Diversitiy is our strength?

[EvilCat Breath]

Diversity is never a strength.

And yet we've listed all kinds of examples on how it is.

Take our security as a nation . Because we have Americans with ancestors from everywhere , we can spy and get contacts on everyone .

Or would you rather send some blonde haired hillbilly to infiltrate some Muslim terror group?

We do have muslim terrorists here, like Nidal Hassan who are STILL very loyal to their real homeland. We have made gangs like MS-13 whose loyalties to their homeland and to one another totally transcend the accident of living here.

Diversity is not a strength. What you imagine as the strength of diversity isn't. It is the strength of homogeny.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

We have all heard the phrase, diversity is our strength. This term seems to be originated from those in the US and abroad who seek to promote other races and cultures to mix in their own. However, is it a correct assumption? ...

It's a strength, not our only one. It's not a new phrase either although it's being used to mean different things nowadays. IMO, part of the reason "We, the People" appreciate diversity is because most of our Founders were Renaissance Men. Men who could see past the Euro fascination with Monarchy and bloodlines where some people were special and all others were "commoners". It's still shocking on some countries for a "royal" to marry a "commoner". In the US we don't even put that shit on our job resumes since we tend to favor merit over bloodline.

Then there's the scientific viewpoint:

How Diversity Makes Us Smarter

• Decades of research by organizational scientists, psychologists, sociologists, economists and demographers show that socially diverse groups (that is, those with a diversity of race, ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation) are more innovative than homogeneous groups.
• It seems obvious that a group of people with diverse individual expertise would be better than a homogeneous group at solving complex, nonroutine problems. It is less obvious that social diversity should work in the same way—yet the science shows that it does.
• This is not only because people with different backgrounds bring new information. Simply interacting with individuals who are different forces group members to prepare better, to anticipate alternative viewpoints and to expect that reaching consensus will take effort.

Diverse individual expertise has nothing to do with social diversity whatsoever. You can absolutely have diverse individual expertise and not have social diversity or multiculturalism at all. One has nothing to do with another.

Socially diverse groupings accomplish very little to nothing at all. They are far from innovative. They become vindictive and backbiting. Unless, of course, it is the latest movie or television show. Then the script is written specifically to find innovation in diversity.

 

[Timmy]

The word, "diversity" is bullshit, for one thing. It doesn't actually mean diversity, it means non-white, or non-hetero-male. Would a white South African, or a Ukrainian be considered a "diversity" candidate for a job on a college campus? Are you kidding? Never. And yet, those two people would bring a "different" perspective to their roles, which is theoretically the goal of "diversity."

Under some limited circumstances, diversity can be helpful. It is good when a police department includes representatives from the various communities it serves, even if the "standards" have to be relaxed in order to get them on board.

Where excellence is the goal: medical school, an engineering department, STEM faculty in a university, Diversity is the enemy of excellence.

True, you never hear someone say that we need more whiteys in the NBA cuz there are too many black folk.

Because sports tend to be one of the few places with totally objective criteria for its workers .

If you can bang out 3s it doesn't matter what your race is .

By the way , the NBA is the most diverse of all the sports . Players come from all over .

 

[Timmy]

Diversity is never a strength.

And yet we've listed all kinds of examples on how it is.

Take our security as a nation . Because we have Americans with ancestors from everywhere , we can spy and get contacts on everyone .

Or would you rather send some blonde haired hillbilly to infiltrate some Muslim terror group?

Was diversity a good thing with the European settlers coming to America?

Why did that work out so poorly?

I thought diverse immigration was always good thing.

Well the euros weren't exactly interested in diversity were they ?

 

[Fenton Lum]

The wrong mix can be deadly when one group decides they are in control from day one and engage in genocide and slavery.

Would you then say that the Europeans would have blended in just fine with the native American Indians had it not been for a centralized government that was hell bent on genocide?

You mean the euro white's govt?

 

[Votto]

The wrong mix can be deadly when one group decides they are in control from day one and engage in genocide and slavery.

