Hong Wu wrote:Another thing that crossed my mind the other day is that in non-western countries with a lot of diversity (such as India, or to a lesser degree, China) they don't describe what they are as "diverse". Indians just describe themselves as Indians, no matter if they're a Hindu, a Jain, a Sikh, a Buddhist or sometimes even a Muslim. Chinese just describe themselves as Chinese, although the cultural revolution had a hand in that. Only in the west are people hyphenated versions of their country, along with a discussion of diversity. I think I've touched on this idea before but I suspect that as soon as the term "diversity" is being used there has been a failure of some kind.
Dear @Hong Wu: I discussed this very point with other people who explained
1. in countries such as Japan or France, immigrants are NEVER considered the same as native nationals.
So this goes both ways. The reason they are all considered Japanese is outsiders are not.
2. In the US there USED to be more cultural assimilation. But this became more lax over time and generations.
Instead of being Americans first, and the local cultures within that,
more often now we are seeing groups putting their own identities first, even at the expense of rights of others.
We even have "reverse racism" going on, where the previous cultural norms are denigrated as being oppressive and negative.
The cure for this problem of diversity, especially of political beliefs that are causing an internal civil war
even within the same party, is to teach all people equal knowledge, empowerment and enforcement of
Constitutional laws by which all people of all creeds are protected equally, and no one is deprived of
liberty or rights without DUE PROCESS of laws. We can't just declare one group racist or inferior and
deserving to be overridden denied rights or discriminated against by our "own beliefs".
If we all have equal knowledge and empowerment to invoke authority and enforce laws of democratic self government, we can have both the cultural diversity and the national unity and identity under common laws.
SEE also: http://www.ethics-commission.net
Hong Wu wrote:Just something to maybe add to the list of leftist oxymorons. In order for things to be diverse, they have to be different. If they're different, they're not the same and if they're not the same, they are by definition not completely equal with each other, right?
The best counter-argument I have been able to formulate to this is that diversity would lead to temporary inequality, which is supposed to be alleviated. I think however that this segways into another argument I made some time ago, which is that the metaphysics of progressivism has no feasible end in sight, thereby robbing it of any concept of the peak of all things (God, etc.) and therefore making every extant and possible being an inferior to future beings, creating an eternal chain of subservients.
Although very subtle, I do believe that this metaphysical presumption is vaguely realized through progressive's growing totalitarian tendencies.
Dear @Hong Wu
What you are pointing out is that equal inclusion
DOES NOT MEAN being all the same. You're right, it makes no sense.
When we treat people or groups with EQUAL RESPECT
and EQUAL REPRESENTATION, that means they will Represent THEMSELVES,
their own interests, their own beliefs, USING THEIR OWN LANGUAGE.
So naturally this will be diverse, as unique as each individual is.
I would compare inclusion of diversity with working with the
FULL ORCHESTRA to play all parts of the symphony in harmony.
The Flutes will play completely different music, notes and key
from the Trumpets. And the DRUM part looks nothing like the other instruments.
These are all different. None are the same.
Yet in a musical composition, it is necessary to include and blend
ALL the instruments and their parts to make the whole, which is
GREATER than the sum of the parts.
Equal inclusion and respect for the role of each section,
each musician, and the purpose of each line of melody or harmony
are ALL important. NONE can be left out or the symphony is incomplete.
But that doesn't make the parts the SAME.