ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, December 06, 2014

Destroying the community to diversify it

There is no Paradox of Diverse Communities; one horn of the dilemma is simply false. So, the answer to his question is, yes,  we shouldn't fight against self-segregation, because divisiveness and a lack of community cohesion are intrinsically dyscivic. In fact, we should actively promote racial, cutural, linguistic, religious segregation in the interest of long term peace and harmonious civil relations across various human differences:
Urbanists and planners like to imagine and design for a world of diversity. Diversity, we like to think, is both a social good and, as I’ve argued, a spur to innovation and economic growth.

But to what degree is this goal of diverse, cohesive community attainable, even in theory?

That’s the key question behind an intriguing new study, “The (In)compatibility of Diversity and Sense of Community,” published in the November edition of the American Journal of Community Psychology. The study, by sociologist Zachary Neal and psychologist Jennifer Watling Neal, both of Michigan State University (full disclosure: I was an external member of the former’s dissertation committee), develops a nifty agent-based computer model to test this question.

Their simulations of more than 20 million virtual “neighborhoods” demonstrate a troubling paradox: that community and diversity may be fundamentally incompatible goals. As the authors explain, integration “provides opportunities for intergroup contact that are necessary to promote respect for diversity, but may prevent the formation of dense interpersonal networks that are necessary to promote sense of community.”
They are correct to point to the "federation" concept as a possible solution, but they are thinking on too small a scale. Neighborwide segregation is not enough. It should be state-wide. People like to point to the Swiss model as being an example of successful integration, what they don't realize is that religious, linguistic, and ethnic cleansing were utilized in establishing the Swiss cantons; that is why the cantons are still identified as "Protestant" or "Catholic" cantons as well as being on one side or the other of the Franco-German divide.

But more importantly, the federation concept cannot work without decentralized government. There is no point in encouraging Somalis or Nigerians to live in segregated neighborhoods if they are legally held to German or Japanese standards by a higher-level government.

The fact is that diversity is a social ill and it exacerbates rather than reduces racial tensions. I can attest that no one in Minnesota had an opinion about Somalis or Liberians 20 years ago. In only two decades, diversity has caused tens of thousands of formerly indifferent people to actively despise them. It would be interesting to test this hypothesis by using contributions to African-related charities as a metric. I surmise that there is a lower percentage of White Minneapolis residents donating to charities that aid Africa now that diversity and immigration have given them some first-hand experience of actual Africans.

Diversity destroys communities. That is the observable fact. Diversity destroys the common interest. To be pro-diversity is necessarily to be anti-communitarian and against the common interest. There is the real paradox: the progressive who claims to be a pro-diversity communitarian.

Labels: ,

69 Comments:

Anonymous realmaty December 06, 2014 8:59 AM  

People just dont understand that what makes a community a community is everyone being similar in more ways than theyre bot.

Brothers grow to hate one another. Why wouldnt i hate someone that behaves in a manner conpletely different from me that looks nothing like me?

Hate is natural and easy. Its the easiest thing in the world.

Anonymous PA December 06, 2014 9:25 AM  

Diversity was always about destroying civil society and ultimately replacing all forms of citizens’ autonomy with a tyrannical central government. Civil Rights was America’s Bolshevik Revolution.

Anonymous PA December 06, 2014 9:28 AM  

Hate is natural and easy. Its the easiest thing in the world.

To love something is to value it very highly. Hate is what you feel toward those who would destroy what you love. Without hate, love is impotent. Without love, hate is cannibalistic.

Anonymous MrGreenMan December 06, 2014 9:36 AM  

Your position sounds an awful lot like how Booker T Washington explained blacks and whites could live peacefully in the US - as distinct as the fingers on the hand when it comes to their own neighborhoods and institutions, unified in the hand when required for national defense, etc.

I used to think this was called the Atlanta Compromise, but, especially the Wikipedia article, is so negative about this idea, claiming its an acceptance of submissiveness to white rule, I don't recognize it vs. what he wrote in his autobiography.