Would you then say that the Europeans would have blended in just fine with the native American Indians had it not been for a centralized government that was hell bent on genocide?

You mean the euro white's govt?

No, the Euro's without the government.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

We have all heard the phrase, diversity is our strength. This term seems to be originated from those in the US and abroad who seek to promote other races and cultures to mix in their own. However, is it a correct assumption?

When looking at these same voices that preach diversity and tolerance from the loudest roof tops, it is these very same voices that create safe zones and create the fascist PC culture that we see at Google and the US government, etc. In fact, the very existence of the PC culture proves that they do not really believe what they are saying. Instead, they only want to promote certain aspects of diversity that only agree with their own world views and none that conflict with those world views.

Looking at history, mixing cultures and races has not always produced a desirable outcome, that is, for all involved. The European immigration into America is but one example, Those immigrants had no interest in mixing with the native people. They abhorred their culture, religion, and way of life. They were labeled savages and seen as regressive and needed to be exterminated, and they were exterminated.

However, other immigrants that came from abroad seemed to mix just fine in the US once those native people were put aside. So what were the differences that made one example of diversity turn into genocide and the other turn into a success story? I suppose it depends on the differences between the groups is the key. For diverse groups to coexist, there needs to be an underlying set of goals and values that can overcome those differences. The wrong mix can be deadly.

So what are those key values and/or goals that need to be present?

The Melting Pot Has Had a Meltdown

Diversity is perversity. Integration leads to disintegration. Prejudice is judicious.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The wrong mix can be deadly when one group decides they are in control from day one and engage in genocide and slavery.

Would you then say that the Europeans would have blended in just fine with the native American Indians had it not been for a centralized government that was hell bent on genocide?

How Indiana Got Its Name

Just the opposite. The centralized government, always run by the private sector, took the Indians' side because it hated the majority. Americans never broke a treaty with the Indians, because we wouldn't have appeased savages. The Whiteys Hating Whitey made all those treaties; the people nullified them.

The ruling class followed the example of their British role models, who had excluded settlement beyond the coastal states in the Royal Proclamation of 1763.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

We have all heard the phrase, diversity is our strength. This term seems to be originated from those in the US and abroad who seek to promote other races and cultures to mix in their own. However, is it a correct assumption? ...

It's a strength, not our only one. It's not a new phrase either although it's being used to mean different things nowadays. IMO, part of the reason "We, the People" appreciate diversity is because most of our Founders were Renaissance Men. Men who could see past the Euro fascination with Monarchy and bloodlines where some people were special and all others were "commoners". It's still shocking on some countries for a "royal" to marry a "commoner". In the US we don't even put that shit on our job resumes since we tend to favor merit over bloodline.

Then there's the scientific viewpoint:

How Diversity Makes Us Smarter

• Decades of research by organizational scientists, psychologists, sociologists, economists and demographers show that socially diverse groups (that is, those with a diversity of race, ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation) are more innovative than homogeneous groups.
• It seems obvious that a group of people with diverse individual expertise would be better than a homogeneous group at solving complex, nonroutine problems. It is less obvious that social diversity should work in the same way—yet the science shows that it does.
• This is not only because people with different backgrounds bring new information. Simply interacting with individuals who are different forces group members to prepare better, to anticipate alternative viewpoints and to expect that reaching consensus will take effort.

Socially diverse groupings accomplish very little to nothing at all. They are far from innovative. They become vindictive and backbiting. Unless, of course, it is the latest movie or television show. Then the script is written specifically to find innovation in diversity.

The TV snakes purposely put wet-dream Sofia Vergara in a show with a sugar-sweetened Gayist couple. Heteros will watch it to get aroused by her, but at the same time have blended into their sex drive an attractive portrayal of sicko perverts.

 

[Divine Wind]

The word, "diversity" is bullshit, for one thing. It doesn't actually mean diversity, it means non-white, or non-hetero-male. Would a white South African, or a Ukrainian be considered a "diversity" candidate for a job on a college campus? Are you kidding? Never. And yet, those two people would bring a "different" perspective to their roles, which is theoretically the goal of "diversity."

