Diversity and social cohesion are vague terms. I've got a couple problems with how social cohesion and diversity are measured.
First is the term diversity. When diversity comes to someone's mind or when its measured its usually in terms of race or ethnicity. I'd say religion too but its usually put together with race or ethnicity. Yet diversity is much more than those previous terms. It can be measured in terms of culture, political ideology, behavior or even minor differences between one another. These other factors likely have as big of an influence as race or ethnicity when it comes to comparing diversity and social cohesion.
Second, when measuring diversity in society its usually done through immigration into that country. Yet societies can become diverse even without immigration and i don't think thats accurately measured when it comes to influence on social cohesion.
Thurd, social cohesion itself is a vague term. Whats its based on? Trust in society? Trust in the government? Or is trust not even a factor to some when it comes to the idea of social cohesion?
I'm on my phone so i can't do a better summary of my argument but this article touches on a lot of what i've said.
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.u...cial-cohesion/
Main point is that saying diversity causes a decrease in social cohesion is not entirely accurate and the fact that comparing diversity and its effect social cohesion is fraught with variables we can't control or accurately measure.
I advise you not to change your post after it was already quoted and addressed. It's a petty way of changing your post...
Victim blaming is a form of justification. It's what you're trying to defend there. I understand that you're failing to grasp what you're actually arguing here. Whats utterly funny is that you're blaming segregation to segregate the society entirely. You're basically playing yourself.
The Armenian Issuehttp://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930
GTA 6 Thread
https://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?819300-GTA-6-Reveal-Trailer
"We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."
It is quite clear that comments about diversity negatively affecting social cohesion have to do with policies enacted by elitist governments that undermine interests of indigenous populations of Europe.
We do not judge society by how cohesive it is. We judge it by the rule of law and civil values. The Hanau shooting shouldn't be making us reconsider diversity. It should make the authorities emphasize that they do not tolerate this kind of violence regardless of who commits it.
Patron: The Mighty Katsumoto
Sukiyama's Blog
Simple explanations of Austrian Economics POV on a number of issues.
Simplified Western Philosophy
Best of Thooorin, CS:GO Analyst and Historian.
You just compared demographic diversity to disease. Congratulations, your words speak for yourself.
There's nothing good or bad about it. Limiting immigration on the basis of ethnicity is nothing short of racism or xenophobia and promoting such discourse does nothing for actual issues. Statements that can be boiled down to, "We need to limit immigration because differences between cultures may results in social conflict" is just bowing down to racism.
Patron: The Mighty Katsumoto
Sukiyama's Blog
Simple explanations of Austrian Economics POV on a number of issues.
Simplified Western Philosophy
Best of Thooorin, CS:GO Analyst and Historian.
I pointed out that you would rather have authorities virtue signal about disliking the consequences of a problem then address the cause of the problem.You just compared demographic diversity to disease. Congratulations, your words speak for yourself.
Has nothing to do with the concept of race. I'm sure if government would mass import Swedes, allow them to create parallel societies that ignore our laws, pay them welfare out of taxpayer's pocket and turn blind eye to crimes committed by Swedes and tell native population to ignore negative consequences of such policies under threat of social and even legal problems, there'd be a problem.There's nothing good or bad about it. Limiting immigration on the basis of ethnicity is nothing short of racism or xenophobia and promoting such discourse does nothing for actual issues. Statements that can be boiled down to, "We need to limit immigration because differences between cultures may results in social conflict" is just bowing down to racism.
Last edited by Heathen Hammer; February 25, 2020 at 09:40 PM.
No you didn't. You did however, liken diversity to contagion.
The only problem here is the fantasy you're cooking up in your mind.Has nothing to do with the concept of race. I'm sure if government would mass import Swedes, allow them to create parallel societies that ignore our laws, pay them welfare out of taxpayer's pocket and turn blind eye to crimes committed by Swedes and tell native population to ignore negative consequences of such policies under threat of social and even legal problems, there'd be a problem.
Patron: The Mighty Katsumoto
Sukiyama's Blog
Simple explanations of Austrian Economics POV on a number of issues.
Simplified Western Philosophy
Best of Thooorin, CS:GO Analyst and Historian.
I don`t like swedes, don`t dare to send those to my country!