Anonymous Stilicho December 06, 2014 9:42 AM  

Good point PA. Those revolutionaries thought their preferred form of statism would replace the system they were tearing down but they never realized that human nature might tend to fill the void they created with something other than socialism. That is the struggle we see today as white Americans look upon the abyss that is their enemies' goal and start to say "enough!". As noted often around here: the Saxon is beginning to hate and the new Normans aren't really aware of what that sullen look in his eyes represents or what it really means when he starts muttering about his rights. Kipling wasn't just a poet, he was also a prophet.

Anonymous MrGreenMan December 06, 2014 9:42 AM  

The Afrikaaner stared at this same question and found the only answer in the original formulation of Apartheid, which was that, since Zulu and Boer and Xhosa and Lesotho, being different cultures, could only live within a federated nation by having their own neighborhoods.

The Swiss stared at this same question and separated into a federation of cantons.

Of course, democracy is the destroyer, as democracy makes everything into a breeding contest.

Blogger Da_Truth_Hurts December 06, 2014 9:43 AM  

I think the push for 'diversity' and multiculturalism is simply an easy backdoor to increasing the size and power of centralized government in western nations. They don't even have to win any elections to make the state become more powerful. Just start forcing people to live near each other that do not belong.

The old maxim "Diversity + Proximity = War" is apt - unless a powerful totalitarian state is there to hold the pieces together. Tito did exactly this in what was once called Yugoslavia. He held that nation together with a firm fist using national socialism. Until it imploded when the forces of diversity and proximity became to great.

"The Communist Party must always endeavour, and does endeavour, to ensure that all the negative phenomena of nationalism disappear and that people are educated in the spirit of internationalism." - Josip Tito

Anonymous Godfrey December 06, 2014 9:44 AM  

"Diversity" has always really been about divide and rule. It is really about destroying community and replacing it with The State.

To "the Progressive" (actually better described as "the retard") there is nothing outside The State. Everything outside The State is to be crushed. Family, church, community, the individual, the local Elks Club etc., everything is to be crushed under the heel of The State.

Anonymous MrGreenMan December 06, 2014 9:46 AM  

It's a damn shame that leftists have no interest in maximizing human happiness. I assume it's a consequence of believing that there is nothing else - might as well make a hash of it, as nothing really matters, spread some misery in the name of St. Darwin.

Blogger Nate December 06, 2014 9:49 AM  

"Neighborwide segregation is not enough. It should be state-wide. "

I find left to their own choice... people self segregate to the town level. And that works well... at least it does down here.

well... i say it works. It works because ultimately the state is keeping those corrupt black towns above water.

its unlikely that american blacks could run a state long term. It would simply collapse into the nigeria style corruption that plagues them.

Anonymous Susan December 06, 2014 10:00 AM  

They proved that in Detroit Nate. The last mayoral election, the white republican got the majority of the vote. Even the blacks are tired of the black politicians.

God Himself segregated. When Nimrod was building the infamous Tower, God struck them all with different languages, causing them to separate and find their own ways. These large urban areas are not what God intended for mankind.

Blogger Da_Truth_Hurts December 06, 2014 10:20 AM  

The mayor of Detroit Mike Duggan is a Democrat. Detroit has been a one party city for 60 years.

But yes, he is white, and it will take white men to even attempt to get that city back in some semblance of functional order.

Anonymous Godfrey December 06, 2014 10:21 AM  

When are we going to see more diversity in Israel?

Anonymous #Istandwithjackie December 06, 2014 10:29 AM  

"Family, church, community, the individual, the local Elks Club etc."

...college fraternities....

Anonymous Stephen J. December 06, 2014 10:52 AM  

The problem comes when you want to enforce segregation on one criterion alone over all others. It would be a shame if Thomas Sowell, Condi Rice or Ben Carson were restricted only to the neighborhoods and institutions deemed appropriate for people like Kanye West, Rihanna or 50 Cent.

Anonymous Anubis December 06, 2014 11:09 AM  

The Federal Reserve has an amazing lack of die verse city. They are getting worse with section 8 housing, people in cities are losing their ability to drive an extra 2 hours to go to an amusement park without non-Asian minority problems. There is even die verse city showing up at Renaissance Fairs

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus December 06, 2014 11:11 AM  

No way, man. Diversity is GOOD. Lakeshia the Lesbian Eskimo told me so.

Anonymous Blitter December 06, 2014 11:14 AM  

Truly bizarre... A community is defined by what its people hold in common. When did we forget that? By that definition it easily follows that diversity is fundamentally incompatible with it.

