Perspective is where you stand. Different backgrounds offer the opportunity of different points of view. Depth of understanding comes from considering different angles on a problem. Literally. Perspective is not a purpose, belief, concept or course of action. It is a vantage point. Multiple vantages are advantageous.
And you keep bringing up these sketchy links pandering to white nationalists like that means something. Anyway, I suggest you form your own mini-nation made entirely of white nationalists or supremacists or whatever here if the thought of minorities scares you so much.
"Beneath our diversity, the peoples of the world have similar goals. They look for dignity, peace, freedom, and a chance to prosper. These common dreams will be the source of our strength." Ronald Reagan, 2/11/82 What do you mean by diversity logic? The ideas the make it up or what?
Yes, You are. Aka......you are implying in order to have a diversity of ideas you must have a diversity of population. Simply untrue.
It just depends on what the vantage points are............as in..............the different points of looking at something may be of some advantage or they may not be....irregardless...........you do not need different races to get different points of view. http://courses.cs.vt.edu/~cs3604/lib/Campus/Diversity.not.html
It doesn't matter. Diversity will happen regardless of anyone trying to stop it...we live in a global society and people will migrate and mix. I find it amusing that someone is foolish enough to believe that their opinion this matters. You can't stop immigration or people deciding to be around others who are different from them.
There is a 'natural diversity' as in the areas you mention.........what some of us are opposed to is 'forced diversity'....that is what has been happening since political correctness took over aka forced busing, forced integration etc.etc. and so on and so forth....the fallacious belief that the minorities must be forcibly deployed into every area of society.....just to achieve racial balance. Aka...........employers being forced to hire minorities even if they cannot find some that are qualified for the work that needs to be done. etc.etc. and so on and so forth. Even some minorities understand there can be a huge downside to forced integration and multiculturalism....it invariably results in the assimilation of the minority population into the larger population group....thus many Jews, Native Americans and even many blacks prefer their own culture and think their culture needs to be protected not assimilated into a larger group which essentially destroys the culture of the minority group as well as its language. https://www.culturalsurvival.org/pu...cultural-survival-vs-forced-assimilation-rene
It's not suicide. Just like slashing down a rainforest and planting a palm oil plantation isn't suicide. Something will be growing, it just won't be what was there before...
Let me git out mah colorized krayons...for dose dat need da help................first of all you make a good point.....'it just wont be what was there before' ala ala aka.....cultural suicide. Say you have a nice Jewish School....very high standards....excellent record....outstanding graduates....fantastic teachers and den suddenly da Federalis decide that dat school must have diversity...so they take out some of the Jews send them downtown to a ghetto skool, bring in some negroids and puerto ricans to replace da jews. You git da picture I am foe shoe??? Suddenly there is a teacher shortage...good qualified teachers prefer to go elsewhere. Thugs take over the classrooms and intimidate those who really want to get an education. etc.etc.etc. This sort of Federal mentality has been so pervasive as to be absolutely ridiculous. It has destroyed communities,schools, families and livliehoods.....in fact political correctness, the civil rights laws, and multiculturalism are all a direct link to the demise of America.....employers shipped jobs and even whole factories overseas to escape the federal red tape attached to the above and other federal programs.....when the Federal gubmint stepped in essentially took over our public schools and began to even tell huge corporations how to run their companies....the inevitable result was very similar to what has happend in any country taken over by communism....suddenlly things do not work, quality goods are not available, jobs disappear, crime takes over etc.etc. and so on and so forth. Bottom Line: Centralized Government does not work. Communism/socialism does not work and has never worked anywhere in the world and will never work due to human nature. We have spent 15 trillion dollars trying to upgrade blacks and wipe out poverty.....yet people are worse off today than they were years ago.
Different circumstances produce different perspectives. A diverse culture, by definition, invites more points of view. We see things more completely, more deeply, with multiple perspectives. It is why animals grew two eyes. Irregardless is not correct English. It is an improper conflation of the words irrespective and regardless. Irrespective means to not consider something, to leave out a perspective.
