Is Diversity Inherently Good or Bad?
Good
30.9% (30)
30.9% (30)
Bad
10.3% (10)
10.3% (10)
Neither
49.5% (48)
49.5% (48)
Chocolate
7.2% (7)
7.2% (7)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Is Diversity Inherently Good or Bad?

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

I always though that diversity of backgrounds, cultures and ways of thinking are great barriers to groupthink.

Imperator_DK:

I'm getting at "inter-cultural friction exists and that some values are inimical in another setting" being a tautology. It's stating the obvious, in a way so vague there's no way it would not always be true. It doesn't actually say anything about whether diversity is good or bad though.

One cannot usefully answer such a general statement as "diversity is good". The statement "diversity is good" is much like saying "eating berries is good". Rather depends on the berries eaten, doesn't it? Diversity has good sides and bad sides. The statement you're picking on is merely bad sides, I also listed good sides. One can bring up specific examples to analyse the extent to which that specific example is good or bad, but they are intrinsically unlikely to ever answer the big question.

I admittedly can't understand or sympathize with your reluctance to condemn stuff like FGM. But if you feel it deserves respect as a cultural practice which must be evaluated only on the standards of the culture it's from, and can't be judged by western values, that's your business. You and your refusal to condemn it can undoubtedly be judged by western values though.

I'll condemn female genital mutilation in my own time, when I feel the primary purpose is the condemnation per se rather than serving other people's tub-thumping ulterior agendas that I do not hold in high regard.

snip the rest

Let's be quite clear. I do not have a problem maintaining the integrity of my personal morality. It is quite sufficient for me to state that I find plenty of your statements morally repugnant. I have read enough of you raising your intellectual drawbridge on matters philosophical, psychological and sociological to believe that where we differ is not actually the ability to maintain our moral position in a sea of subjectivity, but the intellectual willingness to examine the human condition openly, to rigorously attempt to consider our own and other people's reasons for their behaviour. That you revert to nonsense about others' relativisms and moral dissolution seems little but a diversionary tactic whenever you risk being drawn out of the comfort zone of your own prejudices.

No, it isn't.
It can lead to enrichment, it can lead to tensions. Really, diversity should also include a measure of assimilation. One of the worst things to come from diversity is ghettoization and isolationism. Living in the same place but as - in reality - extremely distant groups. Of course, the opposite is also bad: Complete and utter cultural suppression.
I know this doesn't sound like much of an answer, but as so often the right balance is what's necessary. To add further to the non-answers, almost nothing is ever just good or just bad. You can get severely sick from vitamin-intoxications for crying out loud.

I know just in general its good because it helps build a natural resistance the more you interbreed and carry on the strong genes. I would say its good inherently, just cause it brings different ideas. sure those ideas can be good and bad but as long as the good ones are used in a way hthats beneficial to both parties i dont see the issue.

Everything that makes the USA what it is is pretty much due to our diversity. Unfortunately this goes both ways. While diversity has given our country many great achievements, it is also the cause of many problems affecting our country. Most notably crime (gangs, drugs, cartels, and smuggling).

People will find any excuse to attack a group that is different from them, having hundreds of groups within punching distance is a recipe for disaster in this field.

Ryotknife:
Everything that makes the USA what it is is pretty much due to our diversity. Unfortunately this goes both ways. While diversity has given our country many great achievements, it is also the cause of many problems affecting our country. Most notably crime (gangs, drugs, cartels, and smuggling).

People will find any excuse to attack a group that is different from them, having hundreds of groups within punching distance is a recipe for disaster in this field.

... And how exactly did you determine that those negatives were a result of diversity?

I agree with many of the reasons given why diversity is good.

But I also think that in terms of the nation-state, immigration policy and national culture it is really a case by case issue. What is right for the USA, Australia or the UK regarding melting pots or multi-culturalism, may not work elsewhere. I love Japan, for example, because it is a relatively mono-cultural nation-state. Sure there are pockets of multi-cultural living, but in the large part Japan is very Japanese and has a very clear and strongly defined sense of "Japanese-ness". I would say the same for Taiwan and South Korea.

That doesn't mean the above nations are opposed to "diversity". In fact Japan loves diversity, but more in a global sense, in a travel sense, in a learning about other cultures sense, than an open-door immigration policy sense. (Although they are recently pushing aggressively to attract more foreign university students, which is a good thing.)

I personally love diversity which is why I travel a lot. But if we mean by diversity US or 1990s/noughties British style immigration policy applied to a country like Japan then I would oppose that.

Regards

Nightspore

Inherently? No.
Nothing is inherently bad.

