“the community-diversity dialectic”

you’ve probably already seen/read about the latest case of politically correct researchers discovering that Diversity Doesn’t Work. if not, see here: The Paradox of Diverse Communities. or steve sailer: Dr. Vibrant notices diversity v. community trade-off.

i’ve just read the original research paper — The (In)compatibility of Diversity and Sense of Community [pdf] — and it is MUCH funnier than any of us might’ve predicted! it would’ve been absolutely hilarious, except for the fact that these people take themselves seriously and keep trying to foist diversity onto the world.

first of all, in case you didn’t know (i didn’t), these people studying the dynamics of communities — the ones who like to promote diversity — are known as “community psychologists.” no, really. who on EARTH hires a community psychologist? besides universities, that is. real, actual communities? doubt it. some governmental agencies? probably (i dread to imagine). waste of taxpayers’ money. (judging by their own research results!)

secondly, their goal really IS to promote diversity — even though, as their research keeps showing, Diversity Doesn’t Work. apparently, it’s part of the mission statement of the american psychological association‘s society for community research and action (scra). unfortunately, the scra’s mission statement doesn’t seem to be accessible to non-members [link to the pdf]. but here from the “(In)compatiblity” paper:

“Fostering respect for diversity is important for community psychologists and is embedded in the mission statement of the Society for Community Research and Action (SCRA), Division 27 of the American Psychological Association. Specifically, one of the goals of SCRA is ‘to promote … greater inclusion for historically marginalized groups, and respecting all cultures’ (SCRA 2010, p. 13). To this end, community psychologists aim to encourage contexts that facilitate respect for diversity, and view these contexts as promoting individual and collective wellbeing (Prilleltensky 2001).”

never mind that they, themselves, keep finding that Diversity Doesn’t Work.

anyway…

from this latest piece of research:

[W]e simulated social network formation in 500 neighborhoods that varied in their level of integration, each time computing the resulting network’s clustering coefficient (steps 2–5, the integration loop). Figure 4 plots each neighborhood’s opportunity for residents to develop a respect for diversity (as measured by its level of residential integration) and its capacity to foster a sense of community (as measured by its residents’ personal network density). A very clear, albeit somewhat non-linear, negative correlation between diversity and sense of community emerges (r = -0.85, p.001; step 6). Neighborhoods with the greatest opportunity for residents to develop a respect for diversity (i.e. highly integrated neighborhoods) have the least capacity to foster a sense of community. Likewise, neighborhoods with the least opportunity for residents to develop a respect for diversity (i.e. highly segregated neighborhoods) have the greatest capacity to foster a sense of community. This finding suggests that, the values of community psychology notwithstanding, it is not possible to simultaneously promote respect for diversity and sense of community in a typical world where relationship formation is driven by homophily and proximity.”

“…the values of community psychology notwithstanding….” heh!

here is figure 4:

(in)compatability paper - figure 04

since these results made the researchers very, very sad, they decided that simulating “social network formations” just 500 times (what they did in the first round) wasn’t enough, so they went for twenty million+ (yes, 20 MILLION PLUS!) simulations, figuring, i guess, that they’d find that diversity does work somewhere! from the paper:

“Perhaps it is possible to simultaneously promote diversity and sense of community in a slightly different worlds where behavioral tendencies toward homophily and/or proximity are weaker, or stronger, or even reversed. To consider this possibility, we repeated the analysis shown in Fig. 4 using different levels of homophily and proximity. Specifically, we examined diversity and sense of community in 500 simulated neighborhoods varying in their level of integration (steps 2–6), for every level of homophily between -5 and 5 (in increments of 0.05; step 7) and every level of proximity between -5 and 5 (in increments of 0.05; step 8). This required slightly more that 20 million separate simulations (i.e. 500 neighborhoods 9 201 levels of homophily 9 201 levels of proximity) and approximately 6,000 processor-hours to complete….

“The findings illustrated in Fig. 5 confirm that the negative relationship between diversity and sense of community observed in Fig. 4 is not simply an artifact of the particular combination of behavioral tendencies toward homophily and proximity (i.e. bH = 2.5 and bP = 2.5) we initially examined. All points in the upper-right quadrant of Fig. 5 are dark, indicating that all combinations of homophily and proximity yield a negative relationship between diversity and sense of community. That is, in any world where individuals exhibit at least some tendency to form relationships with similar others (i.e. bH[0) and at least some tendency to form relationships with nearby others (i.e. bP[0), diversity and sense of community are negatively related. It is important to note that all studies of human social networks have observed behavioral tendencies toward both homophily and proximity, while none have found worlds where one or both of these behavioral tendencies was missing. Thus, while the findings illustrated in Fig. 4 suggest that diversity and sense of community are negatively related *in a typical world*, those illustrated in Fig. 5 suggest this negative relationship would persist *in all reasonably likely worlds*.

in other words, Diversity Doesn’t Work. not even in imaginary worlds, let alone the real world. here is figure 5:

(in)compatability paper - figure 05
_____

“the community-diversity dialectic.” that’s sad community psychologist-speak for “reality.”

more and more, politically correct social researchers — like putnam [pdf] and now these guys — are discovering that Diversity Doesn’t Work, and they’re finding it hard to express their disappointment. their hurt feelings. the phrase “community-diversity dialectic” was coined in this paper: Reconcilable Differences? Human Diversity, Cultural Relativity, and Sense of Community.

they’re all still trying to spin diversity as something workable, of course — all of these researchers who keep finding that Diversity Doesn’t Work. primarily because diversity is important to them — they don’t seem to give a sh*t about what the members of various communities think or how they feel. again, from the “(In)compatiblity” paper:

“Over 30 years ago, Rappaport (1981) noted that ‘the most important and interesting aspects of community life are by their very nature paradoxical’ (p. 20). Such is the case for two of community psychology’s core values: promoting contexts that are likely to increase respect diversity and promoting contexts that are likely to increase a sense of community (Townley et al. 2011). Results of our model suggest that this community-diversity dialectic can result from common behavioral tendencies toward homophily and proximity. Moreover, given the universality of these behavioral tendencies, it is unlikely that community psychologists can shift them sufficiently to simultaneously promote respect for diversity and sense of community. However, through divergent reasoning, community psychologists can seek a contextually-appropriate balance between these two opposing goals that are near and dear to our field.

right. ok. so…the goal of community psychology seems to be to make community psychologists feel better — i.e. to achieve goals that are “near and dear” to THEM — and NOT to … you know … actually HELP COMMUNITIES.

honestly.

previously: the “happiest, healthiest” community in the u.s.

