Must Diversity Be a Fetish?

Frank BD points out the silliness of our modern elevation of seemingly mandatory integration everywhere in the name of diversity:

Probably the stupidest idea yet to gain common currency is that residential neighborhoods need diversity. I can see where public-contact employees might need to represent the community, like police officers or salesmen. But a residential neighborhood is supposed to consist of people with common expectations of community behavior. Diversity is not a strength if singles want to stay up partying at night while parent are putting kids to bed; or children want to ride bikes on the same sideways senior use.Do you think the residents of a quiet residential street do or should value the diversity of rap music blaring from rolled-down car windows?

I agree. This is ridiculous. No neighborhood, city or town “needs” diversity. Diversity is interesting, some people like it, and people of course can go live anywhere they want, but the idea that a monoracial place automatically sucks and “needs diversity” is some kind of ridiculous diversity fetish. There is nothing per se good about diversity! There is nothing per se bad about it either, but it’s not some inherent good that needs to be strived for all the time.
You see articles in the media now about this or that town or city that is in dire need of diversity. Curiously, it’s always a nearly all-White place. LOL, is there something automatically terrible about a White town or city? Are there going to Nazi marches pretty soon or what? White places are good and bad, but on the whole, for me as a White person, they are often more peaceful and less problematic than living in the Diversity. For one thing, I’ve suffered a lot more crime in the Diversity than in Whiteville.
If a place is White, fine, that’s the way it is. If non-Whites wish to move there, that’s their free choice in America. If a place is Black, fine. Is it possible that Blacks like it that way? I know Blacks who live in 90% Black towns in the South who say they like it that, and like to live with their own people. There are places that are almost completley Hispanic in the US now. So be it, perhaps they are happy that way.
The point is that White towns, Black towns or Hispanic towns or whatever towns are not necessarily in need of any kind of diversity. Maybe they are OK the way they are. The Diversity Fetish acts like there is something sick about a racially monolithic place, but maybe sometimes it’s OK, if it’s done on a voluntary basis. If others wish to move to Black, White or Hispanic places, that is their right of course.
This post is not to be taken as a segregationist post. We are integrationists here at Robert Lindsay, but that only means we believe in the right to integration. We don’t believe that every place in the US needs to have as many racial ingredients as a cake recipe.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

0 thoughts on “Must Diversity Be a Fetish?”

  1. I’ve actually revised my position on Brown v. Board, partially based on reading Raymond Wolters.
    Brown by ITSELF was not a bad decision. Brown only mandated non-discrimination and non-segregation.
    Brown didn’t mandate forced integration, “proportional diversity,” etc.
    This obsession with having the right diversity is absolutely nuts. If diversity were such a wonderful thing, white people would want more of it. But it’s not.
    At best, diversity is a tolerated nuisance as well as some funny racial/ethnic jokes. At worst, it’s an ingredient for great tension and conflict.
    You see, I happen to have many friends of different races, but that doesn’t make diversity wonderful. If I lived in a homogenous white area, I would have many white friends, and enjoy my friendships all the same.
    I think diversity can be tolerable up to a certain point, but it’s often a recipe for trouble.

  2. To clarify, I think that the right kind of diversity can work out well.
    By right, I mean primarily white, Asian, a moderate number of Hispanics, and a tiny number of blacks.
    The wrong kind of diversity is a large number of blacks and browns, with whites and Asians being minorities.
    Hence, cities such as Oakland, Detroit, etc.

    1. I bassically agree with that. I get the impression that most of the WN types want an all whites society. I can tolerate being around non-whites as long as whites are at least the majority. I can live with the current demographics of America but it would be a dissaster for whites to become a minority. I am kind of reluctant to associate myself with WN I prefer Race Realism.

      1. I think an ideal city to live would be about 60% white with the remainder very culturally diverse. I might get kind of bored living some where that was 100% WASP but it would really suck to be somewhere that was a plurality of ghetto blacks or latinos. there is kind of this concept of good diversity v. bad diversity. Affluent white liberals beleive in it personally but would never admit it. They like going out to eat at ethnic resteraunts and going to ethnic festivals but would never want their presccious offsprings anywhere near ghetto blacks or mexicans.

  3. I agree with this post. I think though what many people fear is that since America was founded and is controlled by whites and 99% of the wealth is owned by whites, having too much racial segregation will amount to uneven distribution of wealth. The diversity as a strength camp probably wants to encourage diversity as a way of equalizing wealth. That’s why you don’t see anyone calling for more blacks and Asians to move to East L.A.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)