Anonymous Stephen J. December 06, 2014 11:18 AM  

You can have diversity in superficial characteristics as long as you have commonality on critical characteristics. The question is which characteristics are superficial and which critical.

Anonymous VD December 06, 2014 11:22 AM  

The problem comes when you want to enforce segregation on one criterion alone over all others. It would be a shame if Thomas Sowell, Condi Rice or Ben Carson

No, it really wouldn't be. There will always be costs, but consider the costs vs the benefits.

OpenID mattse001 December 06, 2014 11:25 AM  

Perhaps this was an intended effect of integration: to atomize the community. The Founding Fathers assumed that people would band together in voluntary associations for the purpose of action. Today, there are fewer and fewer of these organizations left that unify communities.
The result is that the people are disorganized, and easily bullied.

Anonymous Will Best December 06, 2014 11:34 AM  

The Ferguson thing is a bit interesting. I have seen comments I did not expect from people I did not expect on my wife's FB feed. Nothing meant to start a flame war with those that are particularly thick in understanding diversity. But it demonstrates they are at least understanding the situation on some level. That just wasn't flat out the case 5-10 years ago.

Anonymous Stg58 / Animal Mother December 06, 2014 11:39 AM  

Ben Carson, Sowell, Rice etc. would probably make those black neighborhoods a better place.

Anonymous Anonymous December 06, 2014 11:40 AM  

As a Christian, for example, I have no business marrying a non-Christian. Diversity exalted to a position of an objective good and an abstraction results in so much of the evil we see.

Sure, merely judging an individual on demographic data alone can be wrong and sinful, but though it might be a sin, it's not a crime, subject to the state's meddling in our lives in order to achieve the ideal society. God can take care of the sin; the state and its meddlers-that-be only wind up erecting their endless and disastrous Towers of Babel . . . at the individual's and the TRUE community's expense!

Regards,
David Smith

Anonymous DMM December 06, 2014 11:45 AM  

One of the biggest problems with diversity is that the good blacks have moved out of black communities. Carson and Sowell and the like move out and you are left with the dregs who cannot get out. These men would be leaders in their communities, making those communities better. So there would be benefit to them being with their communities.

Also, if those musicians had to live with their own kind, maybe they would spend their money making it better, instead of hiding away in their mansions inside their largely white, gated communities.

Anonymous Big Bill December 06, 2014 11:50 AM  

People like to point to the Swiss model as being an example of successful integration, what they don't realize is that religious, linguistic, and ethnic cleansing were utilized in establishing the Swiss cantons; that is why the cantons are still identified as "Protestant" or "Catholic" cantons as well as being on one side or the other of the Franco-German divide.

Either you or Steve Sailer had link a few years ago to a research paper analyzing the effect of diversity on crime within Switzerland itself. As I remember, the more diverse regions within Switzerland were associated with higher crime rates.

Does anyone remember this or have a source for the paper? I flogged my hard drive, but found nothing.

Anonymous Godfrey December 06, 2014 12:00 PM  

Anonymous December 06, 2014 11:40 AM
"As a Christian, for example, I have no business marrying a non-Christian."


In the interest of diversity, you should marry and spend your life with someone you don't like. Please, please try to be more tolerant.

Blogger YIH December 06, 2014 12:01 PM  

The problem comes when you want to enforce segregation on one criterion alone over all others. It would be a shame if Thomas Sowell, Condi Rice or Ben Carson.
The problem isn't the ''Nice, just like the Huxtables!'' African family - it's those who rent afterwords that turn Ferguson into Fergedishu:
The racial composition of Ferguson has shifted, however. In 1970, 99% of the population of Ferguson was White and 1% African American. In 1980, the proportion of White residents went down to 85%, whereas the proportion of African American rose to 14%. In 1990, residents of Ferguson who were identified in the U.S. Census as White comprised 73.8% of the total, while those identified as Black made up 25.1%.[23] (The remainder, 1.1%, identified with other racial categories.) In the 2000 census, 44.7% were White and 52.4% were African American. In the 2010 census, 29.3% were White and 67.4% were African American.

Blogger Salt December 06, 2014 12:02 PM  

I find left to their own choice... people self segregate to the town level.

