Is Diversity and Multiculturalism a Good or Bad Thing?

[Lalaki]

Some apparently believe they will be and say things like diversity is code for anti white and other crazy stuff. If some groups are having more children then others so be it. That's not something the government should be concerned with.

The government should definitely be concerned with the growth of it's population. In my eyes, the government should ideally implement polcies to encourage the growth of the native ethnic group and limit the growth of foreign ethnic groups until racial/cultural homogenity is achieved.

The government should be concerned about the rights and freedoms of its people. Not about perpetuating a certain skin color. This is indefensible.

[Maratha India]

Well it's good if it means including people from all races colours and creeds. But then I guess that begs the question why do we need it if everyone is equal and doesnt hold any kind of advantage whether your a Middle Eastern a doctor or a white doctor. In short If everyone has the right as anyone else in the country what's the point in being Multicultural?

The only time I would consider it bad would be if Multiculturalism means adopting every single culture and neglecting the country whose hosting Multiculturalism in the first place.

I see your point, if anything it teaches us something we already know that no matter who you are, you are worth the same as everyone else. So why does an all white work force in Birmingham get encouraged to hire more diverse workers? l I suppose Multiculturalism only benefits people who believe in it haha

Pretty much ha

[Illiberalism]

The government should definitely be concerned with the growth of it's population. In my eyes, the government should ideally implement polcies to encourage the growth of the native ethnic group and limit the growth of foreign ethnic groups until racial/cultural homogenity is achieved.

The government should be concerned about the rights and freedoms of its people. Not about perpetuating a certain skin color. This is indefensible.

How is that indefensible? That is just your own opinion on the role of government.

[Maratha India]

Diversity? No.
Multiculturalism? Depends on your definition apparently.

Why is diversity not a good thing and why does the other depend on your definition?

It's not that it's a bad thing, it's just a pointless thing. Why does a workforce or even a country HAVE to be diverse in order to achieve greatness? I could care less if there was an all white or all black workforce at McDonald's as long as I get my big Mac

[Roosevetania]

Absolutely! Think about if you went to New York City and everyone was white, born in America, and spoke fluent English and nothing else. That would take away what so many people love about the city; the amazing diversity! Also, without different people in the same place, everyone is ignorant. And when you're ignorant about a group of people, you're bound to be misinformed. For example, if I had never met a gay person, I would just think of them in the stereotypes of being ridiculously eccentric and feminine. If I had never met a Muslim person, I would just think of Muslims as terrorists. Same goes for members of opposite political parties, atheists, Jews, etc.

[San Lumen]

Some apparently believe they will be and say things like diversity is code for anti white and other crazy stuff. If some groups are having more children then others so be it. That's not something the government should be concerned with.

The government should definitely be concerned with the growth of it's population. In my eyes, the government should ideally implement polcies to encourage the growth of the native ethnic group and limit the growth of foreign ethnic groups until racial/cultural homogenity is achieved.

I disagree. Who has children and who does not isn't something the government should be concerned with. And what do you define as native population for the United States or Canada countries that were founded by immigrants?
By your logic the governments of the United States and Canada should be encouraging the Native Americans and First Nations to have the most children considering they were there before the European immigrants came over.

[The Transylvanian States]

Always respect the culture you settle in, by all means bring your own bit of culture with you but remember where you are and try to adapt into it, it's called integration. You don't like it? There's the airport, there's the ferry......pick one

[Illiberalism]

I disagree. Who has children and who does not isn't something the government should be concerned with.

Okay. Why?

And what do you define as native population for the United States or Canada countries that were founded by immigrants?

The native population of the US and Canada are the same ethnicity as the immigrants who originally founded those countries, which is Anglo-European and other closely related Northern-European races.

By your logic the governments of the United States and Canada should be encouraging the Native Americans and First Nations to have the most children considering they were there before the European immigrants came over.

No. Even though Native Americans inhabited land that is now apart of the United States and Canada, they are separate from those two countries. Native Americans have not inhabited the US/Canada for thousands of years. They have inhabited land that was completely unconnected with the US or Canada until very recently in history. They have been natives of their own respective nations; the Iroquois Nation, the Blackhawk Nation, the Choctaw Nation, etc. Those Nations were then invaded and annexed by foreign Anglo-European powers.

