Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The actual end-goal for the promotion of diversity, is not actually to promote diversity. It is actually to integrate the country(and the world) together....So long as forced-diversity continues, eventually the whole world will be nothing but a blob of brown people. With a single culture, under a single one-world government. With diversity within and across nations breaking down national borders, making the nation-state pointless.
Yes, that's the irony of "diversity." It actually leads to uniformity. The tapestry of different cultures is replaced by clones.
Quote:
The division here then, is between the globalists, and the tribalists.
And to the people who aren't fans of diversity, let me just inform you, globalism is simply an inevitability.
I disagree. Globalism is no more inevitable than England forever keeping its empire was inevitable, or Rome keeping its empire was inevitable. A system that violates basic human needs and desires -- in this case, for sovereignty, self-determination, and identity -- cannot last forever.
Quote:
Capitalism is globalism. Socialism is globalism. The economy is global, and will always be. All of the money ultimately wants a global world, and the money has the power.
Religion -- the Roman Catholic Church -- had the same power for centuries. It ruled over Western Europe absolutely. But then it had to start making concessions and share power with kings. Then came the Reformation, the Counter-Reformation, the Enlightenment, etc.
Man is not just homo economicus. The power of money and markets is formidable. Just like the power of Soviet Communism was formidable. But that power is not absolute. I cannot predict how globalism will be overthrown, but I am confident that it will be.
I am an old lady now and I remember race riots etc, I didn't understand then why people can be so filled with hate and fear because of the color of ones skin or their religion or sexual preference. 60 years later and I understand it even less. I love my country and all the different people in it. Personally I think everyone who fears just needs to lighten up and relax. If you have time to spend on why the other guy is different then your not busy enough living your own life. My advice is is to embrace one another and our differences and get rid of the anger and hate.
You do understand there are reasons different races, cultures, languages and countries developed in different territories and totally separate Continents?
You can't undo thousands of years of cultural and linguistic evolution just because some communist, genocidal, Marxist Zionists tell people they should.
I walk around the most "diverse" areas you can imagine and can see how insane this "experiment" is. There's absolutely know way it'll end well for a million reasons I don't have time to get into here. Heck you could write a 300 page book explaining why multi-racial societies will not succeed in the West or anywhere else for that matter. People that can't see this or need it explained to them are under extreme Communist brainwashing and programming.
The actual end-goal for the promotion of diversity, is not actually to promote diversity. It is actually to integrate the country(and the world) together.
Ethnic enclaves might be far more united within, but if they are allowed to persist, you end up with countries within countries. A nation of tribes, all divided and potentially hostile to each other. Each tribe perpetually wanting to break away from the rest. The promotion of diversity serves the "national interests". Not only integrating the people of this country, but integrating us with the world.
So long as forced-diversity continues, eventually the whole world will be nothing but a blob of brown people. With a single culture, under a single one-world government. With diversity within and across nations breaking down national borders, making the nation-state pointless.
The division here then, is between the globalists, and the tribalists.
And to the people who aren't fans of diversity, let me just inform you, globalism is simply an inevitability. Capitalism is globalism. Socialism is globalism. The economy is global, and will always be. All of the money ultimately wants a global world, and the money has the power.
Does forced-diversity suck for the common people? Yes. But so what, it isn't going to stop. And complaining will do you no good. You would basically have to destroy the world to stop it.
You have some good points and you're correct that the end goal of diversity is not diversity. You're totally correct there.
Where you go wrong is when you frame it as a world wide phenomena. You are correct that the ultimate aim is a one world government but you're missing the forest for the trees. The "Globalist" (hmmm, who are THEY?) are only promoting "diversity" in the West. In White nations. And are only concerned about Poland, Hungary and Russia not participating in their "diversity" program and wanting to pressure and demonize them to do so.
They're not worried about making China "diverse".
They're not worried about making Africa "diverse".
They're not concerned about making the Middle Eastern Countries "diverse" except to blow them to bits, remove their leaders, so they can encourage them to come to the West.
Heck they're not even concerned with making Japan "diverse". Oh, sure they may hound them a little and ask them to take some refugees. But when the Japanese say no there's no widespread propaganda campaign of racism and "Japanese Supremacy". They just let it go.
But "they" are pressuring and demonizing Russia and Eastern Europe for not getting on board. Which happen to be Caucasian-Christian Countries.
So the only countries they're really concerned about promoting "diversity" are White-Christian ones.
No others.
You may want to ask your self, Why that is?
Then you may want to look for some reasons.
Because it's disingenuous to insinuate this is a worldwide phenomena when it's really only directed at people who are:
So the only countries they're really concerned about promoting "diversity" are White-Christian ones.
It simply is not some sort of anti-white conspiracy, even if it often appears so.
It is all about economics and world hegemony.
1) Our world is nothing but competing powers, all trying to dominate the world. The most-powerful country rules the rest. And in this world, power is primarily derived from money and control of resources.
The United States became a superpower because we have been able to dominate most of the resources of North America. And through the Monroe Doctrine were able to push out European influence from the Western Hemisphere, as we spread our own influence across it. Throughout most of the 19th and 20th centuries, our corporations, backed by our military, basically turned most of Latin-America into a series of banana republics, who served American corporate interests(think Panama Canal, United Fruit company, etc).
Back when America, with our Latin-American partners, was in effect self-sufficient, as well as the largest energy exporter on Earth; The United States had a much different foreign policy than it does today. After the end of World War II, it became increasingly important for the United States to expand its control over the energy reserves of the world. Especially as the Soviet Union was desperately trying to do the same.
Today, the world economy, which would come to a halt if it weren't being sustained/protected by American military power, is completely dependent on energy, especially from the Middle-East. This forces American foreign policy to not only be interventionist in the Middle-East, but also accommodating to the "elites" from those countries.
As you are probably aware, the "petro-dollar" system, was created with help from the Saudis. We promised the "House of Saud" to perpetually defend them, if they helped us. This is why the US seems to hypocritically overlook the very repressive theocratic monarchies of the Arabian peninsula. They are our friends, they are helping us.
We need to understand that, all governments on Earth are fundamentally oligarchies. And what I really mean is, all governments are controlled by the elites, who then control the people. This is true in monarchies and dictatorships obviously, but it is just as true in democracies.
Thus, as I often say, "If you keep the elites happy, you can rule indefinitely."
In order to maintain our worldwide empire, we must maintain a friendly disposition with the elites in other countries. They must be able to travel to America, and even, spend their money here, and feel welcomed.
Most of what truly sustains the American economy and American intervention, is our ability the manipulate the financial system. And through our control of the world's reserve currency, we are able to run $550+ billion a year trade deficits, with hundreds of thousands of American troops, stationed in foreign countries across the world, exporting US dollars around the world. Which in turn, come back to us, by attracting foreign buyers/spenders to the United States.
These rich Saudis and other Middle-Eastern elites, then use the dollars they've accumulated from us, to buy US weapons, technology, and even to purchase homes and condos in the United States. Much of the most-expensive real-estate in the United States is owned by foreign elites.
And this isn't just happening in America. I have a friend in Australia, where all of the most-expensive real-estate is being bought-up by suddenly wealthy Chinese and other Asians. Which on the one hand, drive up Australian asset values, but on the other hand, make it completely unaffordable for average Australians.
As people like to joke, a lot of Trump Tower is being occupied by Russians, Middle-Easterners, Asians, etc.
2) You mention Japan. And Japan was once a major economic player. But what happened to it? Well, it was coerced into signing the "Plaza-Accords" back in the 1980's, because it was becoming a threat to the global system.
Its booming real-estate market then totally collapsed, and has never really recovered. And part of this can actually be blamed on the sort of Japanese xenophobia and isolationism. Wouldn't their economy be doing far better today if they were more accommodating to Korean and Chinese buyers/investors?