Again.....different cultural viewpoints does not gurantee you will see anything more completely or deeply. You will of course get differing opinions which though in fact may prevent you from getting the best consensus to solve a problem....you do not have to consult various racial groups to get a different perspective on anything.....any dozen people will have a dozen different perspectives or answers.....how many opinions do you want or how many can you handle? You do not want to clog up a possible answer with a whole bunch of irrelevant perspectives most of which would probably be useless. Kinda like try to govern via comittee...everything gets bogged down and very difficult to efficiently operate...more people with more input does not mean better decision making....usually quite the reverse...just coinfused babbling especially amongst different cultures who have some difficulty comprehending each other in the best of situations. You are simply rationalizing trying to come up with some excuse to promote multiculturalism and if you read my links you will understand multicuturalism is not the answer for any society...merely creates more problems. Regarding....Irregardless............ 'In a post I wrote a couple of weeks ago about overpriced Halo USB drives, I used the word "irregardless." it wasn't a very popular decision. For example, one BoopieJones (awesome screen name notwithstanding) challenged the very existence of the word. Another reader, JustDenny, was noticeably shaken by the use of the word, e-shouting "oh no!!!" before noting that the word is a double-negative. In response, I would like to say that "irregardless" is a word. It is, at least according to Merriam-Webster and Scrabble. But I'm not going to stop there. No. I would also like to contend that "irregardless" is the baddest-ass word of all time. This is for several reasons, which I will now explain. It's the only word where attaching the "ir-" prefix to the root word has the exact same meaning as the root word: Throwing an "ir-" in front of normal, less bad-ass words that begin with "R" changes the meaning to the opposite of the word. Irrefutable. Irreverent. Irrelevant. Irresponsible. Not "irregardless." It doesn't care what the rules of grammar are. It means exactly the same thing as "regardless," and that's the way it likes it. Against all odds, against all logic, and (ir)regardless of everyone hating it, it has achieved official word status: How can you not pull for the underdog in this case? "Irregardless" went up against the rules of grammar, stick-by-the-book lexicographers, and the fact that it's a completely redundant word. Didn't matter. Whatever didn't kill it made it stronger. It's the hardest-working word in the dictionary, and it should have earned your respect by now. Even though it's a word, Merriam-Webster says you shouldn't use it: Can you name another word in the dictionary that the dictionary says you shouldn't use? Even really bad swear words don't have a dictionary-imposed boycott. That just makes me want to use it more. It simultaneously makes sense and doesn't make sense: You can think of the word in one of two ways: (1) it should mean the opposite of "regardless," or something along the lines of "keeping the facts in regard," or (2) it could mean "regardless of the fact that something is regardless." The latter of the two is like double-super regardless, and it's the meaning I prefer. "Irregardless" really, really doesn't care what the facts are or what you think. It should only be used in extreme circumstances, such as when a course of action is ridiculously counterintuitive. "Irregardless of the fact that you are very thirsty, you should eat this pile of salt." Stuff like that. It practices what it preaches: Irregardless of the rules of grammar, "irregardless" is a word. It's self-reflexive. It's the exception that proves the rule. It talks the talk and walks the walk. Is there another word like that? No, because "irregardless" is bad-ass. It is a text-based Chuck Norris, roundhouse-kicking everything else in the dictionary into submission. If you think about it long enough, it will blow your mind: It's the Mobius Strip of words, but it's also packed with Eminem's aggressively apathetic attitude. It's completely unique, completely confusing, and it couldn't give a rat's ass about any of that. It just is what it is. If you don't like it, don't use it. So that's my argument. I think "irregardless" should be embraced and celebrated. And damn it, I'm going to use it every chance I get. If you do not like it.....do not use it'. by Tim Moniyhan P.S. Now dont go and get all butt-hurt or sumptin. bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