People who have no recollection of the 50s have no idea what voluntary segregation might look like. Too many confused disparities with that segregation, then came the 60s. Disparities are not causal of segregation, but culture is and I find it impossible to link them. Even poor whites will separate away from poor blacks. Universities are now beginning to experience voluntary segregation and cultural adjustments to curriculum. What I do not get is why this is so hard for the Liberal to grasp.

I can attest that no one in Minnesota had an opinion about Somalis or Liberians 20 years ago. In only two decades, diversity has caused tens of thousands of formerly indifferent people to actively despise them.

I doubt this would be true to the extent of actively dispising if they had been French or even Hungarian.

Anonymous The Anti-Gnostic December 06, 2014 12:04 PM  

Ben Carson, Sowell, Rice etc. would probably make those black neighborhoods a better place.

Beat me to it. Yes, they need to stay and lead their own people.

Anonymous Cail Corishev December 06, 2014 12:08 PM  

The Ferguson thing is a bit interesting. I have seen comments I did not expect from people I did not expect on my wife's FB feed.

I've noticed that too. "Conservative" friends who normally take the "blacks would be fine if liberals would leave them alone" angle aren't letting them off the hook so much this time. Now it's more just, "These people need to get their act together." You can see the doubt sneaking in around the edges of their equalitarianism.

I'm sure if you challenged them they'd still say it's the fault of welfare and so on; but they're starting to realize that lofty arguments about root causes aren't that relevant when people are rioting right now -- and so predictably. It helps that there's so much amateur video now that shows what's really going on; the media is having a harder time than usual selling rioters as "protesters."

Anonymous Stephen J. December 06, 2014 12:16 PM  

"There will always be costs, but consider the costs vs the benefits."

Can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, after all.

Anonymous Bz December 06, 2014 12:26 PM  

"The Afrikaaner stared at this same question and found the only answer in the original formulation of Apartheid, which was that, since Zulu and Boer and Xhosa and Lesotho, being different cultures, could only live within a federated nation by having their own neighborhoods."

South Africa is an interesting country. You can paint what-if scenarios, such as what if they had held out another decade and allied with the chinese instead of crumbling into today's chaos. What then? Their insane colonial parent, the UK, would probably hate them as much as they would hate a Rhodesia that still existed. But South Africans might well have been better off.

Considering Apartheid, it was ultimately a failure. The wisest course would, in retrospect, have been to keep the blacks out of the country entirely instead. (Did you know all the black tribes, except possibly the Xhosa, arrived there after the whites?) Cheap labour is never worth it.

Blogger Danby December 06, 2014 12:29 PM  

"I doubt this would be true to the extent of actively dispising if they had been French or even Hungarian."

Dude, two words, which every Minnesotan will have an opinion on, and usually not a complimentary one.

French Canadian.

From the guy whose French Canadian father and French Canadian grandfather and 4 French Canadian step-grandfathers all died of alcohol-related accidents or stabbings. French Canadians love them some stabbings.

Blogger Tom Kratman December 06, 2014 12:38 PM  

I don't think it can be made to work in normal civil life. In may be possible to have (not make, HAVE) it work where the ethnically diverse community has something else to bring it together, religion, maybe, or academia, or perhaps a medical town. It can work fairly well where there is an all-devouring mission and ethos, as in a military housing area. The latter is especially true overseas, where being surrounded by foreigners tends to pull Americans together to a degree.* Very small numbers, of roughly equal capability, with no real possiblility of those numbers being reinforced, and serious prospects for cultural assimilation therefore, also helps.

On the other hand, who wants to live on a military post all their lives, and how the hell would we come up with a suifficient enemy to drive all that, or pay for it if we could?

On the other, other hand, the mere fact that fantacists and social engineers (Lord, forgive us our redundancies) bring to this their prejudices and delusions and incarnate idiocy, dooms all such efforts to failure.

*"To a degree." Different tastes in music will tend to pull them apart for after hours public socializing purposes.

Blogger Ghost December 06, 2014 12:42 PM  

Anyone who went to high school knows that self segregation is natural.

Anonymous Big Bill December 06, 2014 12:43 PM  

One of the biggest problems with diversity is that the good blacks have moved out of black communities. Carson and Sowell and the like move out and you are left with the dregs who cannot get out. These men would be leaders in their communities, making those communities better. So there would be benefit to them being with their communities.

