4 ms·

"Decades" is a short amount of time and "embraced" obviously varies wildly. When the Immigration Act of 1965 was passed it was promised that "the ethnic makeup

"Decades" is a short amount of time and "embraced" obviously varies wildly. When the Immigration Act of 1965 was passed it was promised that "the ethnic makeup will not be upset". The American people never voted to be demographically displaced. (Why would they?) >A sense of community can transcend religion and race It can, but you're swimming against nature. Do you think the Japanese people would be happier if Japan was minority Japanese?

pknight 8y ago
> Do you think the Japanese people would be happier if Japan was minority Japanese? The more interesting question is why are the Japanese so miserable, 53 other countries rank over Japan despite features that some say should promote happiness. You might even say that the hypothesis that social cohesion must be upheld by deterring ethnic influences in the pursuit of happier communities can't find a worse example in Japan.
- bluthru 8y ago
  https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/16/these-are-the-top-10-happiest-countries-in-the-world.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/16/these-are-the-top-10-happies... White countries with low diversity.
  - pknight 8y ago
    These are all modern economies, most of which operate immigration-friendly regimes. Sweden, Netherlands, Switzerland, Iceland, Denmark, Norway and Finland are all signed up to freedom of movement, which doesn't discriminate on the basis of religion, ethnicity or place of birth, provided you are a citizen in the EEA or Switzerland, or if you are married to such a citizen. Anyway, the point is not that diversity cultivates happiness (no simple answer to that), the point is that some people believe in keeping communities homogeneous and argue that this promotes happiness. That happiness boost is nowhere to be seen when looking at real world examples.
    - bluthru 8y ago
      >These are all modern economies They aren't the only modern economies. Demographics plays a role. >most of which operate immigration-friendly regimes Recent policy and current demographics are two different things. These are still homogenous countries for the most part, especially Iceland which is exceedingly safe. Where demographics have shifted drastically away from the native population, the quality of life has reduced. (Look at Malmo, for example.) >That happiness boost is nowhere to be seen when looking at real world examples. http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/ http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/... Here's a list of countries ranked by diversity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_ranked_by_ethnic_and_cultural_diversity_level https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_ranked_by_et... Doesn't look like a happy list.
      - pknight 8y ago
        I'm not advancing the claim that high levels of diversity bring about happiness, I'm scrutinizing the belief that populations are happier because they get to be homogeneous in composition. It's been my observation that the people who push back against the idea of diversity the most tend to be quite miserable even when living in homogeneous communities.
        bluthru 8y ago
        >I'm scrutinizing the belief that populations are happier because they get to be homogeneous in composition. Read Robert Putnam. People love a sense of belonging and it's embedded in our genes. http://time.com/5095903/genetic-similarities-friends-study/ http://time.com/5095903/genetic-similarities-friends-study/ http://www.bu.edu/sph/2017/04/07/married-couples-with-common-ancestry-share-similar-genes/ http://www.bu.edu/sph/2017/04/07/married-couples-with-common... >It's been my observation that the people who push back against the idea of diversity the most tend to be quite miserable even when living in homogeneous communities. There can definitely be miserable people who are looking for a scapegoat. It also takes a certain level of desperation to be vocal about it today because it's so taboo. On the other hand there are people like me: anonymous, have traveled the world, lived in rural areas and cities, have a masters from a top 10, have a good job, etc. who look at the data and go: "Oh, the data is indicating that this recent configuration of humans isn't as good as it could be." You only have to go back 2-3 generations for homogeneity to be the overwhelming norm--were they all miserable? Portraying people who are against diversity as ignorant or miserable doesn't disprove the fact that if you take a homogenous, high-performing population and flood it with diverse, lower-IQ, culturally-incomptable, more violent, less-productive people the nation will become worse. Simple question: would Europe be better or worse today if there were only Europeans in it?
maroonblazer 8y ago
> It can, but you're swimming against nature. Do you think the Japanese people would be happier if Japan was minority Japanese? Japan - and many (most?) other countries - don't share the contingencies of America's founding. If I emigrate to Finland do I become, and am I seen by Fins as, Finnish? Not really. But a Fin moving to the U.S. can become an American and perceived by the rest of us as American. Civilization is rife with examples of us overcoming our natural tendencies. Why should this be any different?
- bluthru 8y ago
  >Japan - and many (most?) other countries - don't share the contingencies of America's founding. I'm not sure you want to use America's founding as an argument: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUhBdicX0AAGNZ5.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUhBdicX0AAGNZ5.jpg >If I emigrate to Finland do I become, and am I seen by Fins as, Finnish? Not really. People want to destroy this notion. It has already taken place for the British. https://youtu.be/flRELYUqmUE?t=3m55s https://youtu.be/flRELYUqmUE?t=3m55s >civilization is rife with examples of us overcoming our natural tendencies. Why should this be any different? Because it's a very recent experiment and it has been a net loss for white countries. Social science tells us that diversity reduces social trust, identity, empathy, and a sense of community.
  - stordoff 8y ago
    > People want to destroy this notion. It has already taken place for the British. Brit here. What are you even talking about?
    - bluthru 8y ago
      The double standard is demonstrated in the video.
virtuexru 8y ago
Not sure why you are being downvoted. Great post. Bravo.
- bluthru 8y ago
  The new state religion is diversity and to question it makes one a heretic. Why can't it be discussed dispassionately the same way we discuss climate change? Maybe we shouldn't subsidize policies that have negative effects for citizens?

