Diversity Ravages

[KarateCowboy]

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-06-25jl.html

Robert Putnam’s sobering new diversity research scares its author.
25 June 2007Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam, author of Bowling Alone, is very nervous about releasing his new research, and understandably so. His five-year study shows that immigration and ethnic diversity have a devastating short- and medium-term influence on the social capital, fabric of associations, trust, and neighborliness that create and sustain communities. He fears that his work on the surprisingly negative effects of diversity will become part of the immigration debate, even though he finds that in the long run, people do forge new communities and new ties.
Putnam’s study reveals that immigration and diversity not only reduce social capital between ethnic groups, but also within the groups themselves. Trust, even for members of one’s own race, is lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, friendships fewer. The problem isn’t ethnic conflict or troubled racial relations, but withdrawal and isolation. Putnam writes: “In colloquial language, people living in ethnically diverse settings appear to ‘hunker down’—that is, to pull in like a turtle.”

. . .

Though Putnam is wary of what right-wing politicians might do with his findings, the data might give pause to those on the left, and in the center as well. If he’s right, heavy immigration will inflict social deterioration for decades to come, harming immigrants as well as the native-born. Putnam is hopeful that eventually America will forge a new solidarity based on a “new, broader sense of we.” The problem is how to do that in an era of multiculturalism and disdain for assimilation.

In my opinion this is just one example that proves that diversity is not a societal virtue any more than rolling up your cuffs. Is it ethical to revere diversity and force it when the most empirical studies show that forced diversity mostly hurts and helps only a little?

I think that if the pursuit of diversity should be a personal thing without institutional coersion. For example I chose to devote my morning train ride to studying Japanese, and my evening one to studying Finnish. I choose to occasionally rent a foreign film, etcetera.

 

[gengwall]

Isn't the American experiment from Declaration of Independence on a celebration of diversity? How did we become the world's melting pot (something I think the founders foresaw, relished, and prepared us for) without diversity?

 

[reverend B]

that's not what this says at all. he says that there are difficulties in the short and medium term, but the long term will bring new community identifications.
there is also nothing in his work referring to diversity being "forced". what inspired you to add this concept? how do we go about forcing diversity on people? diversity is a fact of life in our country whether you choose to accept it or not. diversity virtually defines our country and sets it apart. diversity is the result of actually considering all men as created equal. when you take that concept to heart, diversity can not be avoided.

here is the exact scenario that he talked about in the article coming to fruition. he fears what the right wing will do with his findings. that fear is well founded. that dang diversity is going to chase us into our personal fortresses, but there is also truth that television, the computer and other forms of in-home entertainment have served to isolate us from each other and undermined the sense of community that once defined neighborhoods. shall we ban these things?

what i also find funny about this is that america has longed to describe itself as the melting pot, that "e plurubus unum" (from many, one) is not just a phrase, but a motto for a country to live by. we aren't a melting pot, we are a stew with all the individual ingredients easily identified. the study may suggest that the great experiment will take time to actually come to pass. if we follow the suggestion of the op, we shall always remain a homogeneous populace with a narrow focus. in the op's signature, we see that we are to expect liberty and justice for all. he would like to make sure that "all" includes all the same kind of alls as he. so much for the dream we once knew as the united states of america.

 

[KarateCowboy]

I have to catch a train so I'll just say that some examples of forced diversity it is recruiting quotas on campuses, at workplaces, and the teaching of multiculturalism in schools.

 

[Steezie]

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-06-25jl.html
In my opinion this is just one example that proves that diversity is not a societal virtue any more than rolling up your cuffs. Is it ethical to revere diversity and force it when the most empirical studies show that forced diversity mostly hurts and helps only a little?

I think that if the pursuit of diversity should be a personal thing without institutional coersion. For example I chose to devote my morning train ride to studying Japanese, and my evening one to studying Finnish. I choose to occasionally rent a foreign film, etcetera.

In our country's current Capitalista atmosphere, intolerance IS promoted. For there to be profit, there must be a certain point where you have enough people to produce what you want, but not so many people that they are out of work and cant afford to pay for what you produce. You must also have a large enough market to make a large profit but that market must be wealthy enough to pay for what you sell.

We have passed that point of critical mass. We have huge markets that dont have the buying power to indulge in high-end luxury goods. We still have a large middle class and very wealthy upper class who can keep the market up, but the lower classes are very poor and cannot afford luxury items.

Well who makes up the lower classes? The poor and the workers. Who tends to be poor? Immigrants, people of different ethnic origins, people on the edges of society for whatever reason. The more of these people there are, the less profit Capitalistas can draw from the larger markets so they begin resenting this lower class. Its like a rich neighborhood getting the cops to kick out all the homeless people because they drive down property values.