This brain drain is the biggest result of integration. Instead of black folks working to better their communities, they ran off. Liberians, Nigerians, Kenyans, Newarkians, DCians, all of them. They run off, and they leave their tribesman dumber and more poverty-stricken.

Sadly, other than a few exceptions like Sowell and Ben Carson, they then insist that the hell-holes they abandoned are white folk's responsibility, not theirs. So we send white doctors and nurses and soldiers back to Liberia to "fix things" instead of the 300,000 Liberian refugee elite living in the USA. Further, they blame the white folks for creating the hell-holes they skedaddled from.

Why did Mr. Brown of _Brown v. Board_ explicitly and deliberately move to a white neighborhood? As he testified at trial, he wanted to get his daughters away from Negro predators and out of Negro schools and go live with a better class of people--white folks--so his kids could have good [read: "white"] friends and go to good schools.

As black folks, the black middle and upper class need their feet held to the fire. They need to step up and take responsibility for the development and "moralization" of their own people. If anything, the last fifty years has taught us that white folks cannot do that. Let a black cop in a black community, responsible to a black police chief and black city council take down Mr. Garner and Mr. Brown (or not, as the black residents wish). Let the black middle and upper classes be taxed to pay for their miscreant fellows. I can guarantee you they would find a solution to the problem that worked. They sure did in the years before desegregation.

This was, in fact, one of the purposes behind the spate of laws in American municipalities (ca. 1880-1920) that let communities (black AND white) organize and self-segregate. By ratifying racial self-segregation by both blacks and whites, these laws inhibited "gentrification" (i.e. rich white developers/homosexuals moving into black areas, buying up properties, converting them to white use, and squeezing blacks out). When white folks move in, organize, force blacks to "ack white", and displace them, they cause a lot of grief.

Anonymous VD December 06, 2014 12:52 PM  

Can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, after all.

If this is a reference to Lenin, I will simply observe that there is a considerable difference between starving millions of people and preventing the black elite from running away from their own people.

Anonymous Porky December 06, 2014 1:05 PM  

All of this is a non-starter without disenfranchisement.

Anonymous PA December 06, 2014 1:20 PM  

As black folks, the black middle and upper class need their feet held to the fire. They need to step up and take responsibility for the development and "moralization" of their own people.

The Talented Tenth are a contemptible lot.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus December 06, 2014 1:31 PM  

Bz: "Considering Apartheid, it was ultimately a failure."

Yes.

Bz: "The wisest course would, in retrospect, have been to keep the blacks out of the country entirely instead."

Yes.

Bz: "(Did you know all the black tribes, except possibly the Xhosa, arrived there after the whites?)"

Yes.

Bz: "Cheap labour is never worth it."

Yes.

Anonymous DJF December 06, 2014 1:34 PM  

Tom Kratman writes """"It can work fairly well where there is an all-devouring mission and ethos, as in a military housing area. The latter is especially true overseas, where being surrounded by foreigners tends to pull Americans together to a degree.*"""

I notice that while in the USN, especially the crew of smaller ships (100 to 400) hung out together overseas while on liberty no matter what the color or religion etc. However when the ship was back in the States they separated out to different groups.

Blogger Tom Kratman December 06, 2014 1:50 PM  

"As black folks, the black middle and upper class need their feet held to the fire."

Speaking of the Huxtables, one strongly suspects that the current spate of "charges" against Bill Cosby springs from this precisely; that he tried to hold their feet to the fire, to gainsay the narrative, and so must be silenced. Janine Dickerson, as far as I can tell, never in her life met a set of genitalia, male or female, she didn't like, and she's going to bitch about Cosby? Why?

Blogger Bogey December 06, 2014 2:07 PM  

Idiots would love to disqualify his remarks now, but I don't think it invalidates what Cosby has said on the matter. Truth is truth no matter who speaks it as the saying goes.

Blogger Tom Kratman December 06, 2014 2:51 PM  

Funny that this came up again in 2013, with the Neals. In 07 or so, another study by one Robert Putnam, of Hahvahd, came to similar conclusions. Putnam actually came to the conclusions long before, nlt 2001, which us when he released the data, but surpressed his own study because he didn't like the result. In any case it suggests that, however much they may hate the truth, even academics can sometimes bring themselves to face it.