(note: comments do not require an email. ison comet!)

Advertisements

47 Comments

  1. Do not like to think that” diversity” does not work. Before we come to this conclusion, it is necessary to investigate the ethnographic profile of the communities he studied. I think societies with different cognitive classes tend not to work well without some conflicts of interest occur. I think more by cognitive-cultural reasons than ONLY by ethnic-phenotypic variability.

    Reply

  2. right. ok. so…the goal of community psychology seems to be to make community psychologists feel better — i.e. to achieve goals that are “near and dear” to THEM — and NOT to … you know … actually HELP COMMUNITIES.

    They should test themselves for narcissism. Traditional religions promise heaven after death and have lasted for millennia. Modern crypto-religions like Marxism and its bastard offspring liberalism promise heaven before death. This is a mistake, because people notice that there’s no delivery.

    Reply

  3. it took 30 or 40 years to pre-prepare the US for the roll-out of the diversity push — & the push itself began 50-60 years ago. a few voices cried out in the wilderness “this will not work” (e.g., carleton putnam) which caused “correct-thinking people” to point & sputter & spout platitudes about the brotherhood of man. does reality ever catch up to magical thinking? i’m not sure of the historical learning curve on reality to change magical thinking (i’m counting on you folks to have insight for me here!) i don’t know what to expect. i suspect, as the noted scholar warren zevon said, “it ain’t that pretty at all.”

    Reply

  4. Of course diversity works much better at the elite level — which is where our elites got the idea that it must be good for everybody else too.

    Anyway, how do you “simulate” communities? You’d think actually surveying actual neighborhoods would be a better methodology.

    Reply

  5. These ‘community psychologists’ really struggle to comprehend how reality never matches their utopian fantasy. ‘Diversity’ and ‘equality’. Really nice ideas in theory. But to achieve them in practice can only be done by doing the equivalent of forcing a square peg into a round hole.

    Reply

  6. Writing for a student publication, I would love to be able to give these things a bigger audience, as I find them fascinating. But academia isn’t open for discussion on some things . . . oh the howl that would be raised for even broaching the subject.

    Reply

  7. Very interesting, but I do have to wonder what the practical implications are. That we should all retreat to our separate ethnic corners and balkanize? I for one like the social-navigation advantages that result from being exposed to different cultures and ethnicities, despite the high potential for a clash of tastes and values. I feel wiser and more enriched for knowing about different cultures, and think it would be a sad and empty place, indeed, were we all to separate from each other and move through space and time along parallel tracks, like passengers forever in side-by-side trains.

    Let me be clear: I’m not disputing the results of these studies, nor am I disputing the correlation between greater diversity and a weaker sense of community. I’m just pondering the future implications for those of us who are already in the mix, so to speak. Should there be a Great Un-mixing? You in your gated community, me in mine?

    Reply

  8. How desireable is community? Belfast anyone? Lebanon? The former Yugoslavia? East Germany, now under Russian and Polish administration? The British class system? The US started with community but for 150 years has been diversity central. Have we seen the US descend into dysfuntionality? The Canadians recognize this and are trying to rub out Anglo Franco communitarianism with rainbow diversity.

    Reply

  9. @gottlieb – “Before we come to this conclusion, it is necessary to investigate the ethnographic profile of the communities he studied.”

    read the paper for yourself. i linked to it in the post.

    Reply

  10. @panjoomby – “i suspect, as the noted scholar warren zevon said, ‘it ain’t that pretty at all.'”

    heh! one of my favorite scholars! (~_^)

    Reply

  11. @luke – “Anyway, how do you ‘simulate’ communities? You’d think actually surveying actual neighborhoods would be a better methodology.

    well, there’s been plenty of that, too, apparently — more than just robert putnam’s work — and all finding that Diversity Doesn’t Work. =/ see, for example, the references in the paper discussed in the post.

    and: history.

    Reply

  12. @chris – ” ‘Diversity’ and ‘equality’. Really nice ideas in theory. But to achieve them in practice can only be done by doing the equivalent of forcing a square peg into a round hole.”

    exactly.

    what you certainly cannot have in a diverse society — a society that is diverse over the long-term — are too many personal freedoms or crazy things like liberal democracy. that just won’t work at all, since there will be too many diverging and conflicting interests.

    sad, but true. one of the harsh realities of Life, i’m afraid.

    Reply

  13. @philip – “How desireable is community? Belfast anyone? Lebanon? The former Yugoslavia?”

    indeed. really, nobody needs to understand or think about the underlying biology wrt human behaviors at all. you just need to look at HISTORY! =/

    Reply

  14. @kevin – “Very interesting, but I do have to wonder what the practical implications are. That we should all retreat to our separate ethnic corners and balkanize…? Should there be a Great Un-mixing? You in your gated community, me in mine?”

    left to their own, that is what people do anyway — they self-sort. look around america (the world, for that matter) and what do you see? neighborhoods. black neighborhoods, white neighborhoods, mexican neighborhoods, chinese neighborhoods, italian neighborhoods. people want to live near and interact with people like themselves. that’s just how it is.

    what i would like to see happen is for our government to stop messing around with diversity, because they are just creating greater long-term problems than we already have.

    since we know that Diversity Doesn’t Work, why … why, why, why … do they want to import tens of millions of more mexicans/central americans into the country? why do THEY (the gov’t and tptb) want to balkanize the country further??

    the government needs to stop the MASS immigration of peoples who are too unlike the founding population of the country. allowing tens of millions of anglos to migrate here would be fine. tens of millions of japanese or somalis … or even italians or irish … no. too different. the outcome will just mean too much balkanization.

    there’s also a problem with relocating the poor — usually poor african americans — to (white) suburban neighborhoods. a lot of the blacks who have moved miss the sense of community that they left behind (sorry, can’t find the reference to the article i’m thinking of wrt this…i’ll keep looking!). MOST people like living around people like themselves. but there are always exceptions to rules….

    @kevin – “I for one *like* the social-navigation advantages that result from being exposed to different cultures and ethnicities, despite the high potential for a clash of tastes and values. I feel wiser and more enriched for knowing about different cultures, and think it would be a sad and empty place, indeed, were we all to separate from each other and move through space and time along parallel tracks, like passengers forever in side-by-side trains.”

    i actually like (human bio)diversity a lot, too! i’m pretty open to new experiences — it’s not an accident that i studied anthropology in college. i LIKE other peoples. i have, in fact, lived in five different countries (six if you count los angeles (~_^) ) and have visited many more. i would score pretty highly on any swpl test. (having said that, i very much appreciate the low-crime, high-trust, low-corruption societies that northern europeans produce, even though they’re often kinda bland.)

