IT HAS BECOME increasingly popular to speak of racial and ethnic diversity as a civic strength. From multicultural festivals to pronouncements from political leaders, the message is the same: our differences make us stronger. But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam — famous for “Bowling Alone,” his 2000 book on declining civic engagement — has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogeneous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings. — Boston Globe

Diversity should always be an element of any healthy society, but it should be considered a tool for strengthening the whole, not a goal in and of itself.

We have to start making decisions in this country that benefit it — as a unit — in the long-term. This means, first and foremost, cultivating a united and cohesive population. What we’re doing instead is creating a series of countries within our own.

This study reinforces the fact that the groups we’re allowing in tend not to like each other. It constitutes guaranteed failure. If we are to succeed in this country we have to flirt with the devil; nationalism is a necessary evil in any country that wishes to survive.

We have to regroup and become one again before it’s too late.:

I’ll say it again. Multiculturalism should be applied sparringly for the purpose of making the original stronger through the benefits of diversity. It should never be allowed to take hold of the receiving country in such a way that damages its identity.  Of course, that requires that you know what your identity is, which seems to be the problem these days.

1. What is our country? What defines it? What parts could not be removed without it becoming something different? If a country has not identified what it truly is, it will have no way of knowing if it has lost itself.
2. Do we have the cohesion and political strength to defend this identity? Are we too cowardly to acknowledge the fact that we love what we are, and that we don’t want it to change? If so, we are already doomed.

Once these two questions have been answered in the positive, a single, all-encompassing concept must be established and accepted by all as the foundation for all immigration policy. When a country begins to enjoy surging immigration numbers it should take this as a compliment to, and an affirmation of, its chosen system of management. The act of moving from one place to another is a clear declaration of:

“Overall, I prefer your country to where I came from. Please let me partake of it.”

As such, allowing incoming populations to modify the existing system puts at risk the very set of conditions that made the receiving country desirable in the first place. Any country that fails to define and defend this identity is doomed to become a collection of countries rather than a strong, unified entity benefiting from the myriad advantages of diversity.:

If people don’t like this society, they should go back home to their own country. There are plenty of airports.

I am encouraged when I see clear thinking like this coming from what so many view as “the other side”. We can’t let extremists darken our view of an entire group. On another note, I hope this guy doesn’t get killed.

Immigration and inclusion should be continued — there’s no question about that — but it should be done from the standpoint of, “What can you offer us?”, rather than, “How can we help you?” At some point, if we want to continue to be in the position of being able to help anyone, we need to start looking after ourselves.

An analogy comes to mind. When you’re preparing to fly and the flight attendant explains what would happen in the event of a loss of cabin pressure, what does she tell you?

Put your mask on first, then help the person who needs assistance.

Why is this so hard for people to grasp? You can’t help others if you are barely handling your own affairs. Think about it — we don’t make anything anymore, our kids can’t read, write, or do basic math, and our currency is becoming a complete laughing stock. We need to wake the hell up before it’s too late.

The very first step in this process is deciding who we are. And in my humble opinion, that means dropping a bit of the sophisticated, academic approach of globalism/multiculturalism and deciding to be American, through and through. First and foremost, that means leaving behind whoever you used to be and taking pride in what you are now.

This doesn’t mean be ashamed of your background or culture — in fact it’s quite the opposite; these various backgrounds help make the single, unified nation stronger. But only if the conversion to being American takes place. If newcomers to this nation are unwilling to shed their culture and adopt ours, they should not have come in the first place. I don’t fault them for coming, however; I fault our government for not looking after the interests of the nation as a single, living organism.

The only way this (or any) nation can succeed is for it to move forward as one unit. Unfortunately, we’re heading in exactly the opposite direction, and something must be done…soon.:

How To Destroy America

This is the main topic I’d like to see discussed during the next presidential election. Of course, that’ll never happen. Plus, the Republicans have made people cringe when they hear this kind of language because it’s often associated with negativity and hate.

We need someone to separate necessary truth from bigotry and isolationism. I hope someone capable of doing this shows up soon and starts a discourse. We desperately need one.