Diversity’s paradox

HAVING HAD IT up to here with little Pakistans and Syrias in their cities, the Brits have chosen to wrest control of their borders from the knuckleheads in Brussels.

¡Qué bueno!

This leads me to address the basic paradox of multiculturalism, specifically promoting multiculturalism.

Since the dawn of history we have lived in a fascinating multicultural world where nations, societies, whatever, have existed fairly intact behind borders — borders defended with stones, knives, pistols, moats and boiling oil.

You often could visit these other cultures to experience multiculturalism, but you needed permission first. This age-old system guaranteed diversity of cultures.

window_paradoxFlash forward to the last half century.

Left-wingers, old Flower Children, their kids and grandkids, have taken it upon themselves to promote multiculturalism! As if it were something new.

The road to multiculturalism, they say, is to dismantle borders so everyone can mix it up. This will not lead to more multiculturalism but to less. It is foggy thinking.

Of course, we would, in time, have a uniculture as the separate cultures lost their bearings and fused into one.

But there is a second path, one often taken. When separate cultures inhabit the same space, they clash. This is happening in the United States and in the European Union.

This is human nature that no Kumbaya will ever cancel.

This is also why borders are a good thing if you want to promote multiculturalism — and avoid bloodshed.

* * * *

The Mohammedans

A notable exception to the uniculture trend are Mohammedans. They do not want to assimilate. They do not want to be like you. They want you to be like them — or die.

This is a powerful argument for well-armed borders.

An argument the Brits took to heart.

Again … ¡Qué bueno!

27 thoughts on “Diversity’s paradox

  1. Sadly comma yes is never yes or no is never no in the European Union. Recent history suggests when a referendum does not go the way that the European Union prefers, a revote will be called.

    Thusly, a new vote is being attempted in Great Britain to try to wrestle out a remain vote for the country.
    The elites never ever give in.


      1. Wow, that is interesting if true. I imagine if this ploy doesn’t work, the Elites will concoct another maneuver to reverse or ignore the will of the people. Much akin to the shenanigans in the Pachyderm Party Elites’ effort to invalidate the millions of Trump voters in a modern day coup.
        What say you, señor?


  2. Makes no difference to me anyway. The Caucasian race gets assimilated into the race that they mix blood with, not the other way. By the middle of this century, white will be the minority. Caucasians are not reproducing at a rate that will even maintain the current population level. Then try to get recognized as a visible minority. Haha!

    I won’t be alive then, so I will enjoy the life I’ve worked to achieve, not try to make other people live in my image of the future. What will your savior Donald, who shoots off his mouth before his brain has the facts straight going to do about that. Ban non-whites from having children?


    1. Kris: I too like to console myself with the thought that, being gray-headed, I won’t be around to suffer the endgame here. Only fly in that ointment is that I believe in reincarnation.

      As for Donald being my savior, Trump is my candidate now because he’s the last man standing, and would make a superior president over that Clinton broad.

      I would have far preferred Ted Cruz, but not enough primary voters agreed with me.


  3. Do we as a people not count for anything? While in most cases, the genetics get mixed, the culture that predominates is European in nature. Indians in the upper classes are more British than the British.
    Most Mexicans are genetically mestizos, but they wear a cloak of civilization that is Spanish in nature.
    That is the way of nature, except with the Muslims. Their religion makes them insular and apart. When their culture conflicts with the morals of a host country, they have difficulty assimilating. The Orlando killer could not resolve the conflict of his nature versus the teachings of his faith. He should have walked away from his faith.


  4. The gunman in Orlando was insane. It didn’t matter what his religion was, he wasn’t even a devout Muslim. He was insane and gay. He couldn’t accept his sexuality, but even as a man with a history of abuse and other investigations, could legally buy guns, and kill gay men to try to ease his demons. He was born in the US, will Donald round up every non-white that came to the US since WWII, and send them packing?
    Also, remember that many East Indians are Muslim, Pakistan was part of India until recently. There are bad people in every race, Muslims are just the flavor of the month. May I remind you of a famous Caucasian who tried to eradicate a religious group in the last century. His death count is still one of the highest.


    1. The man prayed to Allah every day. He attended his mosque more often than you've read actual news. He bore a child and was married TWICE. His final text was to his wife to say he loves her!

      You are on a "gay" tilt. Keep things in perspective and don't play "mini-me" Obama by trying to erase Islam.


      1. Mark: Please let’s not argue with other commenters. I get to argue with commenters, though I usually do not, and they get to argue with me. But if you argue with one other, it tends to fly out of control, and that’s not nice.

        As for the Orlando nutcase, he was both a Mohammedan crackpot and, it seems, a closet queen. He was, to put it mildly, conflicted, and it ended tragically.


      2. Anyway, none of the comments so far touch on the actual topic of the post. Promoting multiculturalism is counterproductive!

        I never mentioned Orlando.


      1. Just like I said Felipe, he was insane. I don’t see it as an act of terrorism, I see it as a crazy man who was legally allowed to buy guns.
        I agree (as I have said here) that there is a clear case to profile young middle eastern men, because 75 yr. old Jewish women aren’t likely to go into a mall and shoot people, as well as I couldn’t care less if all of my phone conversations were monitored, all of my mail was screened, and the government can implant a chip in me to follow my movements. I do not care, because I have nothing to hide. There is a reason to profile certain people, and those being profiled have to accept it and get on with life.


  5. The Democrats are trying to disarm us. That makes us targets. People in Israel carry arms all over the place. They shoot back, and that prevents a lot of carnage.

    The terrorists will always have arms in the U.S. With all the money that the Saudis and Gulf states have, they will always be able to arm murderers.

    Yes, we know who are the intellectual authors of these horrible atrocities. Attorney General Lynch admitted on television the other day that they have no idea where the Orlando killer’s widow is now. She is probably in Saudi Arabia collecting her reward.


    1. Señor Gill: What’s to be done with you folks? This, while important, is not the topic of this item.

      But I can’t avoid noting that Lynch said this week that the way to fight Mohammedan murderers is with looooove.

      Cue the sound track!


  6. I might add they were also chosen for their willingness to take marching orders from this corrupt, felonious administration.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. “Critically, many scientists and social scientists (the Dillingham Commission experts among them) agreed that race was determinative of behavior, intelligence and physical endowment, and that racial groups could be arranged in a hierarchical fashion. The Dictionary of Races or Peoples, for instance, characterized Bohemians as “the most advanced of all” Slavic race groups. The Southern Italian, on the other hand, it deemed “an individualist having little adaptability to highly organized society.”

    Representative of this popular school of thought was the Station for the Study of Evolution, a think tank established by the Carnegie Institution in 1904 at Cold Spring Harbor (Long Island). The institute’s director, Charles Davenport, made it his life’s work to document the relationship between race and comportment. “The idea of a ‘melting pot,’” he wrote, “belongs to a pre-Mendelian age. Now we recognize that characters are inherited as units and do not readily break up.” From arguing that race was both determinative and qualitative, it was no great leap of logic to suggest some racial groups were better fit for citizenship than others.”



  8. Guns don’t kill people, people with guns kill people. Look at the statistics, and accept that being armed doesn’t make you safer, it makes you more paranoid. I currently only know one person who owns firearms, and he is a hunting guide. I have no reason to own a firearm. I served 6 years in the army reserve, trained with numerous types of firearms, but see no reason to own one.


Comments are closed.