Merit of Diversity

We are often told to "celebrate diversity." Similarly, it is heavily implied if not outright stated that diversity is a strength.

You can mindlessly accept or reject this notion, or you could ask yourself an important question: how does diversity improve society?

I thought about this for a few minutes, and then I realized, it doesn't. Not at all.

I'm not advocating racism, sexism, or bigotry of any kind, but the reality is that the diverse world we inhabit is far more a curse than a blessing. True, I think we have to do our best to mitigate the inevitable conflicts that diversity causes, but this is not "celebrating" diversity--it is "coping" with it. The diversity itself is the problem.

Think about it. "Diversity" is really just a positive spin on words with decidedly more negative connotations like "divide" and "division." Divisions imply a lack of unity. Consider catch phrases like "Divide and conquer" and "United we stand, divided we fall." I am not presenting these as absolute truths, but their prevalence does suggest that we accept the value of "unity" as a positive thing.

Yet, "unity" and "diversity" are totally contradictory. One might attempt to blend the best of both worlds; say, a diverse people as a unified nation. I find this sort of rhetoric empty. I would rather analyze the respective merit of diversity and unity and then determine which is the better ideal to work towards. My focus here, though, is pointing out the shortcomings of diversity rather than the merit of unity.

So, forget "celebrating diversity." A more pertinent gesture is asking whether diversity is something to be celebrated in the first place. And again, I believe the answer is no.

First, a world with one race is far superior to a world with many. I'm not saying we work towards that end through mass genocide. I'm simply pointing out that a great deal of injustice, hate, violence, and conflict would never have occurred had different races never evolved. All race does is serve as a "marker," a convenient way of stereotyping people. A world with one race would be a world of far less prejudice. No slavery arbitrarily based on the color of one's skin; no distrust between races; no need for political correctness; no racial profiling; no playing the race card; no race based economic inequality.

Excuse me for failing to see how racial diversity (i.e. racial divisions) benefit us. One might pull out the predictable and frankly very weak "a one race world would not be very interesting" card, and I'd reply, have you ever lived in one? A world unacquainted with racial divisions would not lament a world devoid of racial divisions!

At the risk of sounding obtuse, let me clarify if I haven't already that I am in no way implying that one race is superior to another or that I hate all races aside from my own. On the contrary--I sympathize with minorities and regret the injustices they have historically been subjected to; in fact, this is my very point! Without races, there can be no racial injustice, and this would be a preferable outcome.

Religious diversity is arguably even worse, and this is readily observed all across the world and all throughout history. Religion serves as another vehicle through which we can classify and stereotype people. In the more virulent strains of opposing followers, religion can incite rancor, hatred, and violence. Note again that I am not concerned with the truth or merit of religion itself, but merely the understanding that it is another way people are split into factions, which I argue makes us weaker, not stronger.

Now, there is, I think, one desirable kind of diversity, but it is not the type groups that promote "diversity" are interested in. And that is diversity of thought. Differing ideas and opinions keep us as a people moving forward; they challenge long held but obsolete customs; they enrich the world; and they actually do make us stronger.

So, you might argue that diverse ideas are invariably tied to different cultures which are in turn derived from peoples of varying races and creeds. I concede that they are often tied to culture, but am skeptical as to where race (and to a lesser extent, creed) factor in. Groups of people developing independently of one another around the world are going to evolve their own unique culture, and this culture has nothing to do with the color of their skin. A one race society could achieve just as much diversity of thought as the one we have, and any loss in diversity of thought that resulted from religious homogeneity (or the absence of religion in general) would certainly be offset by the the corresponding reduction in violence, hate, and bloodshed.

In conclusion, I posit that "Tolerate Diversity" or "Accommodate Diversity" are indeed far better depictions of reality than "Celebrate Diversity." Whether by natural evolution or through God, we have inherited a diverse world, and this division poses far more challenges than benefits. If "Celebrate Diversity" means that we should aim to make the best of circumstances within this framework, than I am all for it. But I personally find it dubious to "celebrate" something that has unequivocally done more ill than good.

