> To be clear: Walmart is a monoculture when it destroys diverse town centers in favour of standardized parking-malls. Apples and oranges. Walmart is not a cul

> To be clear: Walmart is a monoculture when it destroys diverse town centers in favour of standardized parking-malls. Apples and oranges. Walmart is not a culture. Walmart is a company. Last I checked, Zoroastrianism and parsi culture is a human culture, not a for-profit entity. > We are discussing principles of value -- and I assert that functional diversity is intrinsically valuable (unless and until the diversity tears the broader system apart, resulting in less functional diversity). I highly disagree. Individuals are valuable. Cultures are valuable and should be respected as long as individuals subscribe to it (and they are within reason). However, cultures as a whole do not have any rights in aggregate that individuals do not have. Attempting to maintain cultural diversity is a form of totalitarianism, basically fascism by another name. If no individual can sustain their culture, no one owes it to them to try. Look, I belong to a cultural group that is dying out due to a diaspora and intermarriage (see the documentary bottle masala in moile). I like people with my customs, but other than the fact that I feel more familiar with people like my family, I recognize there is no inherent value in my culture, and I actually oppose things like coercing children to marry within the group out of some notion of group identity. Of course, in our case, there are a few governmental barriers that ought to be taken down. But, if no one wants to marry or continue the customs, no one should be forced to and it's insanely weird to have outsiders who were not raised in it to all of a sudden decide they want to take part. Anyway, it's not like any culture completely dies out. As groups intermingle, ideas are mixed, and good ones continued. New cultures will form and new identities forged. That's called dynamic society, and should be the goal. A society in which all cultures stay the same is basically an overly traditionalistic, totalitarian one. Anyway, I'm kinda done pontificating here. It's clear we value different things. I value dynamicism, creation, and cultural progress, and you want all cultural divisions to remain the same for the foreseeable future and view any intermingling as a form of cultural destruction. I'm afraid the viewpoints can't really be harmonized.