial or cultural lines, which is what forced diversity brings, cannot fight a winning defensive war for America's survival with such fragmented troops. I am talking not about color, but about different ideas of what America should be about and why it should be defended.
For the rest... https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/05/diversity_isnt_always_good.html
-
Diversity is our strength, and also skin color produces different life experiences which can never be fully understood by those who have not lived them. This will never change. Our strength therefore lies in the cooperation of fundamentally distinct psyches which can never, even in theory, reach any true human accord. Got it.
-
The problem of the left is that they define diversity as race. That's just a poor, poor proxy.
This article comes from a highly illiberal worldview though. America is one of the few places where culture is not supposed to be based on color or religion. The whole point of liberalism is to put the individual at the fore. What's the point of empowering the individual if they're supposed to have the same or similar views on how to live their life? The point of liberalism is to let diverse types of individuals live their life.
I grew up in a collectivist culture and English wasn't the first language I learned. I have a strong bent towards collectivism in my personal life, but outside of my family and community I want to be treated completely 100% as an individual by the government and places of work.
I don't think that's incompatible with being American.
-
The problem of the left is that they define diversity as race. That's just a poor, poor proxy.
This article comes from a highly illiberal worldview though. America is one of the few places where culture is not supposed to be based on color or religion. The whole point of liberalism is to put the individual at the fore. What's the point of empowering the individual if they're supposed to have the same or similar views on how to live their life? The point of liberalism is to let diverse types of individuals live their life.
I grew up in a collectivist culture and English wasn't the first language I learned. I have a strong bent towards collectivism in my personal life, but outside of my family and community I want to be treated completely 100% as an individual by the government and places of work.
I don't think that's incompatible with being American.
@xenon said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
The problem of the left is that they define diversity as race. That's just a poor, poor proxy.
This article comes from a highly illiberal worldview though. America is one of the few places where culture is not supposed to be based on color or religion. The whole point of liberalism is to put the individual at the fore. What's the point of empowering the individual if they're supposed to have the same or similar views on how to live their life? The point of liberalism is to let diverse types of individuals live their life.
I grew up in a collectivist culture and English wasn't the first language I learned. I have a strong bent towards collectivism in my personal life, but outside of my family and community I want to be treated completely 100% as an individual by the government and places of work.
I don't think that's incompatible with being American.
Is it more compatible in other cultures?
-
@xenon said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
The problem of the left is that they define diversity as race. That's just a poor, poor proxy.
This article comes from a highly illiberal worldview though. America is one of the few places where culture is not supposed to be based on color or religion. The whole point of liberalism is to put the individual at the fore. What's the point of empowering the individual if they're supposed to have the same or similar views on how to live their life? The point of liberalism is to let diverse types of individuals live their life.
I grew up in a collectivist culture and English wasn't the first language I learned. I have a strong bent towards collectivism in my personal life, but outside of my family and community I want to be treated completely 100% as an individual by the government and places of work.
I don't think that's incompatible with being American.
Is it more compatible in other cultures?
@Horace said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
@xenon said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
The problem of the left is that they define diversity as race. That's just a poor, poor proxy.
This article comes from a highly illiberal worldview though. America is one of the few places where culture is not supposed to be based on color or religion. The whole point of liberalism is to put the individual at the fore. What's the point of empowering the individual if they're supposed to have the same or similar views on how to live their life? The point of liberalism is to let diverse types of individuals live their life.
I grew up in a collectivist culture and English wasn't the first language I learned. I have a strong bent towards collectivism in my personal life, but outside of my family and community I want to be treated completely 100% as an individual by the government and places of work.
I don't think that's incompatible with being American.
Is it more compatible in other cultures?
It’s closer to certain cultures (e.g. Britain, Western Europe).
But others from shitholes may appreciate it more and be better Americans.
We should be managing for those who truly want to be here to better themselves. No country or culture has a monopoly on those people.
The flip side of this is being able to point out examples of things we don’t want here.
-
-
@Jolly said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
Melting Pot.
It works.
But it takes time. There was plenty of racial and ethnic tension and hatred when previous diverse cultures such as Irish, Italians and Chinese came into the US. People don't just arrive and become Americans overnight, whatever it says on their papers.
-
@Jolly said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
Melting Pot.
It works.
But it takes time. There was plenty of racial and ethnic tension and hatred when previous diverse cultures such as Irish, Italians and Chinese came into the US. People don't just arrive and become Americans overnight, whatever it says on their papers.
@Doctor-Phibes said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
@Jolly said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
Melting Pot.
It works.
But it takes time. There was plenty of racial and ethnic tension and hatred when previous diverse cultures such as Irish, Italians and Chinese came into the US. People don't just arrive and become Americans overnight, whatever it says on their papers.
Sure, it takes time. If you don't let it work, it takes eternity.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
@Jolly said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
Melting Pot.
It works.
But it takes time. There was plenty of racial and ethnic tension and hatred when previous diverse cultures such as Irish, Italians and Chinese came into the US. People don't just arrive and become Americans overnight, whatever it says on their papers.
Sure, it takes time. If you don't let it work, it takes eternity.
@Jolly said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
@Doctor-Phibes said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
@Jolly said in American Thinker du jour - Diversity Edition:
Melting Pot.
It works.
But it takes time. There was plenty of racial and ethnic tension and hatred when previous diverse cultures such as Irish, Italians and Chinese came into the US. People don't just arrive and become Americans overnight, whatever it says on their papers.
Sure, it takes time. If you don't let it work, it takes eternity.
Yeah …
The Colonial era immigrants from Europe did not bother to integrate with the native Americas who were there, instead they killed and displaced most of the native Americans, so that’s one example of not letting it work.
The slaver importers and slave owners also largely worked hard at segregating the imported slave immigrants, that’s also an example of not letting it work.
Most other immigrants who did not attempt to kill or displace the natives en mass and are not being prevented from integration by the then-dominant natives mostly “let it work” and progressing towards “melting pot” integration just fine.