Originally Posted by Eldin

Now, there is, I think, one desirable kind of diversity, but it is not the type groups that promote "diversity" are interested in. And that is diversity of thought. Differing ideas and opinions keep us as a people moving forward; they challenge long held but obsolete customs; they enrich the world; and they actually do make us stronger.

From the standpoint of genetics, I would have to say that I can think of another aspect of diversity that is rather a good thing. In the recombination of genes, you have a wider range of combinations that are possible if the gene pool is diverse.


... and on a side note, I think cultural diversity makes things more interesting. Different cultures do result in different perspectives and ideas.

Originally Posted by Jehanne

From the standpoint of genetics, I would have to say that I can think of another aspect of diversity that is rather a good thing. In the recombination of genes, you have a wider range of combinations that are possible if the gene pool is diverse.

I'm not concerned with biological diversity and what it means for our resistance against disease in this thread. It might be true to a certain extent, but it is not what I would like to focus on here.

... and on a side note, I think cultural diversity makes things more interesting. Different cultures do result in different perspectives and ideas.

I accounted for that position in the original post. There is no reason cultural diversity would not have evolved in a one race world. What would be gone is the "marker," which I think would be a positive development for everyone.

Originally Posted by Eldin

I'm not concerned with biological diversity and what it means for our resistance against disease in this thread. It might be true to a certain extent, but it is not what I would like to focus on here.

What is the exact context of racial diversity that you're referring to?

{EDIT: For example, I don't have a race. And I personally question what race means to different people. Here's something else: NOVA Online | Does Race Exist? to think about }

But all of what you say could merely be bought down to human attitudes, couldnt it? I feel that we lived in a world with less diversity, we would still find ways to divide ourselves. Guess I cant really prove that, though.

Im glad you said that diversity of thought was a strength. Im not sure if I agree totally with all you posted, but I do think "Celebrate" is probably the wrong word.

I'm glad this topic has finally started up because this something I have been wanting to talk about.

My school has been shoving the whole "celebrate racial diversity", "celebrate how diverese our school is", and "we are going to make you learn about this and that" down our throats. I find it really annoying personally.

One our school isn't that diverse in the first place. The "higher beings" believe that it is. My school is almost all White-European. I am Euro-Asian (English, French, ect and Thai, Japanese, Laotian). The second thing is that I do not want to learn about this and celebrate it.

I do agree if that there was only one race that there would be more peace on Earth. But men find everything to argue, fight or wage war against.

"Religion, ideology, resources, land, spite, love or "just because..." No matter how pathetic the reason, it's enough to start war. War will never cease to exist... reasons can be thought up after the fact... Human nature pursues strife."
—Pein

That is a quote from Naruto Shippuden sadly, but it is true.

It is true that there would be less predjudice in our world, but we would still find something stupid to argue about and classify people under. But a race isn't neccessarily decided by skin color, I believe it is more of the contintent or area of that particular continent you are from. Though the fact the one has a darker skin pigmentation and another person has a lighter skin pigmentation is unavoidable. Someone will always be different, and if there were no Whites, Blacks, Yellows, Colored, ect, just a different race, there would be a different person.

I believe that we will never solve the race issue. Humans will never come together in accord in order to form a more halcyon world.

I live in an area that is extremely diverse with culture/race. It's often encouraged to celebrate it, yeah. And it is. We're encouraged to appreciate the differences and I, for one, love this line of thought. I obviously can't speak on behalf of my entire community, but from what I have seen, and from those I do know, accepting and appreciating that things may be done differently with other cultures/races is interesting and wonderful.

That's just my personal experience ^ but what I'm genuinely curious about, Eldin, is whether your post is a theory, or something you've learnt from your own personal experience? Do you maybe live in an area, or have gone to school in an area, where diverse cultures have proven to be the problem that you're presenting?

That's just my personal experience ^ but what I'm genuinely curious about, Eldin, is whether your post is a theory, or something you've learnt from your own personal experience? Do you maybe live in an area, or have gone to school in an area, where diverse cultures have proven to be the problem that you're presenting?

