Diversity is our weakness

5 people in a room are less cohesive than 3. 100 people in a room are less cohesive than 1,000. Some things you just got to live with unless you want to live on an island masterbating yourself.

 

10,000 diverse people living in a town are less cohesive than 10,000 non-diverse people. The people in the non-diverse town are friendlier, more charitable, volunteer more, and are more civic minded than the diverse town.

Which town would you rather live in?

I've lived in both and prefer the non-diverse town.

Stop denying the facts. If you favor diversity just acknowledge that you do so despite the negative consequences.

"Drawing on wide-ranging analysis of the Social Capital Community Benchmark (SCCB) survey, Putnam contends that ethnic diversity causes people to ‘hunker down’, “to withdraw from collective life, to distrust their neighbours, regardless of the colour of their skin” .

http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/15382/2/Sturgis(2011) Does ethnic diversity erode trust.pdf

 

I look at the credits of companies like Adobe - see an incredibly diverse community of contributors and say that maybe it's just antisocial dicks who cause problems in diverse communities - not the diversity itself.

 

Perhaps you need to find a place that is non-diverse and where family trees don't branch.

 

You've hit the nail on the head.

 

Not according to the research. Mistrust also builds between members of the same community. Diversity breeds antisocial dicks. You mistake the effect for the cause.

China is beating us on technology these days and they are not diverse at all.

 

But they are more cohesive than diverse ones.

I agree with you that it is human nature that people create teams of us vs. them, but that doesn't mean we have to strap human nature to the Procrustean bed of political correctness.

The problem of liberalism in general is that it envisions a society that needs better and more noble humans than are currently available.

 

People are multi-faceted and identify with multiple categories. Enlistees from diverse backgrounds don't change or deny their race, religion or gender when they become soldiers. They simply unite based on that common aspect of their identity, proving that people from diverse backgrounds can work as a unit to achieve a common interest.

We do this when we align ourselves with political parties, unions, and all sorts of organizations. Soldiers of all races and genders are "brothers in arms" and have created the strongest military in the world. They don't stop being black or change their gender or religion. They simply acknowledge that these differences shouldn't impede their singular purpose. You're proving that racial diversity isn't the weakness.

 

I'm saying that your example isn't diversity, it's assimilation. Enlistees, no matter who they were before, go through a process to give them new goals, priorities, and ways of thinking.

 

Anti-social jerks are not caused by diversity. They have a character deficit and the worst offenders would cause strife even in a racially homogeneous society. Their attitudes are the weakness. The rest of us will not give up diversity because of them. I'd rather they change but if they really hate diversity they can move.

 

Then call it a prime example of the successful assimilation of diverse groups, around a common interest. They do this without denying other aspects of their identity.

 

So if you're now saying "Assimilation is our strength," than I agree.

 

What I've been saying is that uniting behind a common interest is a strength. We can still acknowledge other aspects of our identity, while adopting a common culture (in this case military culture).

 

That is not what the research says. Diversity causes anti-social jerks. It is all there in the data. That the data conflicts with your ideology is your problem.

And of course they do move; that is what white flight is all about. It seems that you diversity lovers are really in the minority. US cities used to be great, then diversity struck. Yet the liberals want to double down on failed social policy.

 

OK, well that's just what I was saying, Assimilation is our strength.

 

The best hope for a common culture is a common religion. But liberals hate religion and so remove that as a possible cure.

 

My point was that diversity is a negative factor in a peaceful society. That was true 500 years and was more than tragic for the natives. I agreed with you and you agreed with me.

 

I don't much care for idealists, especially when their idealism is based on a fallacy like "diversity is our strength."

When I toured the killing fields of Cambodia the guide answered the question as to why Pol Pot did what he did. She said "He wanted to create the perfect society"

 

Diversity is a threat to our core values. The data is inarguable. Right now the ONLY group that supports those rights are whites. When whites lose political power the government will decimate the first and second amendments because that is what the "diverse" groups want. When they come for those rights is when the bloodshed begins. If we aren't willing to fight and die for those rights, we do not deserve them.

 

I would cite any developed Western nation. Go to any major city in the US and you'll see whites and Asians and blacks coexisting. I've had friends of various ethnic backgrounds over my lifetime and none of us have gone to war with each other.