Perhaps there's a little hope for western civ, after all. A _little_.

Anonymous Too-Soon-ami December 06, 2014 4:03 PM  

Ben Carson, Sowell, Rice etc. would probably make those black neighborhoods a better place.


Not a chance. Those People won't even listen to Bill "Roofie Puddin Pop" Cosby. The negroes listed above would be lucky if they weren't crucified by their brothas and sistas. And they know it.

It would not be a shame to "lose" them, because they offer nothing to Whites, except that warm, tingly feeling that some of them are like us.

Blogger Tom Kratman December 06, 2014 4:27 PM  

Au contraire; Sowell, at least, offers rebuttal to Krugman. Now Krugman, though white, offers nothing but ruin to everybody.

Blogger Miss Carnivorous December 06, 2014 4:51 PM  

Still and all, I think the African Union troops should come and police the inner cities.

Anonymous Sheila December 06, 2014 4:57 PM  

Others have already capable rebutted Stephen J. ("It would be a shame if Thomas Sowell, Condi Rice or Ben Carson were restricted only to the neighborhoods. . . "), but I'd like to add my two cents. That's the omnipresent and dangerous IKAGO fallacy (I know a good one) usually applied to the talented 1/10 (let's be a bit more accurate here!). My husband and I discussed this some time ago, when I was moving more dramatically right than he. Regardless of Thomas Sowell's individual behavior, HBD in general and regression to the mean more specifically indicate his children are not likely to be as learned as he, nor share his precise political and economic views. Even in the unlikely event they do, this does not extend to their friends or cousins or step-sister's boyfriend, who will end up destroying your neighborhood. Finally, even barring all of these likely scenarios, genetics is forever. I realize right-liberals love to claim it's content of character and not skin color they judge by, but would you truly be happy if your White daughter brought home Ben Carson's son and announced she planned to merge their genetic lines?

Anonymous Too-Soon-ami December 06, 2014 5:21 PM  

"It can work fairly well where there is an all-devouring mission and ethos, as in a military housing area. The latter is especially true overseas, where being surrounded by foreigners tends to pull Americans together to a degree."


In light of this week's Wash Times report, that in the past year 3,850 military men have been sexually penetrated against their will, it seems that dressing a savage in a uniform doesn't have any civilizing effect upon the savage. And, yes, I'm suggesting that most of the sexual assaults in the military are perpetrated by down-low black males, regardless of the new Dont Ask Dont Tell v3.0 policies (and I'm sure the DoD survey didn't dare touch the racial angle).

In essence, it sucks to live near blacks; in the city, on base, or especially in a foxhole.

Blogger Michael Maier December 06, 2014 6:20 PM  

Blacks would not welcome the criticism or responsibilities that a Dr. Thomas Sowell would bring.

Remember, a black man beat and robbed Rosa Parks... AFTER recognizing her.

Sadly, it will end in blood. At least the blood of the useless, ignorant portion of the black population. Especially the ones that will turn to predation once the "benefits" stop.

Blogger Michael Maier December 06, 2014 6:22 PM  

In light of this week's Wash Times report, that in the past year 3,850 military men have been sexually penetrated against their will, it seems that dressing a savage in a uniform doesn't have any civilizing effect upon the savage. And, yes, I'm suggesting that most of the sexual assaults in the military are perpetrated by down-low black males, regardless of the new Dont Ask Dont Tell v3.0 policies (and I'm sure the DoD survey didn't dare touch the racial angle).

Now that's an angle I'd never considered. Disturbing stuff.

Blogger Tom Kratman December 06, 2014 6:36 PM  

I'm as skeptical of that figure as I am of sundry claims about female rape and sexual harrassment. Further, have you some stats to go along with that figure to suggest ethnicity of the supposed perps? No, as a matter of fact it doesn't logically follow.

Blogger JDC December 06, 2014 6:37 PM  

If you haven't watched Lillyhammer on Netflix, I highly recommend it. It's entertaining, but also contains a not-so popular critique of MULTICULTURALISM

And I'll also tell you at least one way in which "Lilyhammer" is more intelligent, edgy and sociologically resonant than the Kevin Spacey political drama — in its ongoing critique of multiculturalism, the ideology that dominates American political life but is rarely explored in mainstream media.