I attend school at the University of Wisconsin Madison. As is the case with Slur's school, we routinely have "diversity" shoved down our throats. Everyone who goes here is required to take an ethnic studies course that examines a "consistently marginalized group in modern America." University Housing is particularly obsessed with promoting diversity and protecting the rights of ethnic minorities, gays, lesbians, bisexual and trans-gender students etc. This is an admirable ideal, but it does get old.

I think in a one race world (whether Caucasian, Negro, Mongloid, or something else altogether) would be simpler, more just, and every bit as cultured. As I said earlier, the evolution of distinct cultures has nothing to do with the color of someone's skin. All that color does is "mark" them, which inevitably leads to prejudice and racism (and empty accusations of prejudice and racism). Thus, that there are different races in the world is a curse and NOT something to celebrate.

So you're saying (correct me if I'm wrong) that different *cultures* is okay - which'll probably develop, anyway, it's just the different*racial* part that proves a problem? It's what separates this group from that group? Even if there was, say, a one-race thingie that happened, you don't think that hostility could still happen within the race because of differences in beliefs, customes, and whatnot? I'm not trying to say that there's no hope, anyway, either way. I'm wondering if the idea you're proposing - one race - won't become what you're hoping to rid.

I also found it interesting that you feel that all this diverse stuff is being shoved down your throat at uni. I guess, if I'm honest, it's never really bothered me because I happen to be part of a minority. You've made me a bit more aware (: If it's too much as it is, do you think there is an ideal amount of diverse promotion that should take place? I know it's hard to pin-point exactly *how much* there should be, but then I would think too little would be a pretty bad thing, too.

Originally Posted by Liah

So you're saying (correct me if I'm wrong) that different *cultures* is okay - which'll probably develop, anyway, it's just the different*racial* part that proves a problem? It's what separates this group from that group? Even if there was, say, a one-race thingie that happened, you don't think that hostility could still happen within the race because of differences in beliefs, customes, and whatnot?

A certain degree of conflict among humans is inevitable independent of race. However, I cannot emphasize enough that race, and to a lesser extent, religion, are "markers." In a one race society, you're not immediately going to see someone and think "they're white, so _____," "they're Asian, so _____" You wouldn't be able to categorize and stereotype people based on their physical characteristics. PREjudice (that is, judging someone before you know them) would not exist, or at least exist in an incredibly reduced form.

I also found it interesting that you feel that all this diverse stuff is being shoved down your throat at uni. I guess, if I'm honest, it's never really bothered me because I happen to be part of a minority. You've made me a bit more aware (: If it's too much as it is, do you think there is an ideal amount of diverse promotion that should take place? I know it's hard to pin-point exactly *how much* there should be, but then I would think too little would be a pretty bad thing, too.

I'm not sure. To me, the diversity propaganda (if you can consider it that) is totally unneeded. My own observations tell me that there is very little racism going on and people are in fact quite tolerant of alternative religions and ways of life. There'll always be nuts, but these people don't normally make it into college anyway. So, in that sense, I find the diversity banners everywhere and the rather persistent rhetoric superfluous (when I'm in a good mood) and annoying (when I'm in an irritable mood).

Liah, That is kind of what I was saying. We will always find something to fight about. Strife is inevitable. If there were no races, there would be culture. Culture to fight about, to redicule others about, to wage war about.

We are in the middle of a book right now called The Glory Field by Walter Dean Myers. It is part of both my Social Studies and English class. It is about a slave who came over from Africa and his ancestors up to 1994. Before this in English class we learned about the Harlem Renaissance for 6 weeks. I found that rediculous. (The Harlem Renaissance is a period in time 1920's-30's when Blacks, mainly those in Harlem, showed the world their art and so on) Okay, seriously, 6 weeks? If we are going to be diverse and learn about such stuff we should not just focus on Blacks, but others as well. Our school seems to find that diversity only applies to Blacks being with Whites.