Under some limited circumstances, diversity can be helpful. It is good when a police department includes representatives from the various communities it serves, even if the "standards" have to be relaxed in order to get them on board.

Where excellence is the goal: medical school, an engineering department, STEM faculty in a university, Diversity is the enemy of excellence.

True, you never hear someone say that we need more whiteys in the NBA cuz there are too many black folk.

Because sports tend to be one of the few places with totally objective criteria for its workers .

If you can bang out 3s it doesn't matter what your race is .

By the way , the NBA is the most diverse of all the sports . Players come from all over .

The military is the same way. It doesn't matter what color you are, your gender or who you are fucking, if you can do the job, great. If not, get the the fuck out.

 

[Divine Wind]

We have all heard the phrase, diversity is our strength. This term seems to be originated from those in the US and abroad who seek to promote other races and cultures to mix in their own. However, is it a correct assumption? ...

It's a strength, not our only one. It's not a new phrase either although it's being used to mean different things nowadays. IMO, part of the reason "We, the People" appreciate diversity is because most of our Founders were Renaissance Men. Men who could see past the Euro fascination with Monarchy and bloodlines where some people were special and all others were "commoners". It's still shocking on some countries for a "royal" to marry a "commoner". In the US we don't even put that shit on our job resumes since we tend to favor merit over bloodline.

Then there's the scientific viewpoint:

How Diversity Makes Us Smarter

• Decades of research by organizational scientists, psychologists, sociologists, economists and demographers show that socially diverse groups (that is, those with a diversity of race, ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation) are more innovative than homogeneous groups.
• It seems obvious that a group of people with diverse individual expertise would be better than a homogeneous group at solving complex, nonroutine problems. It is less obvious that social diversity should work in the same way—yet the science shows that it does.
• This is not only because people with different backgrounds bring new information. Simply interacting with individuals who are different forces group members to prepare better, to anticipate alternative viewpoints and to expect that reaching consensus will take effort.

Socially diverse groupings accomplish very little to nothing at all. They are far from innovative. They become vindictive and backbiting. Unless, of course, it is the latest movie or television show. Then the script is written specifically to find innovation in diversity.

The TV snakes purposely put wet-dream Sofia Vergara in a show with a sugar-sweetened Gayist couple. Heteros will watch it to get aroused by her, but at the same time have blended into their sex drive an attractive portrayal of sicko perverts.

Sofia is, indeed, a wet-dream, but only someone with homosexual tendencies would be attracted to a gay couple . People don't "turn" gay but they can repress homosexual impulses.

 

[Timmy]

The word, "diversity" is bullshit, for one thing. It doesn't actually mean diversity, it means non-white, or non-hetero-male. Would a white South African, or a Ukrainian be considered a "diversity" candidate for a job on a college campus? Are you kidding? Never. And yet, those two people would bring a "different" perspective to their roles, which is theoretically the goal of "diversity."

Under some limited circumstances, diversity can be helpful. It is good when a police department includes representatives from the various communities it serves, even if the "standards" have to be relaxed in order to get them on board.

Where excellence is the goal: medical school, an engineering department, STEM faculty in a university, Diversity is the enemy of excellence.

True, you never hear someone say that we need more whiteys in the NBA cuz there are too many black folk.

Because sports tend to be one of the few places with totally objective criteria for its workers .

If you can bang out 3s it doesn't matter what your race is .

By the way , the NBA is the most diverse of all the sports . Players come from all over .

The military is the same way. It doesn't matter what color you are, your gender or who you are fucking, if you can do the job, great. If not, get the the fuck out.

Please . Military is chuck full of politics .

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

We have all heard the phrase, diversity is our strength. This term seems to be originated from those in the US and abroad who seek to promote other races and cultures to mix in their own. However, is it a correct assumption?

