Diversity is our strenght.

[pr126]

I am yet to hear from countries of Africa, Asia, the Far East, Middle East Central/South America, Japan, China, Philippines that diversity is their strength.

Isn’t unity more beneficial? Or are we being programmed? Globalism is our strenght.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbwuAaar-qU

[Gawdzilla Sama]

strenght?

[Atheon]

Should we really be following the benighted lead of dictatorships and backward countries?

[Baruch]

Should we really be following the benighted lead of dictatorships and backward countries?

Of course not.  As progressive Vulcans we should be strictly logical.  We must carry the LBGT burden (same as White male burden of 100 years ago) and show these barbarians how things must be done.  Like we are doing in Afghanistan etc.

[Baruch]

I am yet to hear from countries of Africa, Asia, the Far East, Middle East Central/South America, Japan, China, Philippines that diversity is their strength.

Isn’t unity more beneficial? Or are we being programmed? Globalism is our strenght.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbwuAaar-qU

US is not the same as EU.  Our dialectic of unity is different than yours.  Thesis + Anthithesis -> Synthesis.  Unity is the result of struggle.  In the case of the US, a civil war that took 600,000 lives, and is still a live issue, always will be.  In a manner of speaking the EU civil war was in two parts, called WW I and WW II.  Only 75 million lives lost.

[SGOS]

Diversity is not necessarily a strength, although it does not necessarily defeat strength.  There might be better words to fill in the blank of "Diversity is our ______________."  The statement seems strongly motivated by justifying something that exists in a society. 

"We like our diversity," is a claim that does not require justification or support.  It's obviously an opinion and a statement of personal preference.  It's not a statement of fact.

A justification requires a different statement, "Diversity makes us stronger because ______________."  That would be a more important statement, but would require more thought, because it's not an unsupported claim.

Having watched the video, with the claim being made 100 times by both sides of America, neither of which show by their actions any great amount of joy in diversity, it begins to sound like bullshit.  I think the reason it begins to sound that way is that the claim is never supported, not even once.  It's just a bunch of people trying to sound politically correct.

[GSOgymrat]

"Diversity is our strength" is a shibboleth. As far as unity being beneficial, it depends on who is uniting and why. Do you want all the factions of Islam to unite?

[pr126]

My beef is with the selective application of the slogan. I believe it to be pure propaganda.

Only western (read white people) need to "celebrate diversity".
Unless I am mistaken. 

[GSOgymrat]

My beef is with the selective application of the slogan. I believe it to be pure propaganda.

Only western (read white people) need to "celebrate diversity".
Unless I am mistaken. 

I agree it is liberal propaganda. If you see a "Celebrate Diversity" bumper sticker you can bet the person is a liberal, just as a "Pray for America" bumper sticker typically indicates a conservative. Liberals tend to appreciate diversity more than conservatives, it's a fundamental difference. Many progressives (who I consider a subset of liberals) believe white people in America have a greater responsibility to appreciate diversity because white people have controlled the culture and the economy. Progressives are concerned with power dynamics between groups, equity and giving voice to people they believe have been marginalized. Of course, you know all this.

[Hydra009]

I agree it is liberal propaganda. If you see a "Celebrate Diversity" bumper sticker you can bet the person is a liberal, just as a "Pray for America" bumper sticker typically indicates a conservative. Liberals tend to appreciate diversity more than conservatives, it's a fundamental difference. Many progressives (who I consider a subset of liberals) believe white people in America have a greater responsibility to appreciate diversity because white people have controlled the culture and the economy. Progressives are concerned with power dynamics between groups, equity and giving voice to people they believe have been marginalized. Of course, you know all this.

That's a good point.  And I'd like to point out that diversity has indeed proven to be extremely useful on a practical level. 

During WWII, US forces used Native American languages to create codes that were hard for the enemy to break precisely because they had little/no contact with Native Americans.

Diversity may also help spur innovation.

At this point, I'd like to know what conservatives have against diversity that doesn't ultimately boil down to primitive tribalism or racism (which is itself a type of tribalism).  Surely, their ideas are more mature and intellectual than simply seeing things quite literally in black and white and fearing/hating the stranger.

[Baruch]

At times Americans have pulled together, other times we have pulled apart.  Had nothing to do with diversity.  We had plenty of diversity in 1861 and 1961.  Lots of immigrants adding to a melting pot.  But that is the point, a melting pot.  External aggression ... American Revolution, War of 1812, WW I, WW II were not divisive.    External threats help unite the diversity (that and shared language).  America is more open to changing local culture than Europe, partly because we mostly speak one language.  But I don't see bilingualism as a threat for example.  Bi-language-regions ... would be a threat.  Quebec partly meets this criteria, and has threatened secession.

[GSOgymrat]

At this point, I'd like to know what conservatives have against diversity that doesn't ultimately boil down to primitive tribalism or racism (which is itself a type of tribalism).  Surely, their ideas are more mature and intellectual than simply seeing things quite literally in black and white and fearing/hating the stranger.

Conservatives tend to like order, tradition and community and diversity can seem threatening to those values. Conservatives are not "do your own thing" kind of people. Diversity can cause complexity, unpredictability and therefore a more interesting world. Conservatives probably think the world is already interesting enough.

[Hydra009]

"Tradition" can be used as a euphemism for a less learned, more tribalistic, more homogeneous society.  What exactly is inherently good about an older state of affairs?  Or inherently bad about a newer one?  (Imo, race is definitely the invisible elephant in the room here)  Methinks few people here would enjoy a candid answer to this question, that's why it is kept intentionally vague by presenting it as tradition-loving, which is far more respectable.

Also, I'm very much a "evolve or die" kind of person.  Prizing tradition over all else comes across as suicidal.  Who honestly thinks that there isn't anything new to learn or some new height to reach?  It shouldn't even be debatable that we should change, only how we should change.

[Sal1981]

I like to think of tradition as values that have stood the test of time. Why we should change seems like a more prudent question. Is the change better or worse?

[Draconic Aiur]

A double edged sword