Blogger Da_Truth_Hurts December 06, 2014 7:40 PM  

I notice that while in the USN, especially the crew of smaller ships (100 to 400) hung out together overseas while on liberty no matter what the color or religion etc. However when the ship was back in the States they separated out to different groups.

I saw the same thing during deployments to the war zone while doing 6 in the Army. Even deployed, aside from units eating together - they'd still tend to segregate when seated during meals at the chow hall.

In light of this week's Wash Times report, that in the past year 3,850 military men have been sexually penetrated against their will, it seems that dressing a savage in a uniform doesn't have any civilizing effect upon the savage. And, yes, I'm suggesting that most of the sexual assaults in the military are perpetrated by down-low black males, regardless of the new Dont Ask Dont Tell v3.0 policies (and I'm sure the DoD survey didn't dare touch the racial angle).

The amount of trash that found its way into the military during the war on terror (due to recruiting shortages) is astounding. Young men are being preyed upon by queer senior NCOs. Lots of black men raping white men and women.

I knew of two cases that happened in Kabul - black soldier raped another black soldier in his unit, and a black marine raped a white girl. Was just background noise when you're trying not to run into an IED on a daily basis.

Anonymous Jack Amok December 06, 2014 8:00 PM  

The Talented Tenth are a contemptible lot.

I don't know I'd go so far ad contemptible. They're the fraction of the group with higher CQ (civilization quotient). I completely understand their desire to escape the low-CQ folks who look vaguely like them. The problem is they make the same mistake libs of every color make and confuse the markers of prosperity for the causes of it. They think the barbarians will be uplifted by artificial prosperity.

Anonymous Rhys December 06, 2014 8:03 PM  

An earlier study found diverse communities have less volunteers:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/

Anonymous Jack Amok December 06, 2014 8:06 PM  

Blacks would not welcome the criticism or responsibilities that a Dr. Thomas Sowell would bring.

If nobody else knew how to get them fed, clothed and sheltered, they might. Or at least the ones who lived would be the ones who listened.

Anonymous Cail Corishev December 06, 2014 8:15 PM  

Blacks would not welcome the criticism or responsibilities that a Dr. Thomas Sowell would bring.

They certainly wouldn't now. But I do wonder how much better off they'd be if quotas and other discriminatory policies hadn't skimmed the most intelligent and civilized people out of their neighborhoods for the past 50 years. That's not to say they'd be doing just as well as whites, but it has to have had some effect.

Blogger ChicagoRefugee December 06, 2014 8:19 PM  

Help spread the wonders of diversity! Visit Open Borders for Israel:

https://www.facebook.com/openbordersforisrael?fref=photo

Blogger Thordaddy December 06, 2014 9:17 PM  

It is not integration that "we" despise, but a forced integration that "we" reject. And it is not a separation that "we" seek, but a right to strive towards Supremacy with separation being a necessary consequence.

"They" want liberation without separation.

"We" want Supremacy without liberation.

PS Vox... You may not be a WHITE Supremacist, but you are certainly a Supremacist. You are certainly not an anti-Supremacist, i.e., an equalist.

Anonymous Shibes Meadow December 06, 2014 9:21 PM  

When I was in the Navy (Reagan era), blacks and whites associated without difficulty in the work center (e.g., flight deck, machine shop, sick bay, etc.), but in the Coop (engineering department berthing space) and on the mess deck (cafeteria) they naturally segregated by race. This informal segregation prevented racial differences from becoming sources of problems. The brass knew about this, obviously, but I can assure you that the command staff of USS ENTERPRISE (CVN-65) did not give a hoot in hell if the crew self-segregated by race, religion, hair color, or favorite member of the Beatles so long as everybody turned to when on duty. The Navy used to be a very results-oriented, pragmatic outfit...

Interestingly, the homos on the ship (everyone knew who they were) had their own little corner of the berthing space. I have no idea if this arrangement was official, but it did exist. Even the guys who only went gay while at sea ("sea wives") berthed over in that area. It was weird.