Neither or both. Genetically, probably yes because people say that, for example, mixed-ethinicity children have a higher immunity than single-ethnicity children. But culturally, it can go either way because, as we all know, humans fear and dislike difference unless it benefits them, and there have been occasions where people have been able to get away with illegal things on the basis of their religion. (That's probably the reason institutionalized homophobia is still as tolerated as it is, because there are enough Christians and Muslims to condemn it.)

Fraser Greenfield:

Shock and Awe:

Personally I have always liked the idea of the Melting Pot. A society in which everyone is assimilated into the rest of society, but still retain their unique culture. In America this has happened with some failures and some success in recent times, especially it seems with persons of East Asian and (until recently)Middle Eastern decent. I have heard a lot of people from Europe complain about the "Multicultural Society" that many countries try to adopt, talking about how it has caused nothing but ill. I would love to hear Europeans' views on this in particular.

It's worth noting that 'the melting pot' and multiculturalism are two different things; though often confused. You have described the 'ideal' multicultural system. The melting pot however is when there is an established monoculture, and with each wave of new immigrants elements of that immigrants culture is absorbed by the monoculture; at which point the immigrant assimilates and adopts the nations culture (which subtlety changes with each successive generation of newcomers), there is no retention of the 'original culture' in the traditional sense (though many 'Italian Americans' often amusingly claim the opposite :) ).

The 'melting pot' is a distinctly North American concept; which has proven time and time again it can work on a macro scale, with each successive generation changing dramatically in their behaviors and mannerism; resulting in the cultural oddities other Anglophone nations amusingly point out; like how you misspell paedophile & colour, turn Aspergers into "ASSBURGERS", herbs into 'EERBS" and mix traditionally belgium/french and German cuisine into a surprisingly tasty fast food meal.

Multiculturalism however assumes that all ethnic/national cultures are of equal value, and for some insane reason assumes that all such cultures can successfully exist within a single nation as part of a greater community. Unfortunately if over 4000 years of human history has told us anything; some cultures (emphasis on cultures, not 'races') are indeed objectively superior to one another.
You can read Posts 14 & 15 for any additional relevant statements...

I basically agree with this. For instance, in the UK, curry (originating from India, obviously) is one of the most popular dishes and has practically become a British national dish, but there's still animosity among many people (not just the older generation, trust me) towards "brown people", not to mention the issues of immigration and paranoia over terrorism. My friend, who is a Royal Marine Recruit, believes that Islamic immigration will eventually overtake the amount of white and native British citizens in the UK, turning it into a state ruled by Sharia Law, by 2030. I didn't really know how to respond to that.

If I was to put in my own opinion, I'd say that the "melting pot" works, while "multiculturalism" doesn't. Festivals are all well and good until we see yet another case of a black man getting stabbed for no reason other than some madman thinking that he's "taking their jobs".

Either way, we still have a long way to go when it comes to accepting not just ethnic minorities, but gender and sexuality minorities (I'm talking about gay, bi and transgender people). And there's still that little problem of religion hanging about. The amount of coverage and praise that the Pope, an embodiment of everything that's wrong with Christianity, still gets is absolutely astonishing.

Frission:
I always though that diversity of backgrounds, cultures and ways of thinking are great barriers to groupthink.

So far diversity or at least how it's treated by the PCMC culture mainly in Europe is the dictionary definition of groupthink...

Relish in Chaos:

I basically agree with this. For instance, in the UK, curry (originating from India, obviously) is one of the most popular dishes and has practically become a British national dish, but there's still animosity among many people (not just the older generation, trust me) towards "brown people", not to mention the issues of immigration and paranoia over terrorism. My friend, who is a Royal Marine Recruit, believes that Islamic immigration will eventually overtake the amount of white and native British citizens in the UK, turning it into a state ruled by Sharia Law, by 2030. I didn't really know how to respond to that.

If the current rate of immigration, birthrates and conversion will continue then by 2030 the UK Muslim population will reach about 20%, that's for the UK. The proportional population in England and Wales how ever will be much higher since out of the entire Muslim population of the UK Scotland and N. Ireland make up just around 3% of it.

Relish in Chaos:
Festivals are all well and good until we see yet another case of a black man getting stabbed for no reason other than some madman thinking that he's "taking their jobs".

Does this actually happen? Living in London a fair amount of knife (and occasionally gun) crime gets reported, but the vast majority of that is both gang-related and black-on-black. The Anders Breivik type of murder is much less common.

I think diversity is a good thing. If nothing else, I love having the choice that, if I don't feel like a steak and chips for dinner, I can go down the street and order some Italian, or a nice dish of Canton beef.

Truly, I believe the answer to worldwide peace and brotherhood is good food for all.

I think a severe lack of racial or gender diversity could indicate socioeconomic inequalities that need to be addressed, but diversity itself isn't something to be worked up over.