Japan is nothing more than an American protectorate, just like Korea. It cannot stand on its own. And at some point in the future, it will be forced, by economic pressure, to bend to the will of the United States. Just as it has before.
3) Why does the European Union exist? Do you think it is about protecting culture? Or protecting Christianity or whiteness? No, no, and no. It is about economics.
The European powers were once world empires. But their empires were basically carved-up after WWII, primarily between the United States and the Soviet Union. The Europeans realized that, individually, without their colonies, they were just too small and weak to be relevant. And would become nothing more than colonies, or satellites, or vassals to greater powers.
By coming together as a massive economic and political union, they could become potentially the largest economic, military, and political force on the planet.
And the elites of Europe, are just the same as the elites in America, they don't care about race or culture or religion, they only care about money. And in their desire for wealth and power, they would accept anyone and everyone who furthers their interests.
4) You are correct in that, countries like China and Japan and the Middle-East, as well as Africa, are not adopting the policies of diversity and mass-migration. But those countries aren't empires, they are either isolationist powers, or protectorates of the real empires.
As China continues to grow, it is beginning to expand its influence across Asia. To do this, it will need to integrate its economy with other economies. Making deals with the elites of other Asian nations. Ultimately, it will seek to create some sort of "Asian Union", like the European Union. Just as the rest of the world is also vying to create unions, for the purpose of creating vast economies, which can compete in this global world.
Islamic Unions, African-Unions, Latin-American Unions, etc. It simply isn't true that America and Europe are the being targeted for diversity because they are white and/or Christian. They are destroying themselves with diversity because it is the only way they can sustain and grow their influence/hegemony.
If China was ever in a position to replace the United States as global hegemon, it would behave just as we do.
And no one knew this better than Hitler. Hitler understood that capitalism was globalism. He understood the world power structure. Why do you think he hated capitalism so much? What do you think the "fourteen words" was about? Do you think it was about some conspiracy to kill off whites and Christians? No.
He understood that the goal of both the capitalists and the communists, was to create a one-world government, which would turn the whole world into a massive blob of brown people, with only one culture. Thus it would have destroyed what Germany is, forever. And he had to find a way to stop it.
TLDR: There isn't some conspiracy against white people. Our capitalist system, and the geopolitical realities of a Darwinian world, are forcing our hand.
Unless you change the system, nothing can be done.
I disagree. Globalism is no more inevitable than England forever keeping its empire was inevitable, or Rome keeping its empire was inevitable. A system that violates basic human needs and desires -- in this case, for sovereignty, self-determination, and identity -- cannot last forever.
Religion -- the Roman Catholic Church -- had the same power for centuries. It ruled over Western Europe absolutely. But then it had to start making concessions and share power with kings. Then came the Reformation, the Counter-Reformation, the Enlightenment, etc.
We need to place this is proper historical context.
Let me start out by saying this, the American Revolution was not actually a revolution against tyrants by people who only wanted freedom. It was a merchant revolution.
The American Revolution was led and financed by the merchants in this country, the richest men in America. They weren't fighting for your freedom, they fought to overthrow the power of the king, so that they could have the power.
In every country, it is the rich who rule. Until the rise of capitalism, wealth came mostly in the form of land. The wealthy elites in feudal Europe, were those who owned the most and best land. As the wealth and power of merchants and bankers began to grow, their influence began to grow. But the merchants were not aristocrats. And they could only use their money to buy favor from the Kings and Princes of Europe.
With the rise of industry, and the vast-increase of power of the manufacturers, merchants, and bankers(IE the capitalists); The balance of power between the old landed-aristocracy and the capitalists began to shift heavily in favor of the capitalists.
At this point, there was a power struggle between the capitalists and the aristocrats. And now that the capitalists were richer, and thus stronger than the aristocrats, the capitalists overthrew the old system, and replaced it with a new system that they would control.
If they kept the old monarchies around at all, they remained only as figureheads and puppets, with no real power.
