Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Diversity is weakness
Leaving aside Enemy Operative George Casey's purely Orwellian use of diversity to mean mixing jihadi soldiers with American soldiers, there has been a broader and more productive discussion on the pain of diversity lately.
The Putnam study showed that people who live amid ethnic diversity (in modern American cities) become suspicious and mistrustful, not just of the other ethnic groups, but of everyone. Though it may be news to Putnam, it's not news to the planners who created the modern form of forced diversity. Mistrust was their mission, and they've achieved it.
Putnam seems to miss this point. Our modern problem is not the mere mixing of different types of humans in the same community, because the New World has always been a mixture. Other parts of the New World don't have the same degree of mistrust, and our country didn't always have the same degree of mistrust.
Our modern problem is twofold.
(1) Certain privileged groups are strongly encouraged to flaunt their stereotypical differences. Blacks are encouraged to show Stone Age tribal behaviors; homosexuals are encouraged to scream and swish; Jews are encouraged to be money-grubbing robber barons; females are encouraged to take on the airs of delicate Victorian ladies, fainting at the slightest offense. And worst of all, Mohammedans are encouraged to wear their primitive disguises, perform their primitive idolatrous ceremonies, kill their daughters who try to assimilate, and spread jihad inside our Army.
(2) Simultaneously, we are forbidden by law to mention any form of difference, even while the differences are rubbed in our face, even while the Religion Of Peace expresses its most holy theological principles with bullets and bombs.
It's not the existence of differences that creates the modern sense of rage and mistrust; it's frustration and futility. Learned helplessness.
It wasn't always this way.
Before the Cultural Revolution (1948-1968) we didn't have this problem.
(1) We were free to talk and think about categories. Free to distinguish males from females, English from Irish, black from white, Jewish from Christian. Some of those distinctions may have been inaccurate stereotypes, but most were reasonably true. (One exception: we didn't talk about homosexuality in public because we didn't talk about sex in public.)
(2) There was no cultural encouragement for certain groups to display their distinctions in public. If you wanted respect and advancement in the common arena, you had to speak standard English and behave within civilized norms.
(3) Outside the common arena we had all sorts of "comfort zones" for all sorts of people, and the "comfort zones" were free to be exclusive. Men's clubs, ladies' clubs, Little Italy, Chinatown, etc. Some of these still exist, but now only the officially privileged classes can protect their zones from outsiders. (Example: the Wymyn's Bookstore is free to kick out males, but the Fifty Yard Zone Sports Bar will be shut down and burned if it dares to kick out an obnoxious bulldyke.) ¶ 5:33 PM
The Putnam study showed that people who live amid ethnic diversity (in modern American cities) become suspicious and mistrustful, not just of the other ethnic groups, but of everyone. Though it may be news to Putnam, it's not news to the planners who created the modern form of forced diversity. Mistrust was their mission, and they've achieved it.
Putnam seems to miss this point. Our modern problem is not the mere mixing of different types of humans in the same community, because the New World has always been a mixture. Other parts of the New World don't have the same degree of mistrust, and our country didn't always have the same degree of mistrust.
Our modern problem is twofold.
(1) Certain privileged groups are strongly encouraged to flaunt their stereotypical differences. Blacks are encouraged to show Stone Age tribal behaviors; homosexuals are encouraged to scream and swish; Jews are encouraged to be money-grubbing robber barons; females are encouraged to take on the airs of delicate Victorian ladies, fainting at the slightest offense. And worst of all, Mohammedans are encouraged to wear their primitive disguises, perform their primitive idolatrous ceremonies, kill their daughters who try to assimilate, and spread jihad inside our Army.
(2) Simultaneously, we are forbidden by law to mention any form of difference, even while the differences are rubbed in our face, even while the Religion Of Peace expresses its most holy theological principles with bullets and bombs.
It's not the existence of differences that creates the modern sense of rage and mistrust; it's frustration and futility. Learned helplessness.
It wasn't always this way.
Before the Cultural Revolution (1948-1968) we didn't have this problem.
(1) We were free to talk and think about categories. Free to distinguish males from females, English from Irish, black from white, Jewish from Christian. Some of those distinctions may have been inaccurate stereotypes, but most were reasonably true. (One exception: we didn't talk about homosexuality in public because we didn't talk about sex in public.)
(2) There was no cultural encouragement for certain groups to display their distinctions in public. If you wanted respect and advancement in the common arena, you had to speak standard English and behave within civilized norms.
(3) Outside the common arena we had all sorts of "comfort zones" for all sorts of people, and the "comfort zones" were free to be exclusive. Men's clubs, ladies' clubs, Little Italy, Chinatown, etc. Some of these still exist, but now only the officially privileged classes can protect their zones from outsiders. (Example: the Wymyn's Bookstore is free to kick out males, but the Fifty Yard Zone Sports Bar will be shut down and burned if it dares to kick out an obnoxious bulldyke.) ¶ 5:33 PM