If I were to, say, create a political party and run several candidates for MP, and a large majority of the people who shared my ideology and I felt were qualified to make rational and educated political decisions turned out to be white men, I absolutely would not pass them up in order to run less qualified minorities.

If the majority of them turned out to be native women, I would say the same thing in their favour.

Forcing racial diversity, i.e. allowing race to be a part of the decision of whether or not to hire someone, is racism, and whether or not minorities face significant discrimination in these areas, I don't think racism can be solved through racism. Same thing with sexism.

Verbatim:

If the current rate of immigration, birthrates and conversion will continue then by 2030 the UK Muslim population will reach about 20%, that's for the UK. The proportional population in England and Wales how ever will be much higher since out of the entire Muslim population of the UK Scotland and N. Ireland make up just around 3% of it.

Bollocks.

The most reliable study by a professional body that I know of has projected the UK's Muslim population to be about 8% by 2030. I have no idea which paranoid, Islamophobic sources you are getting 20% from.

Agema:

Verbatim:

If the current rate of immigration, birthrates and conversion will continue then by 2030 the UK Muslim population will reach about 20%, that's for the UK. The proportional population in England and Wales how ever will be much higher since out of the entire Muslim population of the UK Scotland and N. Ireland make up just around 3% of it.

Bollocks.

The most reliable study by a professional body that I know of has projected the UK's Muslim population to be about 8% by 2030. I have no idea which paranoid, Islamophobic sources you are getting 20% from.

Those numbers are floating everywhere even in sites which are dedicated to Islam e.g. http://www.islam21c.com/islamic-thought/7984-the-significance-of-muslim-growth-in-the-uk
The next census will be in 2020(well will end in 2021) they expect the current population to continue to double as it did reaching around 10%, which means that if the same holds true then by 2030 it might reach 20%.

Verbatim:

Those numbers are floating everywhere even in sites which are dedicated to Islam e.g. http://www.islam21c.com/islamic-thought/7984-the-significance-of-muslim-growth-in-the-uk
The next census will be in 2020(well will end in 2021) they expect the current population to continue to double as it did reaching around 10%, which means that if the same holds true then by 2030 it might reach 20%.

Pfft.

The Muslim population of the UK "doubled" in 2001-2011 only by some very iffy use of rounding; specifically, by liberally rounding down the 2001 census to 1.5 million and the 2011 census up to 3 million. In fact, the actual increase was "only" about 70% (although that's quite a lot). Following this trend alone would expand the Muslim population to less than 14% of the UK whole.

However this is very unlikely as the 2001-2011 decade was one of very high immigration - it's already well below its peak from that decade, suppressed by a weak economy and tightened immigration regulations. Furthermore, I believe the whole UK birth rate has a trend of increase in the last decade or two, whilst the Muslim birth rate is decreasing.

Edit: I was a little short on time when I wrote this, to expand more clearly.

The increase in the Muslim population of the UK was mostly driven by immigration: well over half. I have read somewhere (but lack source offhand) that net Muslim immigration to Britain was about 1.1 million from around 1990-2010, during a point in which the Muslim population grew from just shy of 1 million to around 2.8 million.

However, in order to see the "doubling" trend increase occur, there would need to be a corresponding proportional increase in immigration to support it - this is incredibly unlikely. Instead, if we assume immigration remains static - another 1.1 million immigrants in the next 20 years - we get to 3.9 million by 2030. If we then add births for, say, a 50% increase (which I think errs on the high side) in 20 years, there will be another 1.4 - 2 million (depending on whether we count a 2.8 or 3.9 million base). Thus we should predict a UK Muslim population in the order of 5.3-6 million by 2030 - which is well under 10% of the total.

The other obvious factor is conversion/apostasy. Undoubtedly, some non-Muslim Britons will convert, but equally with the UK being an atheistic-trending society, plenty of Muslims are likely to become non-practicing or even fully abandon it.

I believe it is good, different viewpoints results in more ideas and creativity, diversity also helps to combat prejudice.

This seems like the perfect time to post this (shamelessly stolen from the guy who posted the anti-racist Hitler cartoon).

Blanket statements like "diversity is always good. Only a racist would say otherwise" are just that: blanket statements, and therefore prone to being inaccurate. I think there are legitimate reasons for wanting to oppose the extremes of immigration and diversification.

Without being told the exact context of the situation, diversity is neither inherently good or bad. However, I'm sure there are those that would like to advocate their own personal beliefs as being the only "rational/proper/correct" idea and how their opinion on diversity is just "common sense". Personally, I've notice both those who favor and those who oppose diversity as exhibiting this close-minded behavior.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked