
DIVERSE
QUESTIONS ABOUT "DIVERSITY"
Thanks to thebirdman.org
One cannot help noticing the propaganda
barrage in favor of "diversity" that our ruling elite are forcing down
our throats. We are told that "diversity" exists, it is increasing, it
is good, and we must all learn to accept and celebrate these "facts."
That much of this propaganda is targeted at children is of extreme
concern. We would like to ask a few brief questions about this
propaganda campaign, and the subject of "diversity" itself.
1. Does diversity really exist?
This is a serious question. On the one
hand, looking at all the system's propaganda in favor of diversity, it
seems that the major type of diversity that is being promoted is that
of having physically different types of humans - in other words,
different RACES (and ethnic groups) - in one place. BUT...the
pro-diversity liberals also tell us that:
"There
is no such thing as race; we are all actually really the same, we are
all essentially identical. What we think of as race is really a social
construct that has caused enormous human misery; thus, we must get rid
of this social construct. In fact, whatever differences people think
exist between human populations are extremely superficial and
meaningless."
OK, then, we can ask the following. If
race does not exist, how can one have - never mind celebrate - "racial
diversity?" If the social construct of race is so bad, and has caused
so much misery, and must be eliminated, then why do the
diversity-mongers emphasize these social constructs, and make them the
center of attention, the center of society, and a cause for
"celebration?" If human differences are "superficial and meaningless",
then what, pray tell, is the advantage of having a diversity of such
superficial and meaningless differences?
Either human diversity does not exist
OR
human differences are real and important. Which is it? Diversity-
mongers like to confuse the public with Orwellian statements like:
"race does not exist, but racism is real"; however, any thinking person
has to reject such rubbish. Again: are human differences (i.e., races
and ethnic groups) real, or is "diversity" about nothing but an
illusion?
2. If diversity is real, is it good?
Let us assume that the liberals somehow
wiggle their way out of the contradictions discussed above, and assert
that indeed, human differences exist, and thus, human diversity exists.
We can then ask: is the liberals' version of diversity good?
First, a few comments. When scientists
talk about the benefits of "biodiversity", they mean by that something
quite different than what liberals mean by diversity. The key to
biodiversity is preserving all of nature's species and subspecies
within their natural environments. It does NOT mean that animal and
plant species and subspecies from all over the globe are to be brought
to one area to live together, and where attempts are to be made to
interbreed those species/subspecies which are so capable (e.g., dogs,
wolves, coyotes; lions and tigers; various bird species, etc.) into one
sort of homogenous hybrid species. Again, true biodiversity is
concerned with preserving all life within its natural habitats. Thus,
in fact, racial separatist nationalists are the true champions of human
biodiversity, which they want to preserve, and the liberal
diversity-mongers are enemies of human biodiversity, which they wish to
eliminate. Well, actually, liberals are concerned with eliminating
EUROPEAN human biodiversity throughout the Earth; other human
population groups "of course" are allowed to exist unmolested in their
own homelands. But, in any case, the contradiction between real
biodiversity and liberal "diversity" is clear for all to see.
Liberals also like to preface their
statements on the "blessings of diversity" with comments such as:
"Diversity
exists, and it is increasing, so we had all better get used to it. Your
children will live in a more 'diverse' society, so you'll help them by
making them more comfortable with such 'diversity.'"
Well, that makes no sense. We can also
say
that terrorism exists and is increasing, diseases such as cancer exist
and are increasing, crime exists, etc., so should we celebrate these
things also, promote their existence, and make our children more
comfortable with them? The fact that something exists, and is
increasing, is no logical proof that the thing in question is "good."
And, also, the "inevitability" of increasing diversity, which liberals
like to make out to be a "random force of nature", is in fact no such
thing. Increasing "diversity" in White societies is the result of
political decisions which can be reversed. Even low birthrates among
western populations could be reversed with the correct policies and the
political will. The liberals want their agenda to seem inevitable, but
it is inevitable only if those who oppose the agenda accept that it is
inevitable - which it is NOT.
