Diversity Is Our Weakness

Does ethnic diversity erode social trust?

Yes, according to a meta-analysis of 87 studies to be published in the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 23, 2020.

Continued immigration and corresponding growing ethnic diversity have prompted this essential question for modern societies. ... this article reviews the existing literature on the relationship between ethnic diversity and social trust through a narrative review and a meta-analysis of 1,001 estimates from 87 studies. ... We find a statistically significant negative relationship between ethnic diversity and social trust across all studies. The relationship is stronger for trust in neighbors, and when studied in more local contexts....

Or as we reported years ago:

CanSpeccy: Too Much Diversity May Be Bad For Your Economic Wellbeing

So, no, Justin Black-Face, diversity is not our strength, though as Canada's Prime Globalist Mouthpiece you have to say so.

Our strength depends in what unites us, however loudly you and Jaggers scream RAAAACIST at Maxime Bernier, for whom a majority of Canadians would vote if they weren't sheep-brained victims of the propaganda-spewing educational establishment and the globalist media. 

And religious diversity doesn't help, as the ongoing genocide of Christians in Nigeria confirms.

But for a brilliant exposition of what happens when the "other" is within the gates see Brexit: the Banality of Treason, by Andrew Joyce and published by the estimable Mr. Ron Unz.

Quote: speaking of Brexit, Joyce writes:

There are traitors in Parliament, but they occupy every seat, and not just those on one side of the House of Commons. Boris Johnson, in proposing an amnesty for half a million illegal immigrants, acts against the will of the people. Priti Patel, in easing the path for thousands more of her co-ethnics, acts against the will of the people. Treason from government is not a novelty, and is not tied to Brexit. It is endemic and banal in equal measure.

A Post That Disappeared: The Rot At the Head of the University

Reading the latest from the Marquette Warrior, aka Marquette University Professor John McAdams, on the efforts of Marquette's President, Michael Lovell, to impose on Marquette University, a supposedly Catholic institution, the rule of PC, I was prompted to review my own post of almost a year ago entitled: The Rot at the Head of the University, which however, I was unable to find either by way of this blog's search function or using Google to search the Web. That seemed odd since the post comes up at the head of the list in a Bing.com search, and it is in fact, still online as originally posted.

So, in the perhaps naive hope that Google won't exclude it from any future search of the Web, here's that post again.

In The Intellectual Costs of Diversity, Robert Weissberg explains the devastating harm to academic excellence done by the promotion of diversity  in the American University — a cost that guarantees America's demise as the world's leading intellectual, scientific and technological power.

In discussing this transformation of academia, the author considers the motivation of the Interim Chancellor of the University of Illinois at Champaigne-Urbana, Barbara Wilson, who has announced diversity, i.e., rigged hiring to insure blacks and women are favored over better qualified white or Asian males, to be central to the university’s mission. His conclusion is this:

... abandoning intellectual excellence is best explained by physical intimidation and what is most remarkable is the inconsequentiality of this threat. What interim Chancellor Barbara Wilson and others face is at most some fleeting verbal abuse …

This, sadly, is complete rubbish, for if it were not, it would be a simple matter to find university leaders with the balls to insist that the university is about scholarship, not the replacement of Christian morality with that of Political Correctness.

The Truth a Treasonous Elite Will Not Allow to be Stated

Here is what the Irish Savant correctly describes as "a brilliant exposition of the West’s predicament that appears as a comment by reader Dan O’Connor in The Spectator. Or at least it did. It’s since been consigned to the ether."

If you occupied what was considered the ideological / moral centre ground in 1965, and went to sleep for 50 years and woke up in 2015 you’d find yourself occupying the ideological /moral ‘far right’. You didn’t have to budge one inch ideologically to find yourself there. The whizzing sound you heard was the ideological / cultural centre ground zooming over to the Cultural Marxist hard left.

Everything that was considered mainstream, obvious, common sense, logical and moral in 1965 is now considered by our political, academic and media elite to be bigoted, ignorant, hateful, xenophobic, racist, extremist and some form of moral abnormality.

In other words, within the space of 50 years, morality, right, wrong, evil, good, normal, obvious, extreme, sanity, truth, beneficial, dangerous and the instinct for group preservation, has been inverted and stood upside down on its head.

Never before in the entire course of human history has an entire culture, race and civilisation decided to hand over its lands, social capital, heritage and identities to competing and intruding alien cultures without a fight, and even worse, to evolve an ideology that morally justifies and glorifies it as proof of their moral supremacy.

European man is in a civilisational death dance.’

I pasted Dan O'Connors comment as a comment on Craig Murray's very liberal blog where, somewhat to my surprise, it was not only not deleted, but evoked several entirely civil responses, among them, a question from Herbie:

Doesn’t say anything about how all this came to be or why.