[Genivaria]

Diversity? No.
Multiculturalism? Depends on your definition apparently.

Why is diversity not a good thing and why does the other depend on your definition?

I mean't that diversity isn't a bad thing.
And I don't believe that cultural segregation is a good thing.

[The Sauganash Union]

Well speaking of multiculturalism, the French president, the hero of liberalism against FN racism, just said Africans are stupid.

[Genivaria]

Why is diversity not a good thing and why does the other depend on your definition?

It's not that it's a bad thing, it's just a pointless thing. Why does a workforce or even a country HAVE to be diverse in order to achieve greatness? I could care less if there was an all white or all black workforce at McDonald's as long as I get my big Mac

Noone said it does.

[The Sauganash Union]

I disagree. Who has children and who does not isn't something the government should be concerned with.

Okay. Why?

And what do you define as native population for the United States or Canada countries that were founded by immigrants?

The native population of the US and Canada are the same ethnicity as the immigrants who originally founded those countries, which is Anglo-European and other closely related Northern-European races.

By your logic the governments of the United States and Canada should be encouraging the Native Americans and First Nations to have the most children considering they were there before the European immigrants came over.

No. Even though Native Americans inhabited land that is now apart of the United States and Canada, they are separate from those two countries. Native Americans have not inhabited the US/Canada for thousands of years. They have inhabited land that was completely unconnected with the US or Canada until very recently in history. They have been natives of their own respective nations; the Iroquois Nation, the Blackhawk Nation, the Choctaw Nation, etc. Those Nations were then invaded and annexed by foreign Anglo-European powers.

This is true. The Indian tribes were considered foreign nations, not actually part of America.

America was formed at Plymouth Rock, not at the Bering Land Bridge.

[The Sauganash Union]

It's not that it's a bad thing, it's just a pointless thing. Why does a workforce or even a country HAVE to be diverse in order to achieve greatness? I could care less if there was an all white or all black workforce at McDonald's as long as I get my big Mac

Noone said it does.

Really? Nobody has ever said "diversity is our greatest strength"? Shit, my university said diversity was its source of strength (even though most minorities were tokens or athletes).

[Genivaria]

Noone said it does.

Really? Nobody has ever said "diversity is our greatest strength"? Shit, my university said diversity was its source of strength (even though most minorities were tokens or athletes).

Yeah now you're changing your statement.

[New haven america]

Noone said it does.

Really? Nobody has ever said "diversity is our greatest strength"? Shit, my university said diversity was its source of strength (even though most minorities were tokens or athletes).

What you said: Why does a workforce or even a country HAVE to be diverse in order to achieve greatness?

What you changed it to: See above post.

[Bearhinoland]

Okay. Why?


The native population of the US and Canada are the same ethnicity as the immigrants who originally founded those countries, which is Anglo-European and other closely related Northern-European races.

No. Even though Native Americans inhabited land that is now apart of the United States and Canada, they are separate from those two countries. Native Americans have not inhabited the US/Canada for thousands of years. They have inhabited land that was completely unconnected with the US or Canada until very recently in history. They have been natives of their own respective nations; the Iroquois Nation, the Blackhawk Nation, the Choctaw Nation, etc. Those Nations were then invaded and annexed by foreign Anglo-European powers.

This is true. The Indian tribes were considered foreign nations, not actually part of America.

America was formed at Plymouth Rock, not at the Bering Land Bridge.

this is true as well so eurpeans where the first on american soil, unless you want to include solutreans.
they stick to insults and making fun of my comments cause they know its true. Now for your american communist history lesson enjoy-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTmNWY0ZPfM

[Zona33]

Your implying there is some conspiracy to eliminate whites. There isn't. If certain groups aren't having children at the rate of others then so be it. Its not the job the of the government to increase brith rates of certain people.

Of course it's the government's job to preserve it's own people. That's what it exists for. To serve the people... or what it should exist for... It's also the government's job to guard against the foreign hordes in the first place.

