patrick.net

Singapore is amazing

https://twitter.com/todayyearsoldig/status/1575222514342539265

People feel that safe only when there is very little diversity. The more diversity, the less they trust their fellow citizens.

The good news is that given enough time with very little immigration and a strong dominant culture, people tend to intermarry, to homogenize, and to trust one another again. They all feel part of the same country and not part of some resentful splinter group.

The Danes leaving their babies outside in strollers is supposed to be a fresh air annealing process for their health. Or, maybe, it's just to keep the vampires from coming inside.

Diversity:

https://youtube.com/shorts/t4rJHkBsqV8?feature=share

Patrick says

People feel that safe only when there is very little diversity. The more diversity, the less they trust their fellow citizens.

I'd agree. I think small towns are more important though and staying away from big cities and suburbs. Even if they're not diverse. Nearish to me would be Naperville, IL or Geneva, IL where I once lived. Large suburban populations and mostly white. Probably 90% white. I didn't enjoy it to be honest. I don't like stop lights and people grouped close together without land/yard.

Now my town is 95% white, 4% hispanic and 1% black roughly (one being my nephew). Damn near everyone knows me and I've only been here 8 years. I'm an elected official on a board. It's so much easier to have control and input in a small town. The federal government and state government are all outside noise really. When my friends are on the village board and school board, I can get my voice out there.

I really don't like diversity. I like unique if I'm traveling. So a place like NOLA is fun. I've had fun in a place like Phoenix, but it's just so bland. I like the Caribbean the best. Fun people. They don't give a shit. Can be rough around the edges, but having worked in Chicago I can handle it.

Small towns have generally less crime all over world. Almost everyone knows each other and everyone has job /purpose so they kinda need everyone.

Regarding native americans they were treated pretty bad.
"Also, Europeans did not kill most of the American Indians. About 90% of them simply died from being exposed to new diseases. They have since recovered to the point where there are more American Indians now than at the time of European contact. Their population was quite small except in Mexico, where it remains large."

Natives americans literally helped original Europeans who didn't know how to farm, n fed them hence thanksgiving. Then it's pretty cruel how Europeans took over their land, enslaved and massacarred with them with guns. Pretty sure those treaties were not explained well and took full advantage. It's pretty hard to belive people just voluntarily left their ancestral home. So many times natives were moved from their own land. So many died from these moves and emotional issues . Diseases killed them but wars to land grab , getting kicked out own land killed many as well.

There is comfort in thinking same type group is better but diversity is needed for advancement of humanity, mix helps to see what works best. When Europeans enslaved n brought back ideas from world renesances started.

If people like Hitler who think blond hair n blue eye people are better and all should be same, then rest of European whites would have been killed. Irony is lot of defender of homogeniality world have been killed foe having brunette or black hair :). Scary how Europeans have tried to kill each other so many times just to get homogeniality.

Ultimately Darwin survival of fittest works. Equator with lot of sun requires dark skin with melanin. Whites will get cancer n die there. Far from equator with less sun areas ,light skin allows more sun rays absorbing.

KgK one says

Small towns have generally less crime all over world. Almost everyone knows each other and everyone has job /purpose so they kinda need everyone.

True.

KgK one says

Natives americans literally helped original Europeans who didn't know how to farm, n fed them hence thanksgiving.

I'm not sure that that story is true, but it definitely was not the usual case if so.

KgK one says

enslaved and massacarred with them with guns.

Were Indians enslaved or massacred with guns by white people? I don't think that was common. On the other hand, the Indians commonly enslaved and massacred each other, and would also take slaves from white people and massacre them where they could.

Of course there were many very different Indian groups, some more warlike than others.

KgK one says

Pretty sure those treaties were not explained well and took full advantage.

I agree there. The cultures were radically different. None of the Indian groups could really understand European culture at first.

KgK one says

It's pretty hard to belive people just voluntarily left their ancestral home.

Did someone claim that?

KgK one says

There is comfort in thinking same type group is better but diversity is needed for advancement of humanity, mix helps to see what works best.

The original article proves that diversity inevitably has large harmful effects, and you can see it for yourself everywhere.

I agree that cultures need to evolve and to adopt good ideas from each other. The Japanese tried to totally isolate for centuries, but eventually were forced to open up to the rest of the world because their isolation made them militarily weak. On the other hand, it is exactly Japan's ethnic homogeneity which makes it a high-trust society.

It's quite dishonest to say that "Europeans enslaved" without noting that millions of Europeans were enslaved by Arabs (the word slave comes from the word "slav") and that pretty much every culture had slavery. The Africans literally captured other Africans from other tribes and sold them to traders on the coasts.

