Diversity for diversity sake is evil

All the time I hear people bitching about protecting diversity. They defend insane crazy things in the defense of diversity. Yet these same people are supposedly against slavery. You cannot both protect diversity for diversity sake and be against slavery. Slavery is a cultural trait that has been shared by many cultures. If you're against diversity being attacked, then you must also believe the ending of slavery in many cultures was wrong as well. After all we must preserve that diversity. Diversity is everything.

The thing about diversity is, it can be both good and bad. Anyone who protects a thing for the sake of diversity and not it's merit is a very scary individual that seeks chaos over advancement. All advancements in human rights required by definition a changing of culture, and a lessening of diversity that's detrimental to society, humanity and the world as a result. All advancement comes from figuring out and embracing what works and learning from that which does not.

Protecting diversity for diversity sake doesn't even make sense conceptually as the only way to protect diversity is to eliminate diversity by protecting diversity from the diverse cultures that wish to emiliminate diversity. It's a conceptual paradox. It's a complete absurdity.

I love some diversity. I love different foods, varying types of clothes and style, different musics, art etc. I'm also against and loathe some diversity, I dislike punishing women for being raped, I do not agree with sweatshops, I do not support the concept of race or the racism that comes with it, I do not support the slavery that still exists, I do not support corporate wellfare, I do not support welfare in a form that traps rather than helps uplift the poor, I do not support people being imprisoned for minor offenses such as smoking a plant, I disagree with open borders while the world is in it's current state, I support welfare reform that helps people get out of poverty rather than trapping them in it. I support marriage regaurdless of sexuality. I'm against most abortions, but recognize the need for choice, I, however feel that such choices need to be more fair across the board, and that choice should be more limited than the free for all many hope for. I'm pro gun rights even though I neither own nor desire a gun myself. I believe that our current system of government needs change and improvement, I do not believe in the necessity of infinite wealth as a carrot necessary to make a society free or successful. It does not mean I do not believe effort and success should not be rewarded. There is a middle ground.

Point is I believe a great many things, and there are a great many changes I'd love to see. This is true for everyone, and none of these changes can be made without, well changing things obviously. If there is anything you feel is wrong what so ever and you feel things need to change to fix that thing, YOU are against diversity for diversity sake.

So please stop with the "but diversity" it's stupid, paradoxical, and just plain absurd. It's no different than saying to accept a thing just "because" and everyone finds that annoying and aggravatingly stupid.

a reply to: Puppylove

You're mostly right.
Diversity is fine.
Forced diversity is evil.

It's the best way to keep the best people from getting the job.

I think America has had a grand dose of Polarization. They want 'us against them' and that's what we are thrust into. I am ready.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Diversity is not always fine unless you support murder, rape and child molestation. As being a murderer, rapist and child molester is a form of diversity, unless you believe everyone is a murderer, rapist and child molester. I for one am against this diversity, forced or not.

The statement, "diversity is fine" is absurd, it means "everything is fine." Diversity is not innately a good thing, forced or not. We need to stop pretending a neutral term is innately positive.

Diversity is a neutral term, innately neither positive or negative. It's simply the state of being varied. A bowl of M&Ms in which some have cyanide in them would be diverse, but I certainly wouldn't prefere it over a less diverse bowl of regular M&Ms. On the same foot a lack of diversity is also a neutral term, while I might like the less diverse bowl of non poisoned M&Ms I most certainly would not like a bowl of poisoned M&Ms.

Everyone please recognize this, diversity is neither innately good or bad. It's a neutral term that can be good or bad depending on the nature of that diversity.

a reply to: Puppylove

Who the hell includes criminals as being part of a diverse culture?
The only way I’ve ever heard it referenced was with race, gender and sexual orientation being the parameters.

"Politicans don't like when people do things for free, it makes them nervous."...and useless.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Then you're not paying much attention. Whole cultures are protected despite being against these various things in the name of diversity, by the same groups claiming to protect these things in the name of diversity.

I also argue, race is not a positive diverse concept, and personally consider the promotion of it as hazardous to society as a whole.