When looking at these same voices that preach diversity and tolerance from the loudest roof tops, it is these very same voices that create safe zones and create the fascist PC culture that we see at Google and the US government, etc. In fact, the very existence of the PC culture proves that they do not really believe what they are saying. Instead, they only want to promote certain aspects of diversity that only agree with their own world views and none that conflict with those world views.

Looking at history, mixing cultures and races has not always produced a desirable outcome, that is, for all involved. The European immigration into America is but one example, Those immigrants had no interest in mixing with the native people. They abhorred their culture, religion, and way of life. They were labeled savages and seen as regressive and needed to be exterminated, and they were exterminated.

However, other immigrants that came from abroad seemed to mix just fine in the US once those native people were put aside. So what were the differences that made one example of diversity turn into genocide and the other turn into a success story? I suppose it depends on the differences between the groups is the key. For diverse groups to coexist, there needs to be an underlying set of goals and values that can overcome those differences. The wrong mix can be deadly.

So what are those key values and/or goals that need to be present?

The Melting Pot Has Had a Meltdown

Diversity is perversity. Integration leads to disintegration. Prejudice is judicious.

I think diversity is fine as long as everybody is in agreement. But in some cases, diversity is forced on people who don't believe in it or want it. That's when it starts to become trouble.

People of different races can get along fine and live in peace. People of different cultures can't.

When you force two groups of people who act differently, dress differently, have different kinds of names, have different standards, have different ways of living, how could it not be trouble? You are trying to force a hyena and lion to live in the same cage.

Maybe in a hundred years or so, our government will learn this lesson, but for now, they insist that they try and force people together.

 

[Divine Wind]

We have all heard the phrase, diversity is our strength. This term seems to be originated from those in the US and abroad who seek to promote other races and cultures to mix in their own. However, is it a correct assumption? ...

It's a strength, not our only one. It's not a new phrase either although it's being used to mean different things nowadays. IMO, part of the reason "We, the People" appreciate diversity is because most of our Founders were Renaissance Men. Men who could see past the Euro fascination with Monarchy and bloodlines where some people were special and all others were "commoners". It's still shocking on some countries for a "royal" to marry a "commoner". In the US we don't even put that shit on our job resumes since we tend to favor merit over bloodline.

Then there's the scientific viewpoint:

How Diversity Makes Us Smarter

• Decades of research by organizational scientists, psychologists, sociologists, economists and demographers show that socially diverse groups (that is, those with a diversity of race, ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation) are more innovative than homogeneous groups.
• It seems obvious that a group of people with diverse individual expertise would be better than a homogeneous group at solving complex, nonroutine problems. It is less obvious that social diversity should work in the same way—yet the science shows that it does.
• This is not only because people with different backgrounds bring new information. Simply interacting with individuals who are different forces group members to prepare better, to anticipate alternative viewpoints and to expect that reaching consensus will take effort.

Diverse individual expertise has nothing to do with social diversity whatsoever. You can absolutely have diverse individual expertise and not have social diversity or multiculturalism at all. One has nothing to do with another.

Socially diverse groupings accomplish very little to nothing at all. They are far from innovative. They become vindictive and backbiting. Unless, of course, it is the latest movie or television show. Then the script is written specifically to find innovation in diversity.

Not quite sure what you are talking about. Examples of positive and negative examples would be nice.

Now, if we're assembling a team of computer engineers, having a team of highly qualified engineers, all things being equal, a team with various backgrounds and from different schools would come up with more "out of the box thinking" than a team of all white males who graduated together from Brigham Young University (#48 our of 50 top computer engineering schools)/

Again, it's important to have highly qualified people first, not just put someone on the team for the sake of diversity as some on the Left seem to think is "proper".

The recent debacle at Google is a good example. The engineer's memo mentions this. Exclusive: Here's The Full 10-Page Anti-Diversity Screed Circulating Internally at Google [Updated]

Although I understand the nature of his complaint, I have no way of knowing it's validity within Google.


Fired Google engineer Damore says the company is hiring and promoting based on race and gender
James Damore, the former Google engineer fired over a memo criticizing the company's diversity efforts, says his former employer is discriminating in its hiring practices based on race or gender.