pknight 8y ago

> Do you think the Japanese people would be happier if Japan was minority Japanese? The more interesting question is why are the Japanese so miserable, 53 other countries rank over Japan despite features that some say should promote happiness. You might even say that the hypothesis that social cohesion must be upheld by deterring ethnic influences in the pursuit of happier communities can't find a worse example in Japan.

bluthru 8y ago
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/16/these-are-the-top-10-happiest-countries-in-the-world.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/16/these-are-the-top-10-happies... White countries with low diversity.
- pknight 8y ago
  These are all modern economies, most of which operate immigration-friendly regimes. Sweden, Netherlands, Switzerland, Iceland, Denmark, Norway and Finland are all signed up to freedom of movement, which doesn't discriminate on the basis of religion, ethnicity or place of birth, provided you are a citizen in the EEA or Switzerland, or if you are married to such a citizen. Anyway, the point is not that diversity cultivates happiness (no simple answer to that), the point is that some people believe in keeping communities homogeneous and argue that this promotes happiness. That happiness boost is nowhere to be seen when looking at real world examples.
  - bluthru 8y ago
    >These are all modern economies They aren't the only modern economies. Demographics plays a role. >most of which operate immigration-friendly regimes Recent policy and current demographics are two different things. These are still homogenous countries for the most part, especially Iceland which is exceedingly safe. Where demographics have shifted drastically away from the native population, the quality of life has reduced. (Look at Malmo, for example.) >That happiness boost is nowhere to be seen when looking at real world examples. http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/ http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/... Here's a list of countries ranked by diversity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_ranked_by_ethnic_and_cultural_diversity_level https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_ranked_by_et... Doesn't look like a happy list.
    - pknight 8y ago
      I'm not advancing the claim that high levels of diversity bring about happiness, I'm scrutinizing the belief that populations are happier because they get to be homogeneous in composition. It's been my observation that the people who push back against the idea of diversity the most tend to be quite miserable even when living in homogeneous communities.
      - bluthru 8y ago
        >I'm scrutinizing the belief that populations are happier because they get to be homogeneous in composition. Read Robert Putnam. People love a sense of belonging and it's embedded in our genes. http://time.com/5095903/genetic-similarities-friends-study/ http://time.com/5095903/genetic-similarities-friends-study/ http://www.bu.edu/sph/2017/04/07/married-couples-with-common-ancestry-share-similar-genes/ http://www.bu.edu/sph/2017/04/07/married-couples-with-common... >It's been my observation that the people who push back against the idea of diversity the most tend to be quite miserable even when living in homogeneous communities. There can definitely be miserable people who are looking for a scapegoat. It also takes a certain level of desperation to be vocal about it today because it's so taboo. On the other hand there are people like me: anonymous, have traveled the world, lived in rural areas and cities, have a masters from a top 10, have a good job, etc. who look at the data and go: "Oh, the data is indicating that this recent configuration of humans isn't as good as it could be." You only have to go back 2-3 generations for homogeneity to be the overwhelming norm--were they all miserable? Portraying people who are against diversity as ignorant or miserable doesn't disprove the fact that if you take a homogenous, high-performing population and flood it with diverse, lower-IQ, culturally-incomptable, more violent, less-productive people the nation will become worse. Simple question: would Europe be better or worse today if there were only Europeans in it?

maroonblazer 8y ago

> It can, but you're swimming against nature. Do you think the Japanese people would be happier if Japan was minority Japanese? Japan - and many (most?) other countries - don't share the contingencies of America's founding. If I emigrate to Finland do I become, and am I seen by Fins as, Finnish? Not really. But a Fin moving to the U.S. can become an American and perceived by the rest of us as American. Civilization is rife with examples of us overcoming our natural tendencies. Why should this be any different?

bluthru 8y ago
>Japan - and many (most?) other countries - don't share the contingencies of America's founding. I'm not sure you want to use America's founding as an argument: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUhBdicX0AAGNZ5.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUhBdicX0AAGNZ5.jpg >If I emigrate to Finland do I become, and am I seen by Fins as, Finnish? Not really. People want to destroy this notion. It has already taken place for the British. https://youtu.be/flRELYUqmUE?t=3m55s https://youtu.be/flRELYUqmUE?t=3m55s >civilization is rife with examples of us overcoming our natural tendencies. Why should this be any different? Because it's a very recent experiment and it has been a net loss for white countries. Social science tells us that diversity reduces social trust, identity, empathy, and a sense of community.
- stordoff 8y ago
  > People want to destroy this notion. It has already taken place for the British. Brit here. What are you even talking about?
  - bluthru 8y ago
    The double standard is demonstrated in the video.

virtuexru 8y ago

Not sure why you are being downvoted. Great post. Bravo.

bluthru 8y ago
The new state religion is diversity and to question it makes one a heretic. Why can't it be discussed dispassionately the same way we discuss climate change? Maybe we shouldn't subsidize policies that have negative effects for citizens?