Diversity is good so long as it is exploitable, in this culture. When you can use it to sell tolerance pamphlets or fund Diversity Days and such. But when it gets to the point where the detriment to profitability rises above the actual profitability, you get a situation where the Capitalista society turns against diversity. It blames outsiders or those "not of thier own" for social ills such as crime, poverty, drugs, and un-employment.

What's the old joke about a Mexican and his workboots? (I cant post it here because someone will mis-interpret and throw a fit) Diversity comes under-fire as detrimental when it becomes a percieved problem. When the people that you are required to embrace if you claim to be embracing diversity start dammaging your profits, they become bad.

and the teaching of multiculturalism in schools.

Yes, because its SOOOOOO horrible learning about other people and places.

 

[Jetgirl]

Isn't the American experiment from Declaration of Independence on a celebration of diversity? How did we become the world's melting pot (something I think the founders foresaw, relished, and prepared us for) without diversity?

From what I know of US history and my personal family history, up until, lets say, around the late 1950's (to be conservative), assimilation was the goal of immigrants to the US.

My relatives who immigrated here from Hungary and Germany around the turn of the century forbid their children to speak or write German in the house, so that they could pick up the language from their children's schooling. While they retained some cultural traditions the plan was to "become American."

This is how immigration benefited us in the past, when immigrants came here to be partake of the riches by becoming part of the court.

I see a lot of people these days, who have no care to become American, nor even to learn English. One of our biggest problems in schools in my area is that the children don't speak English, their parents don't speak English, and their parents don't care to ever learn English. Balkanization results. The current residents feel as if they're being subjected to a hostile takeover, and the immigrants feel that they're being marginalized.

In the past, the differences between people of varied backgrounds who are residing in or coming to the US have been ironed out by the common goal of building a somewhat singular culture. Today differences are lauded and incentivised, and are made a reason to feel "special."

 

[Jetgirl]

that's not what this says at all. he says that there are difficulties in the short and medium term, but the long term will bring new community identifications.

Edit, misread, you were right in the above, the author did make that claim.

there is also nothing in his work referring to diversity being "forced". what inspired you to add this concept? how do we go about forcing diversity on people? diversity is a fact of life in our country whether you choose to accept it or not. diversity virtually defines our country and sets it apart. diversity is the result of actually considering all men as created equal. when you take that concept to heart, diversity can not be avoided.

In creating specialty subgroups where one of more "diverse" (whatever that means anymore) origins has favored preference over another group, or even the majority, is not equality.

That is, unless you're talking about some people being more equal than others.

he would like to make sure that "all" includes all the same kind of alls as he. so much for the dream we once knew as the united states of america.

Funny, when I talk about equality, as in making sure that everyone regardless of personal charactaristics has the same representation under the law, and the same opportunity as others (which means the same, not more), I'm typically accused of being racist.

 

[Mumei]

Diversity being good in the long run and difficult in the early stages is something I thought was... well-known by now.

 

[Arnold_Philips]

From what I know of US history and my personal family history, up until, lets say, around the late 1950's (to be conservative), assimilation was the goal of immigrants to the US.

My relatives who immigrated here from Hungary and Germany around the turn of the century forbid their children to speak or write German in the house, so that they could pick up the language from their children's schooling. While they retained some cultural traditions the plan was to "become American."

This is how immigration benefited us in the past, when immigrants came here to be partake of the riches by becoming part of the court.

I see a lot of people these days, who have no care to become American, nor even to learn English. One of our biggest problems in schools in my area is that the children don't speak English, their parents don't speak English, and their parents don't care to ever learn English. Balkanization results. The current residents feel as if they're being subjected to a hostile takeover, and the immigrants feel that they're being marginalized.

In the past, the differences between people of varied backgrounds who are residing in or coming to the US have been ironed out by the common goal of building a somewhat singular culture. Today differences are lauded and incentivised, and are made a reason to feel "special."

Not true.

Demand for English Lessons Outstrips Supply - New York Times
Population Council | Media Center | ¿Habla Español? Children of Latin American immigrants may not

 

[BobfromSales]

Diversity isn't exactly good or bad, it just is. What are you going to do? Force people to all be the same?

 

[PassionFruit]

The problem is many people don't know or understand the meaning of "multiculturalism." The thing is, you really can't define what "multiculturalism" is. Hence, that's why people don't know or understand what it is. But I can tell you that multiculturalism is more than just learning about different cultures, that's only one small area of it. And it has nothing to do with people not wanting to learn English.

 

[CCGirl]

Canada is a great example of a successful multicultural society! We celebrate our differences much more than find cause for division.

 

[PassionFruit]

Canada is a great example of a successful multicultural society! We celebrate our differences much more than find cause for division.

Well of course it's successful in Canada, that's where the term multiculturalism originated.

 

[rambot]

In the 1920s, the Middletown Studies pointed to quite a few similar ideas as Putnam does....that's almost 90year ago.