Diversity is our strength, or that’s what you hear parroted by most Western leaders and their talking heads in the entertainment industry. Notwithstanding the waves of drivel in the form of chants, slogans, and half-baked arguments you hear endlessly spewed for the rabble, what makes these people think our strength is in diversity? Are there any empirical data to back their claims up? Before we can look into the validity of their claims and plans, we need to figure out what type of diversity they are calling for. The modern left desires an environment that is diverse linguistically, religiously, and racially. This fact we can infer first from their support for the mass importation of migrants from countries with disparate languages, cultures, and racial makeups, and second from their refusal to have these migrants integrate into the host countries.
But diversity has never been a strength to the inhabitants of the countries it has plagued. Ask Iraqis how much their diversity has enriched their lives. Iraq, since its founding in 1918, has almost constantly been unstable and sometimes at civil war, to this very day. Or maybe you would like to ask the country that Iraq was birthed out of, the Ottoman Empire: that empire died a slow death by diversity. Perhaps you would like to ask the empire that perfectly embodied late-stage diversity, Austria-Hungary, which literally paid off the disparate groups to make them not act out and, when it ran out of money, ended up with the worst war in human history. You could also ask a child of the failed state of Yugoslavia how Yugoslavia’s vibrant diversity turned out for its people.
Lest you think I am grasping at straws, here are some more: Canada and its struggle between Anglos and Francophone factions; the Indian subcontinent and the Muslim genocides of the Hindus; Syria and Turkey, and the endless fight for Kurdish state; Israel, Palestine, and Kingdom of Jerusalem in the place called the Holy Land, which has always been pulled among the three monotheistic religions; Rwanda in the terrible but all-too-common occurrence of tribal genocide. Finally, there is the state that reminds me to the greatest degree of the modern Western world, the Roman Empire. An ever-growing population of outsiders and slaves, making up for the lost labor of this decadent society, stunted innovation and growth and ever increased the odds against the Romans’ continuing in their ways. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and neither did it fall in one. Romans saw their salvation in endless waves of Germanic immigrants coming into their country, and this ended up being Rome’s demographic winter; that Germany is soon going to have a demographic winter of its own is a sort of sick karma.
An example of the diligent supplanting of the West can be seen in a case study of Minnesota, a state in which the people have drunk the Kool-Aid of diversity and chosen to follow the example of their cousins in Scandinavia and Germany, walking off the cliff to societal desolation. In a kind of cultural suicide through migrants, since the 1980s Minnesota has received 19,000 Somali “refugees”; this group has ballooned to more than 40,000, or a growth of more than 100%, while the state as a whole has grown by only 33.9%. The Somali population has grown three times as fast as the Minnesota population at large. In a leftist’s eyes, this population explosion must signify a multicultural utopia for the future of Minnesota, but the truth is quite the opposite. According to census data, the Somalis’ incomes are $15,000 less than the state average; most of the Somali adults have no more than a high school diploma to their name, and more than a quarter do not have even that. Additionally the crime waves that the Somalis have brought have caused massive destruction everywhere: this destruction includes drug sales, burglaries, muggings, murders, and a plethora of sex crimes. The processes brought by Somalis have transformed middle-class neighborhoods into slums and ghettos. So what does the governor of Minnesota and prominent leftist Mark Dayton do and say in response to the desolation being wrought by these groups? He has offered reassurance by saying, “Anyone who can’t accept immigrants should find another state,” and “Our economy cannot expand based on ‘White’, B+, Minnesota-born citizens.” This racist vitriol he uttered about a state and people he is supposed to represent, and for now is 87% White or more. I take it that what the governor expressed is the belief of many on the left, even if not explicitly stated but implicit in their policies for the Western world. The religious fervor in which they act out their policies is intense.
“No country for White men,” they say: we must destroy this double standard. In all my life, I have never seen a leftist say there are too many Blacks in South Africa, too many Asians in China, too many Jews in Israel, or too many Mestizos in Mexico; but I cannot count the number of times I have heard that the West, and only the West with its majority-White countries, needs to become more diverse, despite all studies and data pointing in the opposite direction. If we are to fight – and fight we should – we must have counterarguments that are not just more factual, but also more convincing. If you would like to help, you could start by sharing this article and supporting counter-narratives to the endless flashy drivel.