[Zona33]

You seriously think non-European ethnic groups are trying to purposely destroy white people? The whole refugee crisis is due to a combination of economic instability in the poorer regions of Africa (Somalia for example, or numerous West African states) and the current chaos in the Middle East due to the aftermath of the Arab Spring.

Who said that? They don't know what they're doing, but they still need to be stopped.

[The Conez Imperium]

Your implying there is some conspiracy to eliminate whites. There isn't. If certain groups aren't having children at the rate of others then so be it. Its not the job the of the government to increase brith rates of certain people.

Of course it's the government's job to preserve it's own people. That's what it exists for. To serve the people... or what it should exist for... It's also the government's job to guard against the foreign hordes in the first place.

Yes but last time I checked, the Australian government is not obsessed with racial purity in 2017. Unlike the dark old times, people have moved on from the concept that "the people" volk/peuple is a distinctive racial group.

[San Lumen]

I disagree. Who has children and who does not isn't something the government should be concerned with.

Okay. Why?

And what do you define as native population for the United States or Canada countries that were founded by immigrants?

The native population of the US and Canada are the same ethnicity as the immigrants who originally founded those countries, which is Anglo-European and other closely related Northern-European races.

By your logic the governments of the United States and Canada should be encouraging the Native Americans and First Nations to have the most children considering they were there before the European immigrants came over.

No. Even though Native Americans inhabited land that is now apart of the United States and Canada, they are separate from those two countries. Native Americans have not inhabited the US/Canada for thousands of years. They have inhabited land that was completely unconnected with the US or Canada until very recently in history. They have been natives of their own respective nations; the Iroquois Nation, the Blackhawk Nation, the Choctaw Nation, etc. Those Nations were then invaded and annexed by foreign Anglo-European powers.

I suggest you read a history book. There where Native Americans all along the East coast.

[UED]

You seriously think non-European ethnic groups are trying to purposely destroy white people? The whole refugee crisis is due to a combination of economic instability in the poorer regions of Africa (Somalia for example, or numerous West African states) and the current chaos in the Middle East due to the aftermath of the Arab Spring.

Who said that? They don't know what they're doing, but they still need to be stopped.

White people aren't endangered. This is literally a population cycle that they are going through due to increased wealth and higher standard of living. They'll start having higher birth rates when the cycle starts anew. The majority of Syrian and Iraqi refugees will return to their country once the war de-escalates. I agree that the economic refugees must be stopped due to certain countries enduring employment problems such as France and whatnot but the refugees aren't a "Europe will end up getting destroyed" level threat.

[Liriena]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTmNWY0ZPfM

Have you ever actually read the works of the Frankfurt School?

[Quency]

Well speaking of multiculturalism, the French president, the hero of liberalism against FN racism, just said Africans are stupid.

He said they were uncivilised. Which I would find to be a fairly ridiculous statement to consider controversial. Advanced intelligence and social structures necessary for civilisation only really developed in Eurasia, where conditions were right that settled agriculutralists could produce enough short-term relative to hunter-gatherers to take have a leg to stand on.
Namely in colder climates where it was largely necessary for modern humans after the last Ice Age, very fertile lands where agriculture payed off well versus hunting-gathering (Mesopotamia, the Nile, Indus river, China, etc.), and places where hunting-gathering was not very effective short-term.

[Torrocca]

Well speaking of multiculturalism, the French president, the hero of liberalism against FN racism, just said Africans are stupid.

He said they were uncivilised. Which I would find to be a fairly ridiculous statement to consider controversial. Advanced intelligence and social structures necessary for civilisation only really developed in Eurasia, where conditions were right that settled agriculutralists could produce enough short-term relative to hunter-gatherers to take have a leg to stand on.
Namely in colder climates where it was largely necessary for modern humans after the last Ice Age, very fertile lands where agriculture payed off well versus hunting-gathering (Mesopotamia, the Nile, Indus river, China, etc.), and places where hunting-gathering was not very effective short-term.

That's some advanced level bullshittery right there, considering several civilizations developed in what's not Eurasia. Take those disingenuous lies of yours someplace else.

Also, good job literally contradicting yourself with the Nile there.

[Victores]

Well speaking of multiculturalism, the French president, the hero of liberalism against FN racism, just said Africans are stupid.

Hey, I supported Le Pen.