The main question of this section of
this
essay is: is "diversity" good? The messes caused by such "diversity"
around the globe- including in America - are fairly conclusive proof
that liberal diversity has serious costs. It also seems to have no
clear benefits. After all, if diversity was such an obvious strength,
people would be seeking it out naturally, and the monolithic
pro-diversity propaganda campaign would not be necessary. But actually,
an excellent analysis of the absurdity of the "diversity is strength"
nonsense already exists; thus, instead of just repeating what it says,
we link to it here:
http://www.amren.com/divers.htm/
Read it
for yourself and make up your own mind.
3. If
diversity is so great, why don't "nations of color" practice it?
Hmm...this
is strange. All of the nations of Asian, Africa, and Latin America -
which increase the "diversity" of the West via constant immigration -
themselves seem to reject the blessings of diversity. Nations like
Japan and Korea (Korea being a prime source of immigration to the USA)
are among the most racially/ethnically homogenous nations on Earth.
Another major source of immigrants is China, a state run by its Han
Chinese majority. The small percentage of the population of China which
is not Chinese is herded into the western areas of the country and are
in fact, in some cases, being displaced by ethnic Chinese. The heavily
populated eastern and east-central portions of China are essentially
racial homogenous Chinese. Question: since China has an imbalance of
young males over females, and since this is considered a vexing social
problem, why doesn't China start importing excess females of other
races to wed Chinamen, and help build China's booming economy? I would
think that millions of African and Latino women would help "enrich"
China, don't you agree? And of course, China should not be sexist as
well as racist; thus, the blessings of diversity can include
immigration into China of African and Latino males as well. And of
course, the same goes for all the relatively homogenous (and in some
cases xenophobic) nations of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. [Note to
non-White racial nationalists: I am obviously being sarcastic here.
But, this sarcasm points out non-White hypocrisy on "diversity", a
hypocrisy that non-White nationalists need to correct. If you wish to
be masters of your own domains, then let us - the Whites - be the
masters in ours.]
What
about Israel? Why should Israel be just a "Jewish state?" I would think
that Israel would be greatly strengthened by diverse immigration of
gentiles from all over the Earth, including Africans and Latinos. What
about the benefits of Arab Muslim immigration into Israel? Diversity is
strength! And of course, we cannot forget the exclusive and homogenous
Hasidic Jewish communities in the USA. There are some towns in New York
state which are essentially exclusively Jewish. These poor people are
suffering from inadequate diversity! Perhaps low income housing should
be built there, in the interests of "desegregation!"
4. Other
kinds of diversity exist, no?
Liberals
like to say:
"Diversity
is not only about (non-existent) race or ethnicity or gender. Diversity
includes all of us - we all contribute to diversity with our unique
selves, our particular interests perspectives, experiences, thoughts,
and personalities. Some of us are tall, some short, some extroverts,
some introverts, with all different ideas - that is what diversity is
really about."
To which
I reply: that is simply not true. The system's diversity propaganda
seems to concentrate exclusively on the diversity of (usually)
immutable physical characteristics such as race, ethnicity, and gender,
as does the hiring practices of companies that "wish to promote a
diverse workplace by encouraging applications from 'people of color'
and women." Why does no company encourage applications from "burly
White redneck men", for example?
Let's
look at how this "holistic diversity" could work. Certainly, the mass
media could diversify by hiring more conservative Republicans to go
with all the liberal Democrats; college faculties can be diversified in
the same manner. Pacifists can help diversify the General Staffs of our
military forces. No doubt that anarchists, mobsters, and gangbangers
could strengthen your local police force. The NBA can recruit midgets
and dwarves; blind men can be effective airline pilots. Companies
without a healthy quota of White nationalist separatists can be
considered to have inadequate diversity. Why are undertakers all living
people; why do we assume that the dead would not have useful input to
that profession? That is anti-deceased hate and intolerance! And, if
diversity of opinion is to be valued, what about the opinions of those
who think that liberal multiracial/multicultural diversity is bad? Will
we soon see propaganda from that point of view ?
Last
question:
5. Isn't
it possible that the whole diversity-program is nothing more or less
than an organized system of genocide against peoples of European
descent, sweetened up with syrupy propaganda in order to mask the
poison's bitter taste?
We won't
answer that one. It is up to you, dear reader, to provide your own
response.
This document was saved from
http://www.thebirdman.org/.
Back
to Musings page
Top
of Page
Home