Damore, whose online post has divided Google and ignited a national firestorm, told CNBC that Google is "treating people differently based on race or gender."

The company "is pressing individual managers to increase diversity" and is "using race or gender" to decide which workers are promoted and which teams job candidates are placed on, Damore said.

 

[Divine Wind]

....People of different races can get along fine and live in peace. People of different cultures can't.....

So fuck the French? Nuke the cocky bastards into the stone age?

Of course, we'll have to take out Quebec and Louisiana too since they're "tainted". Oui! Oui!

Next on the list, the fucking Eye-talians!

Old joke:
Heaven is where the police are British, the cooks are French, the
mechanics German, the lovers Italian and it's all organised by the
Swiss.

Hell is where the chefs are British, the mechanics French, the
lover's Swiss, the police German and it's all organised by the Italians.

 

[Divine Wind]

Because sports tend to be one of the few places with totally objective criteria for its workers .

If you can bang out 3s it doesn't matter what your race is .

By the way , the NBA is the most diverse of all the sports . Players come from all over .

The military is the same way. It doesn't matter what color you are, your gender or who you are fucking, if you can do the job, great. If not, get the the fuck out.

Please . Military is chuck full of politics .

Awesome. Please fill me in with the background of your expertise in both sports and our military.

 

[g5000]

We have all heard the phrase, diversity is our strength. This term seems to be originated from those in the US and abroad who seek to promote other races and cultures to mix in their own. However, is it a correct assumption?

When looking at these same voices that preach diversity and tolerance from the loudest roof tops, it is these very same voices that create safe zones and create the fascist PC culture that we see at Google and the US government, etc. In fact, the very existence of the PC culture proves that they do not really believe what they are saying. Instead, they only want to promote certain aspects of diversity that only agree with their own world views and none that conflict with those world views.

Looking at history, mixing cultures and races has not always produced a desirable outcome, that is, for all involved. The European immigration into America is but one example, Those immigrants had no interest in mixing with the native people. They abhorred their culture, religion, and way of life. They were labeled savages and seen as regressive and needed to be exterminated, and they were exterminated.

However, other immigrants that came from abroad seemed to mix just fine in the US once those native people were put aside. So what were the differences that made one example of diversity turn into genocide and the other turn into a success story? I suppose it depends on the differences between the groups is the key. For diverse groups to coexist, there needs to be an underlying set of goals and values that can overcome those differences. The wrong mix can be deadly.

So what are those key values and/or goals that need to be present?

You know, you could have saved us all time by just saying you hate race mixing and agree with the sentiments of these fellows:

 

[Timmy]

We have all heard the phrase, diversity is our strength. This term seems to be originated from those in the US and abroad who seek to promote other races and cultures to mix in their own. However, is it a correct assumption?

When looking at these same voices that preach diversity and tolerance from the loudest roof tops, it is these very same voices that create safe zones and create the fascist PC culture that we see at Google and the US government, etc. In fact, the very existence of the PC culture proves that they do not really believe what they are saying. Instead, they only want to promote certain aspects of diversity that only agree with their own world views and none that conflict with those world views.

Looking at history, mixing cultures and races has not always produced a desirable outcome, that is, for all involved. The European immigration into America is but one example, Those immigrants had no interest in mixing with the native people. They abhorred their culture, religion, and way of life. They were labeled savages and seen as regressive and needed to be exterminated, and they were exterminated.

However, other immigrants that came from abroad seemed to mix just fine in the US once those native people were put aside. So what were the differences that made one example of diversity turn into genocide and the other turn into a success story? I suppose it depends on the differences between the groups is the key. For diverse groups to coexist, there needs to be an underlying set of goals and values that can overcome those differences. The wrong mix can be deadly.

So what are those key values and/or goals that need to be present?

The Melting Pot Has Had a Meltdown

Diversity is perversity. Integration leads to disintegration. Prejudice is judicious.

I think diversity is fine as long as everybody is in agreement. But in some cases, diversity is forced on people who don't believe in it or want it. That's when it starts to become trouble.