I mean, is it a purposeful thing or just like natural entropy that just happens kinda thing...?

The answer to which, I believe, is this:

The liberals would like you to believe that it is the result of a gradual process of public enlightenment. But given that the process ends in death of the West and the occupation of Europe by adherents of a mediaeval theocracy, it looks like either: (1) proof that liberalism is a contagious mental disease, which if allowed to spread unimpeded will destroy any civilization it infects, or (2) that the spread of liberal ideas and the destruction of the Western nations is a calculated policy of national genocide imposed by Western elites.

Here's how the corporate interest humiliates Europeans who opposed to their

 own genocide. It's how Hitler demoralized the Jews.  It works with anyone. 

Heap enough contempt upon them, and most people begin to hate themselves. 

Then they will docilely enter the cattle cars or invite the alien in to rape their

daughter.

The caption, roughly translated: Those who oppose their own genocide are Nazi shit.

It is the voice of Mutti Merkel calling for the extinction of her own people. Her
father was a traitor who defected to Commie East Germany. Like father like daughter.

But if the latter assumption is correct, what is the underlying reason for such a policy?

The answer is the drive to globalize. The Money Power has always wanted total freedom to move:

• goods to where prices are highest;
• labor where supply is tightest;
• production facilities where wages, working conditions and environmental regulation are lowest;
• capital where it can be invested most profitably; and
• profits where taxes are the lowest or non-existent.

All of these objectives are foiled by a genuinely democratic sovereign nation state that makes serving the interests of its own citizens its prime function.

Hence the need of the Money Power to destroy the nation state, the process to begin with the most powerful states. Hence the psychological warfare to undermine the self-confidence and morality of the people of the West by the substitution of political correctness for Christianity.

The results are now in evidence. The European people are being genocided by their own governments, their fertility deliberately repressed by state funded abortion, no-fault divorce, and above-all, kindergarten through university sex "education" (i.e., inculcaton of the belief that the only sexual vice is reproduction).

Europeans are to be replaced by people without troublesome ideas about the rights of man, free speech, the rule of law and all such obstructive crap. In future, the inhabitants of Europe will exist to serve the corporate interest or they will cease to exist altogether.

Related: 

Muhammad Ali Explaining the True Love of Racial Diversity to a Long-haired BBC Twit:




Political correctness is the biggest issue facing America today

BBC Employment Opportunity: Whites People Need Not Apply

Seeds of Disorder: High School Courses Now Dedicated to Teaching American Guilt

'Rent-a-mob' zealot caught red-handed at Trump riot

UN Adopts “Education” Plan to Indoctrinate Children in Globalism

Amnesty International is US State Department Propaganda

Yale Students Object to Eng. Lit Course — Too English
Indicates the irrelevance of university. Students are already in full, self-hating, anti-white brainwashed mode before the arrive at the Ivy Leagues.

Liberal Humbug On Human Racial Differentiation

Previously, I explained the liberal position on the question of race, thus:

First nation Canadian. Image source 

Liberals and other agents of the New World Order, like hard-line Communists, are revolutionaries who seek to establish a system of global governance. The difference between the two is that the globalization aimed at by liberals will subordinate all humanity to the moneyed elite, the bankers, the billionaires and the chiefs of the giant corporations, whereas Communist revolution aims to serve the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, which is to say the Nomenclatura* for whom tyranny means thousands of comfy bureaucratic jobs with lots of power and privilege.

Innuit girl and pup. Image source.

To both classes of revolutionary, the great obstacle to their dream is the nation state that declares the right of the people in any geographic area with the means to defend themselves to rule themselves as they see fit, which means maintaining control of the borders to prevent occupation of the territory by invaders or an uncontrolled flow of immigrants, and the preservation of the religious and cultural tradition of the people.

To the revolutionaries, there is a simple solution to the problem of the nation state and the desire of the vast majority of the people of the world to live among their own kind in accordance with their traditional manners, morals and forms of governance. It is to insist that there is no such thing as the nation, that all humanity is one race, and that it is simply bunk to claim that the English, say, have a privileged status in England,

Chinese. Image source

or that the Amerindians of Canada have legal and moral rights to control over their traditional lands and the freedom to live on those lands according to their own beliefs and traditions.

Since the racial differentiation of humanity is obvious for all to see, and its denial is as idiotic as the denial of the naked emperor's nakedness by the sycophantic courtiers, the issue of race is a cause of embarrassment to every liberal. This is evident over at the Unz Review where the Saker tells us:

I don’t even believe that the concept of “race” has been properly defined and, hence, that it has any objective meaning. I therefore don’t differentiate between human beings on the basis of an undefined criterion.

Mbuti forest dwellers of the Congo. Image source

Suuuure. And the Saker cannot tell the difference between a Chinese and a Australian aboriginal, or between an Eskimo and a Sephardic Jew, or between a San bushman and a pigmy.

But then Steve Sailer, who also appears over at the Unz Review, opened a recent post thus:

One of the weirder contradictions of contemporary dogma is the belief that race does not exist combined with the government’s obsession with counting everybody by self-identified race. If race doesn’t exist, you’d think that, say, the Obama Administration would be under a lot of pressure from its supporters to dump the racial/ethnic classification system. Strangely enough, it never seems to occur to all the True Believers to ask their friends running the federal government to change the system.

San boy and girl. Image source

The reason for the weirdness Sailer does not explicitly address, although his article provides conclusive government-supplied genetic evidence, if that were needed, to confirm the reality of human racial diversity.

What is obvious, however, is that the US Government uses information on the racial composition of the population in ways that serve to destroy the dominant position of the European population of America. This it does by means of affirmative action, forced integration, political correctness, Roe versus Wade, immigration law enforcement, or rather non-enforcement, criminalization of acts of conscence in accordance with Christian belief, white shaming, black history, and other measures to disadvantage certain races, particularly the Europeans, relative to others. 

Thus, we have the answer to the conundrum Sailer raised. The US and its European subordinate states need information on the racial diversity of their populations in order to destroy it. The goal is full racial mongrelization. Or as former French President and future Presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy has already instructed the fast dying European population of France. "Métissage: it is an obligation," 

Indigenous Australian. Image source

So that's why liberals continue to deny the reality of race, for otherwise, as I stated in an apparently censored comment on Sailer's Unz Review post:

... mass immigration of philoprogenitive non-Europeans to European countries with indigenous populations with a far-below replacement fertility would have to be acknowledged for what it is: genocide.

And there is nothing surprising about liberals denying the reality of race while decrying those who oppose the genocide of the European peoples as racist, since nonsensical hate speech is the basic coin of liberal debate.

English. Image source

Europeans who oppose the destruction of their own race and culture need to realize that today’s liberal is either a self-hating European or a settler immigrant. In either case, they are, morally, the Nazis of the present era.

———

* The Nomenclatura of the Soviet Union was a class of bureaucrats that could be hired or fired only at the will of Communist Party. Positions held by members of the Nomenclatura were thus political appointments requiring not competence or integrity, but only grovelling subservience to the political elite. The Nomenclatura is thus an appropriate label for the top tier of Western bureaucrats such as university presidents (e.g., Michael Arthur, Provost of University College London), school principals, healthcare system managers, etc.

Related: 

Pope angered Merkel by calling Europe ‘barren’

Liberalism, Realpolitik and How It Is That People Murder One Another By the Million, But Feel Badly About Doing So

In his latest work "On China," Henry Kissinger provides a concise definition of realpolitik: most wars result, he says, from a failure by one or more of the parties to a dispute to understand the underlying power relationships.

Or more explicitly, every state is prepared to rob, pillage, rape, enslave or utterly destroy any other state, its people, treasures, and institutions, whenever a profitable opportunity occurs.

This is the fundamental characteristic of human society. Throughout human existence, men have lived as members of a tribe, a clan, a nation or an empire. It was the conflict among groups during the early stages of human development, when groups were small, that drove the development of human language and intelligence.

Tribes with leaders of exceptional intelligence, energy and charisma tended to outwit or outfight their neighbors, and thus had the best chance of survival and expansion. Because the tribal leader fathered a disproportionate number of a tribe's progeny, his intellectual attributes tended to be perpetuated and spread through the creation of colonies to occupying the territory of defeated rivals.

This mode of existence required a dual code of behavior: within the tribe, honesty, kindness and mutual aid; among tribes, relentless treachery, brutality and exploitation.

Hence, today, as rivals for the U.S. Presidency compete for inter-tribal psychopathic cred, we repeatedly hear that "all options are on the table," i.e., we'll nuke anyone, if we can get away with it.

In times past, this state of affairs was generally accepted as both right and natural. All foreigners were evil bastards to be mugged whenever possible.

Today, as the money power seeks to create a global system in which mankind will be divided between a ruling set, and a mass of subordinate and essentially domesticated humans to be bred, culled, and brainwashed as best serves the elite, inter-tribal denigration is harmful to the smooth running of the empire. Hence tribal loyalties are condemned as racism.

Anti-racism is now a project to destroy every national, racial, cultural and religious heritage: the destruction to be carried out, as necessary, with nukes, napalm, anti-personnel mines and toxic gases.

Here is the fly in the smooth unguent of liberal morality: to be anti-racist, we must destroy all those who seek to preserve their own race; to be pro-diversity, we must destroy all diversity by mongrelizing the World's human population; to show religious tolerance we must be intolerant of all who believe theirs to be the true faith.

Somehow, even through the miasma of self-congratulatory humbug that engulfs the liberal mind, something about this seems, well, not quite morally sound.