What about the fact, that all of those victims of the Hanau Shooting were born in Hanau, went to school in Hanau and worked there?
They contributed far more for our society than all those tinfoilhats like the shooter, who have nothing better to do than talking the whole day about the Great replacement....
4 or 5 of them with migrant background had already the german citizenship. You can't integrate more.
As i said before, talking about limiting migration to prevent terror from far right terrorists is nothing more than bowing down before them and blaming victims for being shot.
Cause tomorrow is a brand-new day
And tomorrow you'll be on your way
Don't give a damn about what other people say
Because tomorrow is a brand-new day
People who direct their anger about migration policies toward the foreign origin individuals themselves are compromising legitimate arguments. The migrants have essentially been invited, migrants who have committed no crime are guilty of nothing more than accepting the invitation. Second generation immigrants are guilty of nothing more than being born. Political violence of this sort is unacceptable regardless, but if those with grievances focused their anger toward policy makers rather than foreign origin individuals, they would be less easily dismissed as being motivated by racism.
The shooter published a manifesto calling for the complete extermination of the populations ofIsrael, Egypt, Morocco, Turkey, Iran, Indian, Pakistan, Vietnam and the Philippines. He had posted messages ranting about QAnon rubbish, and his inability to find a female partner.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/german-shooter-reportedly-wanted-to-eliminate-israel-other-mideast-countries/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/21/hanau-attack-part-of-pattern-of-white-supremacist-violence-flowing-from-us
Its pretty clear that arseclowns on keyboards repeating this rubbish online inspires murders.
Jatte lambastes Calico Rat
"Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -
It was obviously an analogy. You missed the point entirely, as usual.
An empty ad hominem attack that doesn't address my point about opposition to mass-immigration policies having nothing to do with race.The only problem here is the fantasy you're cooking up in your mind.
Sounds like a pointless statement, given the context of the discussion. The problem is Merkel and her government.
"By dealing with root cause of the problem we are appeasing its consequences*.
Thankfully you are not in charge of dealing with coronavirus.
"Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -
We understand your insinuations perfectly and I'm pleased to see that many Forum members are sufficiently disgusted with them.
I didn't mention race, you did.An empty ad hominem attack that doesn't address my point about opposition to mass-immigration policies having nothing to do with race.
Patron: The Mighty Katsumoto
Sukiyama's Blog
Simple explanations of Austrian Economics POV on a number of issues.
Simplified Western Philosophy
Best of Thooorin, CS:GO Analyst and Historian.
Thats a very strange question and I think you have it arse about.
Genetic diversity is insurance against extinction through multiple survival pathways. Likewise political, economic, cultural and lifestyle diversity offers "survival insurance" to different challenges. Its oversimplifying to say "monoculture is death" as in the long run we're all dead but hedging your bets is a prudent strategy.
Communities both nurture and enforce norms of course so the discussion is about to what degree you promote or discourage difference. Germany is a highly successful state by every possible measure so the degree of diversity would not seem excessive in a rational sense. You'd have to be out of touch with reality to believe a shisha bar represents an existential threat to the dominant state within the EU and member of the G7. Asa side note only Japan of the G7 imposes severe restrictions on immigration (for reasons of limited real estate as well as xenophobia): the other six are pretty multicultural.
Lone wolves on shooting rampages don't say as much about their victims' community as they do their own. This guy's community was keyboard warriors who rant about Great Replacement conspiracies, QAnon and their own sexual failure. These people are self selected for failure. Maybe we could set IRL battle royales for these losers to gun one another down? Guarantee the "winner" a girlfriend and a million bucks, it would more than pay for itself.
Jatte lambastes Calico Rat
It doesn't really. It's a by product of not having to deal with all the ugliness that accompanies striving for or insisting on maintaining 'homogeneity'. As I mentioned before, the only arguments for homogeneity are 1) a belief in one's own superiority or 2) a belief that mankind is so fundamentally predisposed towards homogeneity that it's better to have a few 'reasonable people' in charge who recognize the masses cannot rise above those base instincts and can only be contained by appeasing them.
Last edited by Muizer; February 26, 2020 at 03:29 PM.
"Lay these words to heart, Lucilius, that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand?" - Lucius Annaeus Seneca -