    BUT…the point is that MOST people don’t like to live amongst diversity. MOST people like to live amongst people like themselves. THAT’S when communities are built, NOT when there’s diversity.

    so, you and i have to weigh our personal preferences and desires, which are minority in nature, against the wishes and desires of the majority. and, also, against what tends to WORK the best.

    i like diversity. i like to live in a diverse society. but, more so, i like to live in a well-functioning society. you can’t get that with diversity. Diversity Doesn’t Work.

    (also, there are the whole arguments that: 1) white europeans and their descendents ought to be allowed to have some countries to themselves, and 2) the u.s. was actually founded for the benefit of anglos and their descendents.)

    Reply

  15. “left to their own, that is what people do anyway — they self-sort. look around america (the world, for that matter) and what do you see? neighborhoods. black neighborhoods, white neighborhoods, mexican neighborhoods, chinese neighborhoods, italian neighborhoods. people want to live near and interact with people like themselves. that’s just how it is.”

    and:

    “BUT…the point is that MOST people don’t like to live amongst diversity. MOST people like to live amongst people like themselves. THAT’S when communities are built, NOT when there’s diversity.”

    True enough, for private living spaces, but not so much for public spaces. A community is more than the sum of its private spaces. I can’t imagine, for example, that we could/should ever have Indian-only libraries, black-only banks, white-only restaurants, Korean-only schools, etc. As public policy, such segregation would be odious. Since we’re talking on the plane of observable facts, it’s important to note that diversity is alive and well in many public spaces. The more private something is (e.g., religious preference), the more likely we are to be self-segregating about it (black churches, white churches, etc.); the more public something is, the more likely we are to accept diversity.

    So what’s your plan, in terms of public policy? This was the thrust of my previous comment, and I’m still unclear as to what you’re thinking. Assuming self-segregation is already a brute fact for home communities, it seems no policy changes need to be implemented in that sphere—Diversity Doesn’t Work, and that’s all good in da ‘hood. But if “diversity” is a term that covers both private and public arenas, then what should be done about Diversity Not Working in our libraries, banks, restaurants, buses, etc.? Imagine you’re on some sort of presidential council for the social change, and the POTUS wants your opinion on what to do about all this ethnic/cultural strife. What’s your concrete proposal? Not merely about torrential immigration, which I agree is a problem, but about the diversity that’s already present in our public spheres?

    Reply

  16. I wrote:

    “Imagine you’re on some sort of presidential council for the social change”

    Whoops. We can drop the “the,” just between friends, right? This is what I get for living too long in South Korea…

    And while I’m here, let me add this—I asked:

    “But if “diversity” is a term that covers both private and public arenas, then what should be done about Diversity Not Working in our libraries, banks, restaurants, buses, etc.?”

    A partial answer would be that we need to prove that Diversity Doesn’t Work in the public sphere. That’s far from established. Just from my own experience: I don’t walk into US public libraries expecting gang wars, nor do I expect fistfights at every restaurant I enter, nor ethnic shouting matches at every departure gate of every airport. On the whole, people strike me as getting along just fine in these places.

    Reply

  17. @kevin – “The more private something is (e.g., religious preference), the more likely we are to be self-segregating about it (black churches, white churches, etc.); the more public something is, the more likely we are to accept diversity.”

    really? says who? show me the research. all of the research that i’ve seen (well, most of it) — not to mention the daily news and current events that i follow — indicates otherwise. for instance, american politics at the moment? completely balkanized. and you don’t get much more public than politics.

    @kevin – ” Imagine you’re on some sort of presidential council for the social change, and the POTUS wants your opinion on what to do about all this ethnic/cultural strife. What’s your *concrete* proposal?”

    minimize government — esp. the federal government. the fed gov’t should be tiny, tiny, tiny. so should state governments, for that matter. get out of people’s business. let people self-sort the way they want and to freely associate with whomever they want in whatever ways they want. quit shoving diversity down people’s throats.

    and greater states’ rights so that different peoples can organize their lives the way that they want. some states can be diversity heavens — where you and i could move to if we so chose — and other states could limit their diversity.

    oh, and encourage lots of recent immigrants to self-deport.

    Reply

  18. @kevin – I don’t walk into US public libraries expecting gang wars, nor do I expect fistfights at every restaurant I enter, nor ethnic shouting matches at every departure gate of every airport.”

    depends on the neighborhood you’re in.

    Reply

  19. re: government & states’ rights

    I think all this is great, and I could get behind that.

    re: encouraging self-deportation

    This is a bit too dark and sinister for me. “Encourage” how? “Ausländer RAUS!” posters, like in Switzerland? A campaign of dirty looks cast toward suspected immigrants? Subtle economic pressure that affects a narrow human demographic?

    re: show you the research

    You still haven’t addressed the brute fact that most public spaces are largely conflict-free (how many race-motivated library—or even airport—shootouts do you hear about?). I find this fact so commonsensical, as well as the fact that self-segregation occurs more on private matters than public matters, as not to require anything more than a pair of eyes and a brain to verify. As for politics: political views are about public matters, but they’re private convictions. Hence the balkanization, even within families.

    re: South Korea’s lack of diversity

    I fact I bemoan daily, given the subtle and obvious racism I often face as a large, hulking half-Korean. That’s the flip-side of homogeneity, alas: the attendant racial/ethnic/cultural ignorance. Of course, there’s much to love about living here, which is why I’m here. You weigh the good and the bad, then make your choice.

    Reply

  20. @kevin – “This is a bit too dark and sinister for me. ‘Encourage’ how? ‘Ausländer RAUS!’ posters….”

    always with the nazi imagery from people who don’t like homogeneity (but, then, you DO like homogeneity, don’t you?).

    no, i mean pay people. give them money. a good amount of money that would go a long way in mexico (or wherever). most immigrants to the u.s. today are coming here for economic reasons, not because they love the u.s. or her principles — give them repatriation monies.

    also, don’t hand out freebie benefits like healthcare or education to each and every person who strolls across the border. remove the “pulls” of immigration. and no citizenship/voting rights for 25 years (like in saudi arabia). no family reunification nonsense. i’d even be glad with higher taxes for immigrants (or, at least, for mark zuckerberg).

    @kevin – “You still haven’t addressed the brute fact that most public spaces are largely conflict-free (how many race-motivated library—or even airport—shootouts do you hear about?).”

    most public libraries are in neighborhoods. pretty much all of the ones i can recall ever having been to have been…well…full of white people. there’s security at airports.

