Diversity is our weakness

Except for a BS degree from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, an ivy league institution.

 

Listening to these guys it's like Enron never happened. Ancient history for sure but much of California's woe can be traced to deregulation and corporate takeover.

Diversity brings new ideas and new opportunities. Trying to stop it is like trying to stop the tide from coming in.

We'll see how long the current political position of fear and loathing can hold out in the US and elsewhere.

 

For the proponents of "diversity" that's a feature, not a bug.

 

China has had a monoculture for all of recorded history. Doesn't seem dying to me.

The liberals are certainly encouraging the minorities to see whites as the enemy, and they will, because they are no more immune to tribalism than anyone else.

It will not go well.

 

Not really. There are lots of ethnic minorities in China but they are all dominated by Han culture. Xinjiang province is the most diverse and hence the most tension filled.

Hence the racial tension and ethnic strife. Just as the OP would predict.

 

Build the wall. Deport the illegals. Promote white fertility. Expose the multiculturalist lies, starting with "Diversity is our strength."

 

What is your idea on how to promote "white fertility"? I work in the IT industry and know lots of couples including ourselves that have very few children or none. In our entire department I think there are only 1 or 2 people that have 3 or 4 children . The reasons for not having more children generally revolves around cost of raising kids and loss of time and freedoms. So how would you plan to promote "white only" increased birth rates?

1. Would the government subside white parents for having more children?
2. Would the government provide free day care to white parents?
3. Would schools teach the importance of white people having larger families?
4. Will there be TV ads to promote white sex acts as patriotism?
5. Free things and services for white children?

I list some of these ideas because Europe has done similar things albeit for parents of all ethnicity. The main difference is you only what to increase the white population so it may be harder.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...to-convince-its-citizens-to-make-more-babies/

 

I don't really have any ideas about how to promote white fertility. Propoganda suppressing feminism would help and needn't be done by the government.

 

When I hear the term "propaganda" I generally think misleading or bias information. That does not seem like a very good way to start a movement. If the government does lead this it would be hard for private groups. The scrutiny they would face for this type of idea be tremendous and probably more than an individual or private group could stand up to. It would become one of those fringe ideas regulated to 4chan.

 

#1. stop subsidizing anyone having children , I know of single mothers who make a career of having out of wedlock children so as to get that government check.
2. again, the government should not be subsidizing day care either, should be left to charities 3. the schools teach? They should start teaching again instead of indoctrinating 4. TV ads? they should NOT be glorifying one parent families and mocking the male in male led families. 5. No "free' things from the government , who takes the money by threat of jail and/or violence, again, charities should fill these roles.
The American people are very charitable, whenever there has been a disaster anywhere in the world, the American people have donated more than all the other nations combined, why wouldn't they take care of the children and needy right here in the USA.

That said, I do acknowledge there is a percentage of people in any population that just can't make it without help, either because of mental or physical disabilities.. but that help should actually be helpful.
i.e. at one time, a large percentage of the labor of operating state hospitals was performed by the patients, the patients had pride in contributing to their room and board, and it keep them too busy to get into trouble, AND it kept the operating cost down, THEN the democrats determined that they had to be paid a minimum wage.. and a fact is, some people just can't provide .. are unable to perform, even a minimum wage level of services to their prospective employers. State's Mental Health services and institution were driven into bankruptcy and you now have what we call "the homeless" and the enabling of women with low intellect having multiple children out of wedlock

 

" Diversity is our weakness" .... Nah ignorance is our weakness and It's been on full display.

 

Of what am I supposed to be ignorant? Certainly not about the latest research which shows how diversity erodes social cohesion.

Don't let your ideology blind you to the facts.

 

Do you think that Mexicans bear a superior civilization to bestow on us ignorant Americans, or the Africans invading Europe carry the torch of Progress?

I would think not. Stop thinking ideologically and start looking at facts.
.

 

The Middle East is one of the most diverse areas in the world,.

The Middle East is so tribal with Shia's, Sunnies, Berbers, Jews the hoodie doodies.

What can go wrong ?

 

I was told that Barack Obama earned a bachelor of arts degree (BA).

And he was able to do it without earning a GPA or making the Deans List.

 

Can you show any massive positive impact poor uneducated Hispanics have added to the country? We already have plenty of poor and uneducated already here that don’t do much besides suck up benefits they barely pay into. Millions more each year doesn’t help us.

The fact that far too many educated and middle upper class white people are barely breaking even when it comes to having enough kids, is not a good thing. Essentially the dumbest and poorest demographics are outbreeding those we actually NEED to have kids. It’s Idiocrisy the movie.

 

relevant excerpt from the political history of the Latin American country of Guyana:

"a growing rift in the country's main political party as the personal conflict between the PPP's Jagan and Burnham widened into a bitter dispute. In 1955 Jagan and Burnham formed rival wings of the PPP. Support for each leader was largely, but not totally, along ethnic lines. J.B. Lachmansingh, a leading Indo-Guyanese and head of the GIWU, supported Burnham, whereas Jagan retained the loyalty of a number of leading Afro-Guyanese radicals, such as Sydney King.

He could not win if supported only by the lower-class, urban Afro-Guyanese. He needed middle-class allies, especially those Afro-Guyanese who backed the moderate United Democratic Party. From 1957 onward, Burnham worked to create a balance between maintaining the backing of the more radical Afro-Guyanese lower classes and gaining the support of the more capitalist middle class. Clearly, Burnham's stated preference for socialism would not bind those two groups together against Jagan, an avowed Marxist. The answer was something more basic -- race. Burnham's appeals to race proved highly successful in bridging the schism that divided the Afro-Guyanese along class lines. This strategy convinced the powerful Afro-Guyanese middle class to accept a leader who was more of a radical than they would have preferred to support. At the same time, it neutralized the objections of the black working class to entering an alliance with those representing the more moderate interests of the middle classes."
​

Sounds like a lot of political conflict and disunity there.

 

But ethnic tensions in a region that has been exploited and conquered by outside forces for resources over generations is not the same as diversity in developed nation states with stable economies and social structures such as Canada or the US.

Believe it or not (not, I'm thinking, ) genetic diversity in any organism increases its chances of surviving changing conditions whereas genetic stagnation including inbreeding lessens the ability to survive things like plagues and changing climate.

Evolution has always been about this. Gene pools that are stagnant are far less resistant to disaster and change.