Is Diversity and Multiculturalism a Good or Bad Thing?

[Oil exporting People]

Thanks for proving you don't, I'll take this as a win. :3

> Still refuses to answer points

You may take this however you want, but it will never change the fact you can't refute what I said no matter how much (or lack thereof) you tried.

[Oil exporting People]

As opposed to reducing prejudice and getting people to know each other?

At the macro level that does nothing, as my studies have shown.

[Bakery Hill]

No I feel that's an overly simplistic understanding of what racism is that unduly essentialises it. Racism is rooted in racial identity, which as a social construct has been subject to massive shifts throughout history, right up to today. If racial identity becomes less important in a society than other forms of identity, be it national identity, cultural identity or class identity, racism also becomes less acute. Given where we find ourselves, we must construct a society with a set of values and purpose that makes these identities far more important than race. You might say that this is impractical, but value judgement aside ethnically cleansing a society like yours or mine would be far less practical.

Also if you're trying to employ the No True Scotsman fallacy, you're sort of employing the Fallacy Fallacy. NTS is based in terminology, I've got no attachment to multiculturalism as a term and believe its fundamentally unable to deal with racism.

But that's exactly the problem; increasing diversity results in higher racial consciousness. The only way one can reduce racism is thus to reduce diversity.

And this occurs because multiculturalism conceives of society in an essential racial way. It is based on the reactionary foundation, that society is fundamentally divided by race, and so if one racial group is seen to increase in proportional size, you might feel that the racial group that you've identified with is going to lose out. As I've said, this along with other important factors, is one of the reason why multiculturalism as a way of thinking is a bad thing.

[Bakery Hill]

No, I got exactly what you're saying,

:rofl:

Thanks for proving you don't, I'll take this as a win. :3

You've spammed that link three times now. I'd be more careful if you want to avoid moderator action.

[New haven america]

Race is biological and denotes subspecies within an species' popuation, humans have none.

Leaving aside how wrong that is, that doesn't answer the question; if Humans do not have subspecies, then there is no biological basis to race because we are all the same thus race is a social construct.

But there is, as it denote subspecies in a species' population.

Humans don't have any, however, that doesn't mean other species of plants and animals don't: the Bengal Tiger and Sumatran Tiger, the Asian and African Elephants, Red Squirrels and Gray Squirrels. All of those are subspecies and can be taxonomically categorized as different races among their species.

[New haven america]

:rofl:

Thanks for proving you don't, I'll take this as a win. :3

You've spammed that link three times now. I'd be more careful if you want to avoid moderator action.

It's the only response that truly fits your posts.

Also, using Mods as weapons is considered an offence.

[The East Marches II]

You've spammed that link three times now. I'd be more careful if you want to avoid moderator action.

It's the only response that truly fits you're posts.

Also, using Mods as weapons is considered a warnable offence.

I thought your usual reply was to throw passive aggressive TGs that one can't reply to.

[Oil exporting People]

Humans don't have any, however, that doesn't mean other species of plants and animals don't: the Bengal Tiger and Sumatran Tiger, the Asian and African Elephants, Red Squirrels and Gray Squirrels. All of those are subspecies and can be taxonomically categorized as different races among their species.

So what does animals of Asia have to do with my question?

You continue to do the duck and dodge; Allow me to ask again: In Humans, is race a social construct or biological reality?

[Bakery Hill]

You've spammed that link three times now. I'd be more careful if you want to avoid moderator action.

It's the only response that truly fits you're posts.

If you're incapable of mounting an argument, it's probably best you leave the thread.

Also, using Mods as weapons is considered a warnable offence.

I've never reported anyone to moderation and I don't intend to start now. If you choose to ignore reasonable advice, that's on you.

[New haven america]

Humans don't have any, however, that doesn't mean other species of plants and animals don't: the Bengal Tiger and Sumatran Tiger, the Asian and African Elephants, Red Squirrels and Gray Squirrels. All of those are subspecies and can be taxonomically categorized as different races among their species.

1.So what does animals of Asia have to do with my question?

2..You continue to do the duck and dodge; Allow me to ask again: 3.In Humans, is race a social construct or biological reality?

1. You asked if race was biological, I said yes, and provided examples as to how it was biological.

2. Then how 'bout you actually try to specify from now on, k?

3. Social Construct. As are most things set up by society.

[Luminesa]

Is Race a social construct or genetic?

Race is biological and denotes subspecies within an species' popuation, humans have none.

...So humans have no race? This doesn’t make any sense. Race is a social construct that has been developed in maybe the last 300 years or so. You’re thinking ethnicity.

[Oil exporting People]

1. You asked if race was biological, I said yes, and provided examples as to how it was biological.

2. Then how 'bout you actually try to specify from now on, k?

Or yah know, you could understand the basic social convention of "context"; not a damn one of us has talked about animals until now and my question was posed in response to a quote you made about Humans.

3. Social Construct. As are most things set up by society.

Arabs do not view themselves as White nor are they viewed as such by Europeans; you can admit you are wrong now.

[Paledonn]

Austria-Hungary, the most diverse country. Simply a beautiful cluster.

Least diverse country...

Probably North Korea. Also a cluster...

Diversity can cause conflict if handled poorly or based off the histories of the people. A good example might be Rwanda. Poor history between the tribes, and a poor government. BAM, genocide. Lots of the time one group may even refuse the other, or they may self segregate. This causes problems when the groups come into contact. (Think French no go zones)

Diversity can also lead to large benefits, if handled well. A good example might be the EU. The EU has good scientific programs due to the huge amount of cooperation. That being said, differences between areas spark a lot of squabbling.

Humans are tribal and probably always will be. Some might mix, others might not. Diversity to me seems like including all, even outsider groups based on merit. This is good. A lack of this gets you North Korea.

Multiculturalism is two very different peoples culturally, linguistically, and historically being artificially forced together. Welcome to Austria-Hungary or half the nations of Africa. This doesn't end up well.

[Salus Maior]

Arabs do not view themselves as White nor are they viewed as such by Europeans; you can admit you are wrong now.

What does that have to do with anything?

[Oil exporting People]

What does that have to do with anything?

NHA was earlier arguing that Arabs are White in a debate with someone else; the quotation chain will show this.

[Salus Maior]

What does that have to do with anything?

NHA was earlier arguing that Arabs are White in a debate with someone else; the quotation chain will show this.

Yes, they tend to be more on the brown side (which makes sense given they have tons of sun and Europeans generally don't). Features wise, they're not really that different.

[New haven america]

It's the only response that truly fits you're posts.

1.If you're incapable of mounting an argument, 1b.it's probably best you leave the thread.

Also, using Mods as weapons is considered a warnable offence.

2.I've never reported anyone to moderation and I don't intend to start now.

1a. Oh the hypocrisy... 1b. I'd love to have a reasonable debate or conversation with you, however, it seems you aren't able to stop acting smug or acting like you're right and everyone else who doesn't fully agree with you is below you (In which then you randomly latch onto threads in order to harass people). Fix that and people might be more willing to interact with you.

2. Then a bit of sincere advice: Don't use the mods as weapons or threaten mod action (Unless you're the OP or are in control of an RP thread), they don't like it and will most likely give you redtext as well.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

1.If you're incapable of mounting an argument, 1b.it's probably best you leave the thread.


2.I've never reported anyone to moderation and I don't intend to start now.

1b. I'd love to have a reasonable debate or conversation with you, however, it seems you aren't able to stop acting smug or acting like you're right and everyone else who doesn't fully agree with you is below you (In which then you randomly latch onto threads in order to harass people). Fix that and people might be more willing to interact with you.

Is that like when you ragequitted earlier on today because you had no good arguments against me and just went "Oh well fuck you, your loss if you don't find me special to TG me"?

I mean, what is the standard of "reasonable debate" here, besides "whatever bullshit NHA decides is right today and we just have to shut the fuck up and listen to him"?

Also, people are willing to interact with him far more than you, honestly. So I don't know what is the problem, here, that you see.

[New haven america]

1. You asked if race was biological, I said yes, and provided examples as to how it was biological.

2. Then how 'bout you actually try to specify from now on, k?

1.Or yah know, you could understand the basic social convention of "context"; 2.not a damn one of us has talked about animals until now and 3. my question was posed in response to a quote you made about Humans.

3. Social Construct. As are most things set up by society.

4.Arabs do not view themselves as White nor are they viewed as such by Europeans; you can admit you are wrong now.

1. You're one to talk. I had to specially tailor a response for you and you still didn't fucking understand.
2. I'm sorry, but when did humans stop being animals? It seems that I've missed that memo...
3. Then I repeat: You should try to specify from now on.
4. And yet several areas of the world say otherwise, good job screwing up your argument.

[The East Marches II]

NHA was earlier arguing that Arabs are White in a debate with someone else; the quotation chain will show this.

Yes, they tend to be more on the brown side (which makes sense given they have tons of sun and Europeans generally don't). Features wise, they're not really that different.

t. I've never been to Europe or the ME

What world do you live in? You can tell each group apart by its distinctive features. Thats not even taking into race but instead certain things that crop up. Thats blatant denial of reality.

[Kubumba Tribe]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washin ... dangerous/
http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2015/01/19 ... jXQRYFOmBZ
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2007/08/05/w ... 86248.html
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles ... inevitable

[Bakery Hill]

1.If you're incapable of mounting an argument, 1b.it's probably best you leave the thread.


2.I've never reported anyone to moderation and I don't intend to start now.

1a. Oh the hypocrisy...

The main "argument" you've been using is "you don't have an argument" which in itself prevents actual argument because it results in meta-conversations, it's a self fulfilling prophecy.

1b. I'd love to have a reasonable debate or conversation with you, however, it seems you aren't able to stop acting smug or acting like you're right and everyone else who doesn't fully agree with you is below you (In which then you randomly latch onto threads in order to harass people). Fix that and people might be more willing to interact with you.

You've seen me argue a point civilly, coherently and in detail with Oil exporting people here, who is by all means far to the right of me. I generally have no problems interacting with other people on NSG. If you interpret my criticism of your horrible excuses for argument that damage the anti-racist cause as harassment I apologise, but to be frank this is why this forum exists.

2. Then a bit of sincere advice: Don't use the mods as weapons or threaten mod action (Unless you're the OP or are in control of an RP thread), they don't like it and will most likely give you redtext as well.

I don't think that particularly advice is relevant to this situation but thank you anyway.

[New haven america]

1b. I'd love to have a reasonable debate or conversation with you, however, it seems you aren't able to stop acting smug or acting like you're right and everyone else who doesn't fully agree with you is below you (In which then you randomly latch onto threads in order to harass people). Fix that and people might be more willing to interact with you.

Is that like when you ragequitted earlier.

You're the one who threw a temper tantrum.

For anyone interested: Soldi makes a blanket statement, I say that said statement wasn't true, and Soldi looses his fucking shit over nothing.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Is that like when you ragequitted earlier.

You're the one who threw a temper tantrum.

For anyone interested: Soldi makes a blanket statement, I say that said statement wasn't true, and Soldi looses his fucking shit over nothing.

I didn't lose my shit. Your fault if you don't like my aggressive debating when it's aimed back at you.

[Bakery Hill]

NHA was earlier arguing that Arabs are White in a debate with someone else; the quotation chain will show this.

Yes, they tend to be more on the brown side (which makes sense given they have tons of sun and Europeans generally don't). Features wise, they're not really that different.

They look different, speak different languages, have a very different culture and hail from a traditionally geographically separate area from Europe. They conceive of themselves as separate to whiteness, and white people overwhelmingly agree on that point. This is how socially constructed groups/identities work.