    @kevin – “As for politics: political views are about public matters, but they’re *private convictions*.”

    yes, but they’re effected in the public sphere. and the problem with adding too many different types of people to the political mix — too much diversity — is that it starts not to work very well anymore, because there are too many DIFFERENT interests.

    @kevin – “You weigh the good and the bad, then make your choice.”

    yup. that’s what people do, alright! and MOST people choose to live with people like themselves. that’s what the majority does. (oh… and you, too! (~_^) )

    Reply

  21. “always with the nazi imagery”

    Did I mention Nazis? And have I given you evidence that I always mention Nazis? No; I mentioned the Swiss. You went Godwin first.

    “most public libraries are in neighborhoods. pretty much all of the ones i can recall ever having been to have been…well…full of white people.”

    Time to step out of your comfort zone and visit some libraries in black neighborhoods, then. I want a full report, with Google Glass footage of all the violent rejection, afterward.

    “there’s security at airports.”

    That doesn’t seem to prevent shootouts. How many of those are racially motivated, again? Last I checked, there was an anti-TSA nutjob… This article describes eight post-9/11 incidents, only two of which might be considered racially/culturally/ethnically motivated.

    “yup. that’s what people do, alright! and MOST people choose to live with people like themselves. that’s what the majority does. (oh… and you, too! (~_^) )”

    And I choose to live among those who are different. Believe me, despite being half-Korean, Koreans see me as nothing but white, and I see Koreans as radically different from me, too. Does my choice to live in Korea still put me in the majority? You wrote earlier:

    “BUT…the point is that MOST people don’t like to live amongst diversity. MOST people like to live amongst people like themselves. THAT’S when communities are built, NOT when there’s diversity.

    so, you and i have to weigh our personal preferences and desires, which are minority in nature, against the wishes and desires of the majority.”

    I’m most decidedly not living among people like myself. So—am I in the minority or in the majority? Better get your story straight, and try not to eat your own tail, O Ouroboros!

    Hey, I don’t blame you for self-contradiction. Half-Koreans are hard to pin down. Ask any full Korean.

    Reply

  22. @kevin – “Did I mention Nazis?”

    no. but you said ‘Ausländer RAUS!’ which a LOT of people associate with what is called the far-right (the swiss people’s party, for instance) and groups that many people associate with nazis or neo-nazis. if you don’t want people you’re talking to online to think of nazis, avoid germanic references, as they are commonly used online to mean nazi or neo-nazi.

    @kevin – “Time to step out of your comfort zone and visit some libraries in black neighborhoods, then. I want a full report….”

    you missed my point. my point was that public libraries — the local branches — are usually located in neighborhoods which, in the u.s. and in many diverse countries, tend to be comprised of a single race or an ethnic group or whatever — in a black neighborhood or in a white neighborhood or an italian neighborhood or whatever. so you won’t find diversity-related problems in local libraries because they are located within UN-diverse areas.

    @kevin – “This article describes eight post-9/11 incidents….”

    the fact that there’s been only eight shooting incidents at airports might mean that the security is working.

    @kevin – “I’m most decidedly not living among people like myself.”

    you’re living in a place where the majority are more like you (they’re 100% korean, you’re…what?…50% korean) than is the case for me and where i live. i live in an area where NO ONE is of my ethnic background. most people are white (there are some somali asylum seekers and a few east asians, too), but they’re of another ethnic group than me.

    compared to me, you live amongst people like yourself.

    @kevin – “Hey, I don’t blame you for self-contradiction. Half-Koreans are hard to pin down. Ask any full Korean.”

    i’m not contradicting myself. you’re half korean and you live with full koreans. you have NOT chosen to live in new york city amongst blacks and puerto ricans and jews and italians. THAT would be you choosing diversity!

    Reply

  23. ” if you don’t want people you’re talking to online to think of nazis, avoid germanic references, as they are commonly used online to mean nazi or neo-nazi.”

    Ah, yes. And since the Swiss are a predominantly Germanic culture, I should avoid talking about them, ja, even though they’re not Nazis? Any other rhetorical terms you care to dictate, Fräulein?

    “my point was that public libraries — the local branches — are usually located in neighborhoods which, in the u.s. and in many diverse countries, tend to be comprised of a single race or an ethnic group or whatever — in a black neighborhood or in a white neighborhood or an italian neighborhood or whatever. so you won’t find diversity-related problems in local libraries because they are located within UN-diverse areas.”

    And a most awesome point this is! I rejoice in it. So let’s give you a set of Google Glasses and send you into library after library in black neighborhoods—see whether we can incite some of these “diversity-related problems.” It shouldn’t be that hard to do, and we need documentation! Hell, I’d do that with you. If I had the time and the means, I’d take that road trip. We’d create a list of, say, 500 such libraries across the country, hit them all, then count up the number of times we were either yelled at for explicitly racial/ethnic reasons or had our asses kicked for same.

    “the fact that there’s been only eight shooting incidents at airports might mean that the security is working.”

    Indeed, because what’s a single human life, after all, right? Pagh! Nothing! I totally agree: everything’s working just fine; nothing to see here.

    (My point isn’t that I expect perfect security; my point is the cavalier, callous, and cold “only eight.”)

    And who said there have been only eight such incidents? Was the newspaper report claiming to be comprehensive? I thought the article used the word “include(s).”

    “you’re living in a place where the majority are more like you (they’re 100% korean, you’re…what?…50% korean) than i am. i live in an area where NO ONE is of my ethnic background. most people are white, but they’re of another ethnic group than me.

    compared to me, you live amongst people like yourself.”

    You’re seriously pulling this stunt? This is a close cousin of “Some of my closest friends are black.” To wit: I’m living where it’s more ethnically diverse, so I have more room to talk! What’s the subtext, here (aside from the genetic fallacy—dismiss my words because of where I live? really?)? And what’s your ethnicity, by the way? Don’t be coy: you’ve trumpeted your regional uniqueness, so my curiosity craves followup.

    “i’m not contradicting myself. you’re half korean and you live with full koreans. you have NOT chosen to live in new york city amongst blacks and puerto ricans and jews and italians. THAT would be you choosing diversity!”

    I’ve spent about nine years in Korea, but most of my life living in Alexandria, Virginia, which is pretty ethnically diverse—lots of blacks, puertoriqueños, Jews, and Italians. Have I now satisfied your diversity credentials, or will you continue to dictate even more terms? What other conditions must I meet before you’ll offer a fair hearing? You really need to stop trying to control the rhetoric. Aren’t you for freedom of expression?? Where’s your humanity?

    And you did very clearly contradict yourself. Since you apparently can’t see the contradiction, I’ll spell it out for you.

    First, you said:

    “so, you and i have to weigh our personal preferences and desires, which are minority in nature…”

    In this instance, you’ve lumped me with the minority. My actions are manifestly different from most people’s. Later on, you wrote:

    “that’s what people do, alright! and MOST people choose to live with people like themselves. that’s what the majority does. (oh… and you, too! (~_^) )”

    Here, you lump me with the majority: my actions are no different from most people’s. So once again: get your story straight. Am I in the majority, or in the minority?

    And a rhetorical plea: please avoid the genetic fallacy. Even if I lived among clones, that would affect my arguments not one whit.

    And regarding the pay incentive you mentioned, here’s what I wrote over at Malcolm Pollack’s blog:

    “HBD Chick, in her spirited (if somewhat contradictory) responses to me, seems to arguing along the same lines re: social policy, i.e., provide incentives for disaggregation (self-deportation, as she puts it), remove medical and other benefits for illegal aliens, etc. One example she gives, in terms of self-deportation, is that we pay immigrants (I’m unclear on whether she’s talking only about recent illegal immigrants or about all immigrants, legal and illegal) to go back home, since what brought them to our shores is, in large part, an economic motive.

    But how workable is that? And what would the posters for such a campaign look like? Paying off illegals will only motivate more to attempt our borders because of the easy money: Hey, no need to work in America! They pay you just for hopping the fence! Imagine using something like that appeasement strategy as a teacher in a room full of misbehaving students. Giving candy to bad students doesn’t make them quieter: it makes them more demanding.”

    So that’s what I wrote.

    Anyway, I’m old and tired and have got things to do tonight (yeah, it’s night here), and I’m giving you the last word, which is the least I can do since this is your blog. Thank you for making me think. You didn’t convince me of a thing (I’m sure I similarly failed with you), but what really saddens me is that you and I are actually in basic agreement about many of the philosophical/scientific underpinnings of this whole discussion. I agree that diversity—at least as it presents itself according to the “multiculturalist” agenda—is problematic. I actually think some of your policy notions would be salutary, if implemented, although as Malcolm points out in his replies to me, implementation is an uphill battle. I agree with the empirical facts revealed by the studies you’ve cited. Diversity Doesn’t Work, while embarrassingly corny as mottoes go, has more than a ring of truth to it. My Korean mother often used to sigh, “Maybe everyone should just go back to their own country.” (This didn’t stop her from voting Democrat.)

    What worries me, and this is a worry I often come back to when I listen to conservatives start talking about ethnicity and harmony-through-homogeneity, is that not enough attention is being paid to the human cost of adopting these proposed social policies. (Let’s put aside, for the moment, the inconsistency among conservatives who publicly deplore liberal attempts at utopian social engineering, yet who seem comfortable enough about proposing their own social-engineering projects.) Michelle Malkin’s “let’s put them on trucks and truck them all outta here” proposal, along with her “internment camps” proposal, horrified me. Although I think your “payment” incentive is unworkable, I give you credit for taking a more positive approach to the diversity problem than many others have.

    So again: nice sparring with you; thank you for making me think, and good luck with that Google Glass project (wink). 500 libraries!

    Reply

  24. @kevin – “And since the Swiss are a predominantly Germanic culture, I should avoid talking about them, ja, even though they’re not Nazis?”

    you didn’t talk about the swiss. you talked about the swiss who put up signs saying ‘Ausländer RAUS!’ who, as far as i know, were the swiss people’s party:

    “The party has variously been identified as ‘extreme right’ and ‘radical right-wing populist’, reflecting a spectrum of ideologies present among its members. In its far right wing, it includes extremist members such as Ulrich Schlüer, Pascal Junod, who heads a ‘New Right’ study group and has been linked to Holocaust denial and neo-Nazism.”

    YOU’RE the one who made an allusion to a group considered by some to be extreme right/neo-nazi, not me. you jumped to that idea first — that putting up signs saying ‘Ausländer RAUS!’ would be my idea for dealing with too many (illegal) immigrants in the u.s. why would you do that? why not imagine me thinking of a more moderate idea — something in english, not german, since english is the language of the u.s. and my native tongue — something not related to so-called neo-nazis? why ‘Ausländer RAUS!’ for your example?

    @kevin – “We’d create a list of, say, 500 such libraries across the country, hit them all, then count up the number of times we were either yelled at for explicitly racial/ethnic reasons or had our asses kicked for same.”

    you have a very narrow, unique defintion of how Diversity Doesn’t Work. please see the paper in the post and other papers (like putnam’s) wrt what it means to have a sense of community and a well-functioning community.

    @kevin – “Indeed, because what’s a single human life, after all, right? Pagh! Nothing! I totally agree: everything’s working just fine; nothing to see here.”

    did i say that? did i even imply that? no.

    @kevin – “And who said there have been only eight such incidents? Was the newspaper report claiming to be comprehensive? I thought the article used the word ‘include(s).'”

    sorry. i didn’t follow your link, and i thought you meant that since 9/11 there had only been eight shootings at airports in the u.s. i thought that number sounded very low given the rate of gun violence in the u.s., and i thought it sounded pretty good given the rate of gun violence in the u.s. — and the fact that we’re 300+ million in the country.

    since it appears that neither of us knows what the true number is, i’ll wait on commenting any further on it.

    @kevin – “You’re seriously pulling this stunt?”

    it’s not a stunt at all. YOU’RE the one saying you live in diverse conditions because you’re NOT 100% korean, and yet you live with mostly koreans, and YOU are half korean. i’m telling you that in the area where i happen to live, there is no one else of my ethnic group — locally — (sorry, can’t say what my ethnic group is, because i’m concerned about being watsoned), so, between the two of us, i’m actually immersed in more diversity than you.

    @kevin – “Have I now satisfied your diversity credentials, or will you continue to dictate even more terms?”

    you don’t NEED to have any so-called “diversity credentials” as far as i am concerned, and you can say anything you like here about diversity or whatever (as long as you’re not abusive or threatening to anybody). but you have to agree that it’s a little ironic that you have CHOSEN (i’m presuming — unless you’ve been forced in some way — correct me if i’m wrong) to live in an EXTREMELY heterogeneous country, the ethnic composition of which you partly belong to, but you are claiming to like diversity. it sounds a bit…ironic!

