Skip to comments.United Nations says that diversity is bad and fossil fuels are good
Posted on 11/20/2009 8:57:16 AM PST by Still Thinking
In a shocking reversal, the United Nations has come out against New World Order dogma about diversity and global warming. It has concluded that the best countries for human development are racially homogenous, as long as the dominant race is white or Asian. And if that's not enough political incorrectness, the top country in human development in the U.N.'s eyes has funded its rich social spending with -- gasp! -- offshore oil production.
Well, admittedly, the U.N. didn't state its conclusion that directly, and the mainstream media didn't report it that directly; but anyone with a grain of intelligence and an ounce of knowledge could read between the lines and reach that unspoken conclusion. That means that no one in Congress, the White House, the media, teachers unions, or the professoriate could reach the conclusion.
The conclusion can be easily drawn by everyone else from the U.N.'s recently released annual index of human development, which ranks 182 countries by such factors as education, per-capita income, and life expectancy. The top ten countries are listed below. I have added in parentheses the percentage of their populations that is white and, if they have a large Asian population, the percentage that is Asian. (The percentages are estimated from other sources for those countries that don't report their racial composition.)
1. Norway (98% white)
2. Australia (92% white and 7% Asian)
3. Iceland (94% white)
4. Canada (66% white and 11% Asian)
5. Ireland (94.9% white and 1.3% Asian)
6. The Netherlands (85.7% white and 2.4% Asian)
7. Sweden (94% white)
8. France - (95% white)
9. Switzerland (96% white)
10. Japan (99.4% Asian)
[NOTE: This proves that facts are racist; please don't attack Craig or the Uninvited Ombudsman for this fact.]
As you can see, unless you're a liberal arts professor or community organizer, the top ten countries are predominately white or Asian. They are also democratic, industrialized, mostly capitalistic, and protective of civil liberties and property rights. In addition, several of the countries fund private schools with public money. And two of the countries, Norway and Canada, are rich in fossil fuels and other natural resources.
With its rank of 13th place, the United States didn't make the top ten. According to leftists in the White House and elsewhere, this is proof that the country sucks. Actually, it's proof that the leftists suck in statistical analysis and veracity.
The truth is that the United States would rank near the top if it had the racial make-up of Norway -- or even Minnesota. Conversely, Norway would not rank at the top if it shared a border with a third-world country and had to absorb, assimilate, and educate millions of legal and illegal immigrants, especially if many of them crossed the border with little education, low skills, no money, and poor health.
Moreover, the U.N.'s definition of "human development" is misleading. For example, an unskilled and uneducated Mexican with tuberculosis who earns four dollars a day can cross the U.S.-Mexico border and in a few months be earning eight times as much, be treated for free in a modern hospital, and get a free education for his children. Although his own human development will have skyrocketed, he brings down the ranking for the United States, because he is not as well-off as a blond, blue-eyed native Norwegian.
Based on the U.N.'s human development index, the key to the United States rising to the top in human development is not nationalized healthcare or a European-style social-welfare state. It is to deport all non-whites and non-Asians. Thankfully, that goes against American values. We'd rather be a diverse nation and be lower on the index than look like Norway and be higher on the index.
An author and columnist, Mr. Cantoni can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
"Actually, it's proof that the leftists suck in statistical analysis and veracity."
Some great lines in here.
Hard to believe this is for real.
Wow. ‘white’ and ‘asian’ are races. I learn something new everyday.
By Asian, do they mean Asian as we know it? Or Asian as in Middle-Eastern (Arabic)?
All right, it’s Caucasian and Mongoloid.
It does come across as sort of xenophobic or something, but I guess it is what it is. I don’t know if the methodology of the study is available for review, but since it cuts against the UN’s normal political outlook, they probably didn’t rig it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.