People of different races can get along fine and live in peace. People of different cultures can't.

When you force two groups of people who act differently, dress differently, have different kinds of names, have different standards, have different ways of living, how could it not be trouble? You are trying to force a hyena and lion to live in the same cage.

Maybe in a hundred years or so, our government will learn this lesson, but for now, they insist that they try and force people together.

What are u talking about ? Example ?

 

[g5000]

We have all heard the phrase, diversity is our strength. This term seems to be originated from those in the US and abroad who seek to promote other races and cultures to mix in their own. However, is it a correct assumption?

When looking at these same voices that preach diversity and tolerance from the loudest roof tops, it is these very same voices that create safe zones and create the fascist PC culture that we see at Google and the US government, etc. In fact, the very existence of the PC culture proves that they do not really believe what they are saying. Instead, they only want to promote certain aspects of diversity that only agree with their own world views and none that conflict with those world views.

Looking at history, mixing cultures and races has not always produced a desirable outcome, that is, for all involved. The European immigration into America is but one example, Those immigrants had no interest in mixing with the native people. They abhorred their culture, religion, and way of life. They were labeled savages and seen as regressive and needed to be exterminated, and they were exterminated.

However, other immigrants that came from abroad seemed to mix just fine in the US once those native people were put aside. So what were the differences that made one example of diversity turn into genocide and the other turn into a success story? I suppose it depends on the differences between the groups is the key. For diverse groups to coexist, there needs to be an underlying set of goals and values that can overcome those differences. The wrong mix can be deadly.

So what are those key values and/or goals that need to be present?

The Melting Pot Has Had a Meltdown

Diversity is perversity. Integration leads to disintegration. Prejudice is judicious.

I think diversity is fine as long as everybody is in agreement. But in some cases, diversity is forced on people who don't believe in it or want it. That's when it starts to become trouble.

People of different races can get along fine and live in peace. People of different cultures can't.

When you force two groups of people who act differently, dress differently, have different kinds of names, have different standards, have different ways of living, how could it not be trouble? You are trying to force a hyena and lion to live in the same cage.

Maybe in a hundred years or so, our government will learn this lesson, but for now, they insist that they try and force people together.

What are u talking about ? Example ?

You know. Like those fucking Irish and the Catholics. Totally different culture. It will only lead to disaster for real Americans to let them come here.

 

[Divine Wind]

We have all heard the phrase, diversity is our strength. This term seems to be originated from those in the US and abroad who seek to promote other races and cultures to mix in their own. However, is it a correct assumption?

When looking at these same voices that preach diversity and tolerance from the loudest roof tops, it is these very same voices that create safe zones and create the fascist PC culture that we see at Google and the US government, etc. In fact, the very existence of the PC culture proves that they do not really believe what they are saying. Instead, they only want to promote certain aspects of diversity that only agree with their own world views and none that conflict with those world views.

Looking at history, mixing cultures and races has not always produced a desirable outcome, that is, for all involved. The European immigration into America is but one example, Those immigrants had no interest in mixing with the native people. They abhorred their culture, religion, and way of life. They were labeled savages and seen as regressive and needed to be exterminated, and they were exterminated.

However, other immigrants that came from abroad seemed to mix just fine in the US once those native people were put aside. So what were the differences that made one example of diversity turn into genocide and the other turn into a success story? I suppose it depends on the differences between the groups is the key. For diverse groups to coexist, there needs to be an underlying set of goals and values that can overcome those differences. The wrong mix can be deadly.

So what are those key values and/or goals that need to be present?

You know, you could have saved us all time by just saying you hate race mixing.

That's an exaggeration, but, then, so is the OP.

Too many people on this forum want to see the world in black and white, either you are are or you aren't, either you're with us or against us. They forget that the world is full of greys, thousands of greys, not just the two choices of one extreme or the other.

Your own avatar attests to a rainbow of colors. Do you actually believe it? Do you think there is room for those who think diversity for its own sake isn't all it's cracked up to be?