Originally Posted by Eldin

First, a world with one race is far superior to a world with many. I'm not saying we work towards that end through mass genocide. I'm simply pointing out that a great deal of injustice, hate, violence, and conflict would never have occurred had different races never evolved. All race does is serve as a "marker," a convenient way of stereotyping people. A world with one race would be a world of far less prejudice. No slavery arbitrarily based on the color of one's skin; no distrust between races; no need for political correctness; no racial profiling; no playing the race card; no race based economic inequality.

You can't be bloody serious. The world is prejudiced simply because it wishes to be so, not because of an arbitrary case of racism against a skin color. Slavery - even during the colonization of Africa - was never based on the color of someone's skin. It was simply done because those in power could profit from it and no one from the victimized side would be a threat to such action. This would not work with enslaving Europeans, Chinese, Indians, or Middle Easterners in numbers equal to the African slave trade. It was certainly done, but hardly in numbers of millions as these people had some powerful state to advocate its case. Africa did not.

The concept of political correctness, racial profiling, and race cards are only modern instances of inter-racial relations, and they exist even for white-on-white clashes.

As it was once said on New York shop windows, "No Irish Need Apply."

So why don't we take a region that was relatively isolated from other races save their own for centuries and see how they treated each other?

Greece? Whoops, city-states enslaving each other on a whim, along with severe hatred not much different than black-white relations in the 60s.

Africa? Slavery abound, even before Europe or Middle Easterners made their appearance in the region.



It's all called tribalism, and we have prejudices against people not because of race, but because they are just not 'us.' Being black or white doesn't matter, as a black-white community will be just as racist to another group of outsiders if they choose to be.

Originally Posted by Eldin

Excuse me for failing to see how racial diversity (i.e. racial divisions) benefit us. One might pull out the predictable and frankly very weak "a one race world would not be very interesting" card, and I'd reply, have you ever lived in one? A world unacquainted with racial divisions would not lament a world devoid of racial divisions!

Diversity benefits us biologically. There is a reason New York City is a cultural hub and the backwoods of Alabama are not. One can benefit from the abilities different races have brought to different sectors of society - art, music, business, sports, television, banking, science, and engineering. The other cannot.

There is a reason the most Catholic kingdom of Spain was a financial failure after kicking out the Moors and Jews, and the Ottoman Empire was an economic and military monster after absorbing the very same Jews and Moors.

Originally Posted by Eldin

At the risk of sounding obtuse, let me clarify if I haven't already that I am in no way implying that one race is superior to another or that I hate all races aside from my own. On the contrary--I sympathize with minorities and regret the injustices they have historically been subjected to; in fact, this is my very point! Without races, there can be no racial injustice, and this would be a preferable outcome.

Too bad we'd still have 'racial' injustice against others anyway. I'm sure the Irish had it just awesome since they were just as white as everyone else! And the Poles and Romanians in Europe too! Surely they have seen the advantage of not being 'racially discriminated' against!

Originally Posted by Eldin

Religious diversity is arguably even worse, and this is readily observed all across the world and all throughout history. Religion serves as another vehicle through which we can classify and stereotype people. In the more virulent strains of opposing followers, religion can incite rancor, hatred, and violence. Note again that I am not concerned with the truth or merit of religion itself, but merely the understanding that it is another way people are split into factions, which I argue makes us weaker, not stronger.

Spain vs. the Ottoman Empire.




The entire premise is ridiculous, as there never was such a thing as a one race world. I could argue that the world would be better if we all thought the same way. But that is equally impossible.

When the world has one person, there is no strife.
When there are two people, there is strife.

Welcome to human nature. Whether there were different races or not there would still be a great deal of drama. Brothers and sisters fight. Therefore, the world would be better if humans could have only one child. But wait, even within the realm of children and parents there is a "great deal of injustice, hate, violence, and conflict". So it would no better if there were no children. Or no parents, for that matter.

I hope you see the problem here.

Vertigo:

I never said a world with one race would be perfect. Conflict will inevitably arise regardless. I simply said that many tragedies could have been avoided. Race is a useful tool for oppressing, classifying, and stereotyping people.

It's really not as ridiculous as you make it out to be.

he entire premise is ridiculous, as there never was such a thing as a one race world.

It was hypothetical.