If you look at the failure of the Roman Catholic Church in this context. The protestant reformation occurred because the Roman Catholic Church failed to maintain the loyalty of the elites of its distant territories. These elites, seeing no benefit in sending their tribute/tithes to Rome, and being dependent upon titles and honors granted by the pope; Wanted to break from the Church, and thus to take the power for themselves.
In order to sustain themselves, they needed money, and began to depend increasingly on revenue from the activities of the merchants and bankers(IE trade). They began to promote it, protect it, and subsidize it. And these activities laid the groundwork for modern capitalism. First as mercantilism, and then industrial capitalism.
Had the Roman Catholic Church kept the elites happy(or dependent), they could have maintained control of England, and Germany, etc, forever.
So while I agree that the world will not, and cannot stay exactly as it is forever. What needs to be understood, is that history is controlled by the elites, not the common people. The major tectonic shifts of world history, came from the conflict between competing groups of elites who had opposing interests.
If there is another shift, it will be the result of a new elite(IE new money), overthrowing the old elite(old money).
The rise of globalism was the result of the rising power of the bankers/merchants/technology companies/Hollywood/etc. Along with the decline of manufacturers, farmers, etc.
Unless by some miracle, the money starts to move away from the globalists, everything will continue as it is. And if the the globalists continue to get richer, it will only get worse.
Hmm... Well let's see, the cities and metropolitan areas wth the most diversity are among the wealthiest and are prospering. Meanwhile, areas with the least diversity are falling further behind.
It's pretty simple, diversity is incredibly important especially if you want to attract top notch employers and the educated workforce that they bring with them which then increase tax revenues, quality of life, etc. it's a cycle that feeds off itself.
Hmm... Well let's see, the cities and metropolitan areas wth the most diversity are among the wealthiest and are prospering. Meanwhile, areas with the least diversity are falling further behind.
It's pretty simple, diversity is incredibly important especially if you want to attract top notch employers and the educated workforce that they bring with them which then increase tax revenues, quality of life, etc. it's a cycle that feeds off itself.
The prosperous cities you're talking about have a lot of poverty. LA for example.
California, the model of diversity, has one third of the nation's welfare recipients, but only a little over 12% of its population.
San Francisco is great -- if you can afford it.
Otherwise you have to live in Oakland -- if you can afford that.
Hmm... Well let's see, the cities and metropolitan areas wth the most diversity are among the wealthiest and are prospering. Meanwhile, areas with the least diversity are falling further behind.
It's pretty simple, diversity is incredibly important especially if you want to attract top notch employers.
We need to make a distinction between "diversity" and "immigration". The cities doing well, are those with very large immigrant populations. These immigrants tend to provide cheap, but often high-quality and reliable labor, giving businesses there a competitive-advantage.
Cities which are diverse, but not because of recent immigrants, tend to be doing poorly.
But more importantly, in these wealthy immigrant cities, there is a surplus of low-skilled labor. Which means that pretty much anyone without a college degree, has to compete against cheap foreign labor. And this is why these diverse cities also have the greatest income-inequality. New York City has more income-inequality than anywhere else in the country.
If you were born in America, and aren't a highly-skilled worker, you should not live in these diverse/immigrant cities. Which is why a sizable portion of the native-born middle class has been moving out of California and New York City.
Businesses go wherever the wages are lowest, and the government benefits are greatest. They don't give a crap about diversity. That is just an excuse to push for more immigration.
Non-diverse European and Asian countries do just fine.
Of course, we will destroy the world if we DON'T stop it, so I'll take my chances with doing what is right.
What are you doing then my friend? I am always interested in fresh ideas.
But, if you ramble about how you're going to post on forums and facebook, and go vote, I'm going to slap you.
You don't think anyone else has thought of that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) are only promoting "diversity" in the West. In White nations. And are only concerned about Poland, Hungary and Russia not participating in their "diversity" program and wanting to pressure and demonize them to do so. 