The only racial problem I remember from my Navy days was the problem of noise. Off-duty, the Negroes in out department would bellow at each other instead of talking at a reasonable volume. Most of the time it wasn't too bad (like all squids at sea, the Negro sailors on our ship spent the majority of their off-duty hours in blessed slumber), but when more than two or three of them were awake at the same time, the noise was deafening. The worst times were when they would play this dominoes game called "Tonk". The game consisted of four Negroes sitting around a steel card table, backed by their individual crowds if kibitzers. As play continued, the noise of their taunting and jiving would rise and rise until finally one or the other of the players achieved a "Tonk", at which point he would slam down his dominoes and yell "HOW YOU LIKE DAT MUFUKER" or words to that effect at his defeated opponents. The noise of those dominoes being slammed onto that steel tabletop, combined with the shouting and laughter of the players and their crews, was ear-splitting. I never could figure out why they had to be so G--d---d loud all the time. I still don't get it.

The racial problems in the U.S. could be almost completely eliminated by simply restoring the ability of Americans to create segregated businesses, enact restrictive covenants in real estate, and otherwise freely associate on private property. We'd have Whites Only lunch counters, apartments, and neighborhoods again, but the public schools, courthouses, and other public venues would remain open to all regardless of race.

Anonymous John December 07, 2014 1:50 AM  

The only racial problem I remember from my Navy days was the problem of noise. Off-duty, the Negroes in out department would bellow at each other instead of talking at a reasonable volume. Most of the time it wasn't too bad (like all squids at sea, the Negro sailors on our ship spent the majority of their off-duty hours in blessed slumber), but when more than two or three of them were awake at the same time, the noise was deafening.

Absolutely true in every barracks I ever lived in. Well, particularly true and noticeable while living in barracks, but equally true outside the barracks. It's just that it must be endured to a larger degree while living in the same barracks (there's no escaping their din). They are really noisy, impulsive, and boisterous. They are temperamentally different from whites, and by and large, dumber, even in an at least somewhat pre-selected population that weeded out the dumbest of their lot prior to entry, the differences in temperament and intelligent were apparent, and the groups (mostly) self-segregated in all but the actual work environment.

Blogger Thordaddy December 07, 2014 6:02 AM  

If it is practically illegal for a white man to strive towards Supremacy THEN he cannot be said to possess the ability to separate from the black man without serious repercussions. It is silly to believe that because black man desires a private segregation that this is at all relevant to the fact the he is zealous in his desire for coercive public integration. There is no future compromise with a gang of perpetuating racial self-annihilators.

Blogger Thordaddy December 07, 2014 6:06 AM  

Logic dictates that separation from radical "black" liberation, for the white man, is in the embrace of white Supremacy.

Logic dictates that separation from radical Jewish liberation, for the white man, is in the embrace of white Supremacy.

Logic dictates that separation from radical homosexual liberation, for the white man, is in the embrace of white Supremacy.


Logic dictates that separation from Jihad, for the white man, is in the embrace of white Supremacy.

etc. etc...

Anonymous Old Man in a Villa December 07, 2014 9:57 AM  

"Diversity, we like to think, is both a social good and, as I’ve argued, a spur to innovation and economic growth."

Evidence? Proof? Verifiable data sets?

It's no different than insisting on putting your athletic socks in the dishtowel drawer because they are different and should be kept together. Why? I would love to see the first social engineer just offer up evidence that is indisputable.It's always conjecture and hopey-wishy think.

Anonymous Discard December 07, 2014 11:58 AM  

The diversity that the SJWs prefer for themselves is the sort they learned in college. A limited number of non-Whites, chosen for compatibility, and artfully distributed. Decoration, in other words. They can even have their own Best Non-White Friend, a personal Oprah.

Blogger Anthony December 07, 2014 11:18 PM  

Man, if Richard Florida is beginning to figure this stuff out...

Anonymous Luke December 08, 2014 11:45 AM  

Godfrey December 06, 2014 12:00 PM

Anonymous December 06, 2014 11:40 AM
"As a Christian, for example, I have no business marrying a non-Christian."


In the interest of diversity, you should marry and spend your life with someone you don't like. Please, please try to be more tolerant."

This aptly describes most marriages to American women now (at least until she frivorces you, probably at a time you are particularly vulnerable to her faithlessness, such as still having minor children).

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts