Posted on 11/06/2017 10:25:47 AM PST by davikkm
I remember being taught in school that what held us together was a common language, similar religions and values.
The communists stated in the 1950s that to take us down they had to drive a wedge into our homogeneous culture.
Interesting how they’ve guilted so many who have been the traditional backbone of this great country. Now you can’t even say “it’s ok to be white” without repurcussions.
“Diversity” is a manipulation to normalize sexual deviancy and cultural sin.
Diversity should happen as a sidebar to the mutual sharing of ideals. You should not choose friends based on their color, their color should not matter. The reason the military works is because everyone shares common goals.
I was recently in Korea. Was walking around downtown Deajeon with a business partner. Saw some scruffy central Asians in a group, which brought up the topic of Korea’s guest worker program.
I asked if these men are allowed to stay in Korea. The emphatic answer - “NO! Korea already is a very crowded country. They also simply do not fit in here. They do not speak the language and besides their temporary work, they have no connection to Korea and would only be unhappy and cause problems for the country.”
What, you mean centuries of dominant heterosexuality is better than 57 genders, lgbtqueers, fag marriage, men thinking they are women and vice versa and all that other diversity perversity?
Diversity is the greatest asset of those wanting to destroy our country.
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
DIVERSITY IS STRENGTH
Diversity is highly overrated.
One of the greatest lies ever told.
Diversity is a strength.
Diversity killed Hollywood
Diversity for the sake of Diversity is a fools errand that will destroy.
Diversity is only a small COMPONENT of Merit, meaning you shouldn’t forsake someone of high merit because they are different. One should never forsake merit in the name of diversity...
Good point.
Diversity, i.e. balkanization, killed the “melting pot” which, of course was its purpose.
“As long as your BEHAVIOR is polite and civilized, you are part of all of us.”
Who decides what behavior is polite and civilized if cultures and customs are diametrically opposed?
Hiring discussions were soon filled with euphemisms such as “targets” or “goals” since quotas were illegal under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Increasingly, the push for faculty diversity has come to resemble Chinese political indoctrination where even the term “affirmative action” is verboten since it implies unequal ability. At the University of California–Riverside, for example, all candidates for faculty jobs (including the sciences) must submit a statement describing how they’ve worked to promote diversity, equity and inclusion in previous positions as graduate students or professors and how they planned to continue to do so once on campus. And guess what? Those who give superior answers to these questions surprisingly turn out to be from historically under-represented groups! Cynthia Larive, Riverside’s interim provost, said that avoiding numerical targets “gets people out of thinking about a quota system. We want to hire outstanding faculty members who can help the institution continue to be successful and, most importantly, who can mentor students.”. Ah yes, the new way to cheat, to deceive, to discriminate against better applicants.
What makes this coerced diversity so hard to swallow is that its purpose rests on a plain-to-see but impossible to express fraud—the alleged benefits of diversity. Indeed, the elite’s obsessive proclamations of this lie far more closely resemble propaganda than celebrating a cliché-like truth. Simply put, if diversity is so wonderful, and in the self-interest of universities and businesses, why must it be imposed forcefully? Surely if it was as beneficial as advertised, there would be no need for disparate impact lawsuits, training to overcome implicit bias and similar measures that resemble mothers punishing junior for not eating his lima beans. Does government and the social justice camp followers really believe that diversity is akin to chocolate or red wine whose consumption hardly needs coercion?
Now for what really fuels the anger over coerced diversity: it is one thing to demand sacrifices for a clearly understood, noble cause—WW II rationing, for example. But it is quite another to demand sacrifices for a cause whose benefits rest on an obvious falsehood, and it is hard to imagine a bigger lie than “Diversity is Our Strength.”
Even worse, today’s PC dogma insists that those coerced into this charade dare not complain, at least in public, since such caviling will be deemed “racist” and a defense of white privilege. An unemployable white male Harvard Ph.D. in English will be told to just shut up and get an adjunct position at a community college. After all, the barely competent black who beat him out for the Yale job had enslaved ancestors.””
Are you on Facebook? Facebook gives your name out to many different websites if you are logged in to it.
“Are you on Facebook?”
No, not unless one of my kids has done that without my knowledge.
Great point. The "melting pot" theme is ingrained in us yet today I have no idea what this mess is in some parts of America.
Hm, don’t know what the problem is, then. Social media networks will give your information to websites you’re visiting if you’re logged in.
I didn’t see my name on the website, but I adamantly refuse to use my real name on the Internet.
Diversity + proximity = war
I'm beginning to believe that indeed, diversity should be the seasoning, not the stew, as somebody else put 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.