Currently, India is worst offender: https://scroll.in/article/898862/india-is-home-to-the-worlds-largest-slave-population-yes-slavery-still-exists

Indians are by far the most racist people on earth:

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-racist-countries

To blame all white people for Hitler is offensive, given that Hitler killed more white people than anyone else.

True, white people are white simply because it was an advantage in northern climates to have light skin to get more Vitamin D. They do get more skin cancer when they move to very sunny places.

No one is claiming that all whites are like Hitler. That's ridiculous. Most white people are amazing. Hitler was big on homogenety blond hair blue eyes. Agree he killed lot of whites and probably would have killed lot more if not stopped. Point is people pushing homogeneous culture many times think their culture is best and want to get rid of everyone. Europeans have most to fear from themselves, only exception may be muslims. Muslims are very Homogeneous for most part, and it's scary for rest.

https://scroll.in/article/898862/india-is-home-to-the-worlds-largest-slave-population-yes-slavery-still-exists
It's sad that these conditions still exist. They used the term slave like condition, not really slaves. Slavery is illegal. When British came India's GDP was 25% of the world but when they left it was 4%. So poverty may cause many people to work in labor jobs or whatever jobs they can find. No one is forcing them to work but they have to take any job that they can get.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-racist-countries
This is hard to believe given that it is one of the most diverse. It has tons of Christians, Muslims many off shoots off Hindu( Jain ,Buddhist, and sikh and so many more). People typically don't migrate to poor countries. So not many people move in. North East people are similar to Chinese. Northeast Greeks and Mongols n afgans, persians were mixed. British, French, n other countries had trading posts n towns, there was mixing there. As for complexion, you can find really white n really black people.
So many people migrated into india to escape genocide.
E.g Dali lama, parsis, zorashtrians, ... except for Muslims, most have assimilated , Muslims tried to kill n convert everyone.
Wapo is faking these surveys, their surveys are like Hilary was 100% president.

Yeah like Tower of Babel and King Nimrod firing an arrow into the sky. We got diversity alright from that. Seems like a good analogy as far as chaos of diversity.

This Youtube video is from a late 1970s TV movie I recall watching as a very young kid. It was a series of movies of the Bible. I believe it was from this movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible:_In_the_Beginning...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhZDmdf8w0w

.

Patrick says

Correct, diversity is not a strength. Well, it's not a strength for the citizens, that is.

This should be every country's and ever corporation's slogan:

Diversity is a disaster.

Meaning, that to deliberately bring in anyone just because of "diversity" is a massive loss for group cohesion.

It also undermines the desire to work, because you can see that your accomplishments and abilities do not matter as much as belonging to a favored race, such black or Hispanic.

The right answer is to stress unity as Americans, and not consider or talk about race at all, ever. Though obviously I have to mention it here to object.

Not just a loss for group cohesion, its being used as a tool for destroying group cohesion, so that the group can be weakened and thus controlled. What does control mean? It means economic exploitation

I think the Japanese understand this clearly, which is why they have essentially zero immigration. They have an aging population like the West, but even older. Still, they choose to deal with it on their own terms.

I think this is possible because the Japanese, living in a homogeneous country, still have a strong sense of civic virtue:

https://patrick.net/post/1378324/2023-01-19-civic-virtue-is-not-profitable-so-how

Patrick says

I live in Cuyahoga County in Ohio. It is believed that you have to have a certain name, for example Irish sounding name, to get elected in certain governmental positions, meaning, that people are voting based on ethnicity. This is one example but there might be other examples. So, its incorrect to say that whites gave up in-group preferences. It is a first world, luxury belief that exists among people who are either rich or seek power. If whites gave up in-group preferences, why did they do it? There are two possible answers to this, money (corporate profits) or power (political power). No one put a gun to white people and forced them to give up in-group preferences. No one put a gun to white people and forced them to send their jobs overseas or give visas to people from incompatible cultures. These were deliberate choices.

Like Joe Pesci's character notes in all mafia movies, its all about the dollah.

Stefan Molyneux was making important arguments, he should not have been Snowdened.

gabbar says

If whites gave up in-group preferences, why did they do it?

They did it because business interests used psychological warfare, mostly on white women, to make them feel guilty so that business owners could import and use much cheaper labor. I think that's about all there is to it.

Patrick says

They did it because business interests used psychological warfare, mostly on white women, to make them feel guilty so that business owners could import and use much cheaper labor. I think that's about all there is to it.

I think there is a plan to break up American families through various methods so that they can be controlled and economically exploited. And yes, women have been brainwashed and this has made break up (high divorce rate etc.) easier.