    @kevin – “First, you said:

    ‘so, you and i have to weigh our personal preferences and desires, which are minority in nature…’

    In this instance, you’ve lumped me with the minority. My actions are manifestly different from most people’s. Later on, you wrote:

    ‘that’s what people do, alright! and MOST people choose to live with people like themselves. that’s what the majority does. (oh… and you, too! (~_^) )’

    Here, you lump me with the majority: my actions are no different from most people’s. So once again: get your story straight. Am I in the majority, or in the minority?”

    that was two different stages of the conversation. at first you said you LIKE diversity, and i took you at your word. then you said you lived in a very UNdiverse country, the ethnic background of which you partly belong to, and it became more clear to me that you seem to behave more like most people — in liking to live with people like yourself — not that there’s anything wrong with that!

    @kevin – “Paying off illegals will only motivate more to attempt our borders because of the easy money….”

    obviously we need to secure the borders properly, too. other countries manage it (japan, for example). we should, too.

    @kevin – “Although I think your ‘payment’ incentive is unworkable, I give you credit for taking a more positive approach to the diversity problem than many others have.”

    it’s not unworkable at all. the israelis have done it and quite successfully.

    i have all sorts of “kind and gentle” ideas about getting immigrants to, please, go back home — and i do mean legal as well as illegal ones, but mostly in the case of mexicans/central americans, since there are just so many of them. it’s a numbers game, afaiac. i have nothing personal against mexicans — if it were tens of millions of italians, i’d be trying to figure out how to encourage them to go back home, too.

    here’s one of my “kind and gentle” ideas for ya: i’d have some sort-of age cut-off. if we’re talking an immigrant family — legal or illegal — with kids over the age of, say, 12 — kids who have only ever lived in the u.s. (you know, they grew up in the u.s.) — i, personally, would let them stay. that’s harsh kicking out teenagers from the only place they’ve ever known. (see, i’m not heartless!) if the kids are small, though, that’s different.

    Reply

  25. @kevin – ILLEGAL immigrants from mexico/central america should be put on buses and sent back home, though. in gentle, humane ways, of course. people shouldn’t be treated like cattle. (actually, i treat cattle — and all animals — very humanely, so you could treat these people the way I treat cattle. (~_^) )

    (again, families with kids over 12 who lived their whole lives in the u.s. are exempt in my plan — immediate familiy members only.)

    Reply

  26. Kevin Kim
    “Very interesting, but I do have to wonder what the practical implications are. That we should all retreat to our separate ethnic corners and balkanize?”

    You’re missing the step where people are currently being deliberately imported out of their separate ethnic corners into the West (and soon East Asia) to promote diversity because diversity is supposed to be a good thing – when it plainly isn’t a good thing in the majority of contexts – as anyone who’s lived or worked in the urban blight knows full well.

    Once imported they then resegregate back into their ethnic corners thus *creating* balkanization where it didn’t exist before. The process of diversification i.e. the process of destroying homogenous communities in the West (and soon East Asia), is the active balkanizing process.

    .

    “You still haven’t addressed the brute fact that most public spaces are largely conflict-free”

    Utterly, totally, completely wrong. The public spaces that well-off, educated people frequent may be conflict-free but in the urban blight public spaces are the ethnic battlegrounds – schools being a particular grim example where there is an *immense* amount of inter-ethnic violence and conflict which is the prime driver of “white flight” aka low intensity ethnic cleansing.

    .

    One aspect of the previous point which reflects back on your original question is higher IQ people can deal with diversity better so apart from anything else there should be *no* blue collar mass immigration at all for reasons which would be obvious if the media didn’t censor the news.

    Reply

  27. I stopped following the back-and-forth with Kevin. The issue that he raised is just. In a high-trading world, and a society that already has an enormous ethnic mix and trades with countries with ethnic mix, the practical reality is that institutions have to foster some sort of comity, even if only on a superficial level, for life to go forward. I work as a social worker for a government (I work with the dangerous mentally ill) and sometimes have to go into neighborhoods which would not ordinarily welcome me.

    There is a tradeoff between the comfort zone of what people would choose to encounter and whe reality of what they have chosen to encounter even though they don’t know it. If you move into Community A, the cost for housing is such-and-such, and the opportunity for employment, the quality of schools, the public areas, the condition of the roads are all part of the package. Community B has a different set. If there is more diversity in an area, driving the cost of housing down and rearranging the employment possibilities to your advantage, you can’t just say “well, I want only the good, not the bad.” As a psychiatrist friend used to say “You ordered it. You eat it.”

    I absolutely get that government fiat creates problems. But it’s tradeoff, not either-or.

    Property rights have actually been a force for cooperation in America. We would not ordinarily cede power to those in outgroups. But in order to protect our own goods, we made an uneasy peace with Quakers/propertied widows/blacks/Jews. It has worked pretty well, and the subgroups in America within races – Irish/English, German/Russian, Dinka/Nuer, Colombian/Mexican – get along far better than they do in their home countries, because we have insisted on it. I think it is fair to ask how much of that is valuable, how much is intrusive, and does that change over time.

    Reply

  28. Kevin, you wrote:

    “True enough, for private living spaces, but not so much for public spaces. A community is more than the sum of its private spaces. I can’t imagine, for example, that we could/should ever have Indian-only libraries, black-only banks, white-only restaurants, Korean-only schools, etc. As public policy, such segregation would be odious. Since we’re talking on the plane of observable facts, it’s important to note that diversity is alive and well in many public spaces. The more private something is (e.g., religious preference), the more likely we are to be self-segregating about it (black churches, white churches, etc.); the more public something is, the more likely we are to accept diversity.”

    I think this needs a little unpacking. Yes, a society with high diversity, if it is even to attempt to enforce equality and neutrality as a matter of law and custom (and of course, many don’t, good examples being the status of dhimmi in Islamist societies, Jews in Nazi Germany, or blacks in the U.S. until fairly recently) will have to “accept diversity” in its public spaces (which includes schools, shops, workplaces, businesses, and, apparently, even private associations). But what does that entail? It goes much farther than not getting your ass kicked in a library.

    I’ve harped on this for a long time now at over at my place: in homogenous societies, where there is high commonality of ethnicity, custom, ritual, language, religion, folklore, and all the other things that bind human populations into cohesive communities, the private space can extend effortlessly and almost imperceptibly into the public space. Not so in diverse communities. As I wrote here, about modern Western civilization:

    “Its highest value, its summum bonum, is now the very antithesis of culture itself: not commonality, but “diversity”.

    At the heart of this unnatural, Utopian ideology is a fatal paradox: the notion of a single “culture” that is, somehow, all cultures at once. But if culture itself is that which is common to a people — that which is shared — then, given the profusion of incommensurable features that make up the world’s cultures, any hybrid that seeks to combine and assimilate them all can only have as its own core of commonality the vanishingly small area of overlap between them.

    It is like a Venn diagram linking an ever-increasing number of sets: as each new human group is added to the collection, the intersection between them — the set of what is common to all, and thus the limit of what can form the shared basis of the new metaculture — becomes smaller and smaller. In the end, as is now plain to see, all that remains are the basest commonalities of our animal nature, grafted onto a few philosophical abstractions about the form of government.”

    Also, from a post written a couple of years earlier:

    “The point: as social diversity increases, commonality decreases. In a Venn diagram plotting beliefs, customs, traditions, and social mores amongst a society’s various groups, as diversity increases there will be a smaller and smaller area in which all the circles overlap. In terms of public policy, enforcing “non-discrimination” maintaining “harmony” means that everything outside of that dwindling region must be excluded from the public square — requiring ever-increasing restrictions on liberty. We are reminded daily by our ruling elites that “our diversity is our strength”, but the truth — a truth that was simple common sense in a saner era — is that it comes at a heavy cost. What is intolerable to an ideology that sees Diversity as the greatest possible good is the simple, natural fact that discrimination — meaning, at its most basic, “we are this and not that” — is intrinsic to, and essential for, the very existence of culture itself.”

    Diversity, at least in the public square, necessarily entails restrictions on liberty — or, at least, on perceived liberty — which is, as I argued here, all that matters. In modern-day, post-massacre Rwanda, for example, it’s got to the point where nobody dares say a word.

    Finally, if you will all forgive me for this auto-linkfest, here are some simple, commonsense points about diversity and immigration that I think we in the West would do well to keep in mind.

    Reply

  29. I don’t really have much to add here, other than that I really admire your patience with people like Kevin.

    Personally, I think a lot of people like Kevin just fall into sort of all-or-nothing thinking. “Hey, it’s nice to get to know people from other cultures, so let’s just let EVERYBODY in here, even if it destroys what’s left of our OWN culture!”. It’s the kind of thinking that says, if a little cayenne pepper makes this soup taste good, why not just go ahead and dump in the whole jar?

    I also find it amusing the way people act like deporting Mexicans back to Mexico is somehow a fate worse than death. Have these people ever been there? Sure, there’s poverty, and yes, there are large parts of it that I wouldn’t want to live in, but it’s not like the whole country is one giant hellhole. People seem surprised to find out that the whole country isn’t bartering with chickens. That they actually have running water and cable TV and people who wear suits to work. There are places in Mexico that are nicer than a lot of places in the US.

    My grandparents had a few friends who, when they retired, moved to Mexico voluntarily. So it would be nice if people didn’t act like deporting people to Mexico was the equivalent of dumping them in the middle of the Gobi desert and telling them to fend for themselves.

    Reply

  30. i said: “ILLEGAL immigrants from mexico/central america should be put on buses and sent back home, though.”

    illegal immigrants from anywhere should be sent back home immediately. this includes european groups, too, like the irish (although we might have to send them back on planes — or boats — difficult w/buses and oceans).

    there should be zero tolerance for breaking the country’s immigration laws — there certainly shouldn’t be amnesty! talk about rewarding bad behavior.

    Reply

  31. @grey – “You’re missing the step where people are currently being deliberately imported out of their separate ethnic corners into the West (and soon East Asia) to promote diversity because diversity is supposed to be a good thing…. Once imported they then resegregate back into their ethnic corners thus *creating* balkanization where it didn’t exist before.”

    yes. =/

    @grey – “‘“You still haven’t addressed the brute fact that most public spaces are largely conflict-free’

    Utterly, totally, completely wrong. The public spaces that well-off, educated people frequent may be conflict-free but in the urban blight public spaces are the ethnic battlegrounds….”

    yes, thank you. i forget this, too, ’cause i live (and have mostly lived) a very sheltered life.

    Reply

  32. @malcolm – “Yes, a community with high diversity, if it is even going to attempt to enforce equality and neutrality as a matter of law and custom…will have to ‘accept diversity’ in its public spaces (which includes schools, shops, workplaces, businesses, and, apparently, even private associations). But what does it take to make that work? It goes much farther than not getting your ass kicked in a library.

    “I’ve harped on this for a long time now at over at my place: in homogenous societies, where there is high commonality of ethnicity, custom, ritual, religion, folklore, and all the other things that bind human populations into cohesive communities, the private space can extend effortlessly and almost imperceptibly into the public space.

    that’s the thing right there. this is what you find in putnam/other researcher’s work which looks into societies that have a “sense of community” and that have well-functioning — smoothly-functioning — communities: those that work the best seem to have features that arise organically out of the population.

    the populations in nw european societies — and, if the world values study data are correct, several african societies — just are civic-minded. why? good question. one thing’s for sure, no one’s FORCING them to be civic. these people just are. they come together and work cooperatively naturally, there are high degrees of trust, low corruption (at least in nw europe), low theft, etc.

    not being beaten up every time you walk into a public library is probably a fairly good indicator of a well-functioning society with a good “sense of community,” but you need to look at the whole package.

    Reply

  33. @assistant village idiot – “In a high-trading world, and a society that already has an enormous ethnic mix and trades with countries with ethnic mix, the practical reality is that institutions have to foster some sort of comity, even if only on a superficial level, for life to go forward.”

    sure. i agree.

    i just happen to be focused right now on the mass immigration issue (i.e. stopping it as much as possible!), because it seems so critical to me. why — WHY — would we, in our right minds, ADD to the diversity that’s already in the country, when it’s apparent that Diversity Doesn’t Work and that adding more and different populations to the mix will just make it all the more difficult to build functioning communities? why make MORE work/strife/problems for ourselves?

    i don’t argue for sending anybody home except for the recent millions of mexicans/central americans (because, like i said, it’s just a numbers issue) — and all illegal immigrants. what’s done is done. we’ve got the amount of diversity we have in the country now — we’ll have to make the best of it.

    letting people self-sort is a good idea in my mind. or self-coalesce if they so choose — i’m not picky! but FORCING people to do things (e.g. relocate poor blacks into middle-class white neighborhoods) is just a bad idea.

    i also think that increasing states’ rights is the way to go — then the different american nations can run their lives the way they want (according to their natures). different states could even decide to work together on different issues — if all the new england states wanted socialized medicine, for example, they could have it! (just don’t impose it on the rest of us. (~_^) )

    Reply

  34. @disgusted – “…I really admire your patience with people like Kevin.”

    there’s a big dent in my desk now from where i was pounding my head into it earlier. (~_^)

    all in all, though, it is a good thing to enter into discussions with people with opposing opinions/viewpoints. it helps to clarify one’s own ideas — helps you see where you are, or might be, wrong, too. i really mean that! (or i like to think that i do, anyway…. (~_^) )

    kevin’s always welcome here! that i definitely do mean. (^_^)

    Reply

  35. Assistant Villager
    “The issue that he raised is just. In a high-trading world, and a society that already has an enormous ethnic mix and trades with countries with ethnic mix, the practical reality is that institutions have to foster some sort of comity, even if only on a superficial level, for life to go forward.”

    It’s not just at all. He’s treating the *active* balkanization of the West – based on the idea that diversity is beneficial – as if it were passive and the act of stopping this deliberate increased balkanization as the active instead. That is entirely bogus.

    Diversity may be beneficial in very low numbers but above very low limits diversity is actively *harmful*. So the obvious first step is to get that point accepted. The obvious next step is to *stop* the active balkanizing. Anything else is simply an attempt to deflect the debate.

    Reply

  36. Malcom Pollack
    “The point: as social diversity increases, commonality decreases. In a Venn diagram plotting beliefs, customs, traditions, and social mores amongst a society’s various groups, as diversity increases there will be a smaller and smaller area in which all the circles overlap.”

    Yes, or an all-encompassing empty set.

    Reply

  37. “And a most awesome point this is! I rejoice in it. So let’s give you a set of Google Glasses and send you into library after library in black neighborhoods—see whether we can incite some of these “diversity-related problems.” It shouldn’t be that hard to do, and we need documentation!”

    Do you actually know any blacks? They existed for 6000 years or so as a civilization before they had any contact with Europeans, and in all of that time, they never even thought about creating a written language. They don’t HAVE libraries, and if whites give them libraries, they use them for the same purpose as every other building they own, a place to store kids and do drugs,until it falls in from disrepair.

    The point is that you CAN’T test your hypothesis. There is, for all intents and purposes, no such thing as “library after library in black neighborhoods”. Blacks don’t build libraries, at least not in the sense that we build libraries (i.e. as places filled with books used to study and acquire cultural knowledge, another thing which blacks do not have and the main reason why they do not have libraries), and if there are libraries near blacks, they are built and maintained mainly by whites or some non-black minority.

    You claim to “love diversity”. This must simply be ornamental ideology on your part, as you know nothing about the groups you claim to love being around. Your statement about “black libraries” is as naive and ignorant as someone asking to see the handball courts used by digital amputees for entertainment, or trying to procure tickets to the Aborigine Opera.

    You really think the entire world works like your upper-class bubble where individuals of all races self-select themselves (via income level) into groups that are united based on a love of whatever faggy liberal yoga or diet trends that you guys are into. You have no idea that multiculturalism means that things like “black libraries” not only do not, but CANNOT, exist. Blacks refuse to partake of any Western tradition. The use of libraries,and indeed the act of reading for pleasure or personal improvement, is one of these traditions.

    You have no idea just how much all of the things you take for granted rely upon the civilizational pre-eminence of two very distinct systems of thought,engaged in mainly by whites,that are dragged down into the mud and spat upon by “diversity”. These ideas are Christianity and Greek Rationalism. It cannot be just any Christianity either, but must be Christianity predicated upon Greek Rationalism. Voodoo Christianity is just paganism in Christian colors. Without these belief systems being held as the ideal by a society democracy is just mob rule, as in Africa, the idea of learning for pleasure is incomprehensible, the concept of private property is seen as some kind of moral sin, patriarchal division of property and labor, and hence the Industrial Revolution, are impossible. Really everything that happened to advance humanity in the last 2000 years is erased if Christianity mingled with Greek Rationalism and vice versa doesn’t in some way color the decisions of the majority of participants in a society.

    Diversity kills society. If you must jerk yourself off in order to have any self-esteem, just rent some porn and do it at home. It’s a lot less destructive to everyone else.

    Reply

  38. @nergal – “They don’t HAVE libraries, and if whites give them libraries, they use them for the same purpose as every other building they own, a place to store kids and do drugs, until it falls in from disrepair.”

    this, i imagine, is probably more or less true in poor, low-class black neighborhoods (ghettos), but i doubt it’s true of middle-class black neighborhoods. i’ve been to middle-class black neighborhoods (both in chicago and los angeles), and they were very nice neighborhoods. didn’t go to any public libraries in either of those neighborhoods, but my guess is that the libraries in those areas were nice and functional.

    sure, there are fewer nice middle-class black neighborhoods than middle-class white neighborhoods, but there are some blacks in the u.s. with middle-class values and middle-class lifestyles (just as there are a certain number of po’ white trash — with the emphasis on trash — folks). don’t forget that.

    Reply

  39. @hbd chick

    The reason why there are fewer middle class black neighborhoods is because blacks didn’t build the neighborhoods in the first place. They are either middle class white neighborhoods that blacks have moved into, or lower class black neighborhoods which have been gentrified by whites.

    Poor white trash are an order of magnitude more civilized than the majority of blacks. They build schools and libraries in West Virginia, they don’t have to be built FOR the whites there by middle class blacks from somewhere else, and if the poor white trash DID have to rely on middle class blacks to do this for them, they’d be SOL.

    Reply

  40. @nergal – “The reason why there are fewer middle class black neighborhoods is because blacks didn’t build the neighborhoods in the first place. They are either middle class white neighborhoods that blacks have moved into, or lower class black neighborhoods which have been gentrified by whites.”

    no. you’re lacking a sense and a knowledge of history. the middle-class black neighborhood — actually two of them — that i visited in chicago were middle-class black neighborhoods since, well, one was from the 1930s and the other was post war — 1940s/1950s. they were small middle class neighborhoods, i’ll grant you that — but they were, almost from the start — especially the post war one — middle-class black neighborhoods.

    please, keep in mind that there is variation in every population. the averages are different between populations, but not everyone in a population is at the average. there is always variation — thus there are middle-class blacks (not to mention upper-class ones). they’re just fewer in number (percentage-wise) than what you find in white or east asian populations.

    if you fail to understand averages and what that means, you will never understand human biodiversity.

    Reply

  41. @nergal – “Poor white trash are an order of magnitude more civilized than the majority of blacks. They build schools and libraries in West Virginia….”

    the po’ white trash i was thinking of don’t build schools or libraries anywhere. i was thinking of the meth heads — or the football hooligan types you find in britain. those people are not building schools or libraries.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s