The entire, race needs to be preserved and protected as a way of life because of diversity is in my opinion wrong and harmful. It's a non positive, diverse concept, we need to learn from it and move towards eliminating it. People with various physical traits will not suddenly cease to exist because of it. Nor will anything positive be lost. It should become an example of an ignorant concept we have advanced away from.

Oh right, clarification, do not confuse the belief that race should be eliminated as a part of society and the concept treated with scorn with the belief that discrimination based upon features often associated with race should be ignored. The two beliefs are not the same thing. In fact such discrimination should be fought, but by attacking any belief that such features should result in them being treated differently in any way and attacking the ignorance of those that believe they are anything less than as human as anyone with any other cosmetic features. It should be combatted by promoting togetherness and inclusion, not by segregation and distancing. It should be promoted by recognizing each other as the same and equal and fighting together against anyone who says otherwise, regardless of what skin color they have and who's side they say they are on. If they stand for race and are telling you to treat someone else differently because of the color of their skin, be theh black or white, they are not for ending racism, period, end of story.

a reply to: Bluntone22

It's the best way to keep the best people from getting the job.

I'm very torn on this issues.
On one hand in a perfect world, the best person should get the job.
In reality, how often does that happen.
We've seen so many case of hidden racism.

www.usatoday.com...

Cronic confirmed Bethmann was disenrolled as a member of the alumni association.

Would a person like this Navy member help people of color get scholarships, or advancements if there was no diversity requirements? I don't know, but I think it would be interesting to see some of the paper trail.

If I were a young lady and worked for his wife, and I was passed over for promotions, could I reasonably believe it was due to discrimination. Being an Asian woman I think so.

Diversity leads to all kinds of inconsistencies. It also leads to moral relativism.

Some things do have to homogenized in order for society to proceed.

For example, in some cultures a meeting proceeds when all the attendees are present. In the usual Western way, the meeting begins at the assigned time whether all are there or not. Those two ideas do not work well together. So one way or another, they must be homogenized in order for society to proceed in an orderly way.

That's just one example.

a reply to: JAGStorm

With my many years in the employment industry I can tell you that I can't always send the most qualified person because they don't check the proper diversity boxes.

a reply to: Puppylove

I totally agree. There will never be a republican on any of my crews.

Just curious as to what your reasoning is that such is a positive decision? Out of curiousity would love your rationale besides simple contraryism.

By the way, I'm not a republican so is no threat to me. Half the stuff I'm for no republican would ever agree with.

That said, if I had a business, I wouldn't stop from hiring a Republican or Democrat, it would be none of my business, and both parties better keep their bull# from affecting my business.

I don't think you should hire a Republican because they're a Republican, nor should not do so for the same reason.

So please, give me a reason why you think hiring a Republican would hurt your business. If it's a good one, like you're business is specifically political and part of the Democratic Party then sure it would make little sense. If you're business is streetsweeping however I'd love to hear the argument.

a reply to: Puppylove

Republicans used to be the party of personally responsibility; that's changed, now it's all the dembs or Obama's fault.

I need to be able to trust ALL the people on my crew because of the inherent danger when working with high voltage and hot lights, 30k usd cameras, etc. I know it's a broad generalization but I just can't take the chance when the safety of my crew is at stake.


I don't care about diversity, I care about character!

a reply to: olaru12

What do you do ... force them to produce a Democrat party registration card?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: olaru12

What do you do ... force them to produce a Democrat party registration card?

Nope, they always give themselves away on facebook, twitter, instagram or youtube. And I always call the 3 references everyone puts on their application. It's astonishing how many people put jobs they have been fired from, as a reference.

And even a little familiarity with NLP let's you read people by the way they respond in the interview. HR people and poker players know all the tricks.

I'm at work and now that we are back to work there are plenty of applicants. I can see 3 people waiting for interviews and I know already who will be hired. It ain't the 2 guys with their hats on backward.

deleted because post does not contribute to the thread

Well, on a more serious note then earlier, it is being abused or weaponized in most western countries, with the largest amounts of different ethnicities an nationality.

Why should America, of all countries which was built on voluntary immigrants(majority and cant forget legal anyways) should even bother with this rhetoric compared to others is beyond me.

By the systemic basically means disease, lobotomy used to a cure.

I came here to say I agree with your thread title

It's a no-brainer...