Diversity: Uniformity of Destruction for America
In principle, diversity is a good thing. But Democrats have turned it into a political weapon.
Diversity is a defining topic of our day. In its simplest form, observing diversity is welcoming the differences and uniqueness of every individual. In principle, this is very good. But that definition isn’t quite what social justice warriors use.
Some of the most effective teams benefit from members’ manifold talents that function in a complementary fashion — to add to an organization or group and to make it better. These effective teams can be found in sports, the military, business conglomerates, schools where a block of teachers function as a unit, health care facilities where sub-specialists work synergistically, and so on.
But in politics, diversity is employed as a tool for division. First, to be of value to the political Left, you’re given an identifier: woman, black, Hispanic, disabled, gender fluid, victim of white privilege, atheist, whatever. Then, according to that identifier, your status is the priority, not your individual rights or Liberty as an American.
One’s status is the preeminent driver of the issues discussed and, therefore, your value to the political Left is to be a victim in need of an intervening agency, such as the government, to be your protector, your provider, your equalizer, your defender, your insert-function-here. Thus, Democrats love “diversity” for the purpose of having a variety of needy subjects. And, yes, “subjects” is the right term.
Some leftists advocate no more citizens of sovereign nations, shouting, “No borders, no wall, no USA at all.” To eradicate borders is to abandon the need for citizenship. To abandon citizenship means that the government rules over wards (or subjects) of the state.
While the true purpose of diversity is to ensure that talent, skill, human ingenuity, opinion, and experience should add value to an organization or group, Democrats carry the banner of diversity to appear morally superior while using it to bludgeon both majority whites and America as a whole. Though he made a lame attempt to walk back his comments, that’s what Democrat New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo meant when he said American “was never that great.”
The diversity club has been used against Trump, too.
In recent months, the open-borders crowd has become “woke” to a policy that was used by George W. Bush and strengthened in Barack Obama’s last term due to human trafficking — the separation of children from their law-breaking parent/adult/trafficker. As with other adults who break the law in every other aspect of law enforcement, children are removed to safety until legal proceedings provide a remedy. Trump’s zero-tolerance approach to this policy’s enforcement was due to the massive influx of illegal immigrants seeking safe harbor in sanctuary cities, coupled with the true obstinance of both Democrats and some Republicans to allocate funding for a wall and enforcement of America’s southern border.
Additionally, there was Trump’s travel ban. Trump took the list of nations associated with terrorism itemized during Obama’s tenure and paused travel into the U.S. from these nations until adequate vetting and documentation could occur. But that wasn’t “diverse” enough.
In his April lecture to the Hillsdale College National Leadership Seminar, California State University professor Edward Erler asserted, “If [the travel ban had been] signed by any president other than Trump, there would therefore be no constitutional objections.” That’s not based on any material changes of the proposal, but because of the assumed racist intent assigned to Donald Trump by the biased media and rabid Left.
Following the arguments presented by Democrats, Americans must accept all who come to the United States for the supreme attainment of diversity as a defining moral trait that supersedes the value of citizenship or national security. Instead of the greatness of America and any exceptionalism, as Dr. Erler posited, the political Left wants universal persons to live in a homogenous world-state with global interests prevailing. It’s ironic that, using the ideal of diversity, America would be embracing sameness in a borderless society absent the foundations of freedom, right?
In November 2016, Americans supported the candidate who loudly rejected the Left’s attempt to define our American culture as some universal slog of sameness with no exceptionalism based on some manufactured morality of diversity as constructed by Democrats. A constitutional government serves those with a shared desire for independence, self-reliance, and rights that exist not from the State but from one’s being a responsible, decent part of humanity. A constitutional form of government empowers its citizenry that is naturally diverse in its geographic divisions and cultural mix.
America needs and must welcome immigrants. Our nation is great with its diverse culture that varies “from sea to shining sea.” Yet the idea that a constitutional government can truly exist without assimilation to a shared culture is not just foolhardy but impossible.
Those highly functioning teams that lead in health care, sports, the military, business, and every area of life possess individuals of various talents, skills, ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status. Yet without a shared commitment to the stated mission of each team, they fail. Diversity is good when valued as part of a culture devoted to common goals. Diversity for the sake of itself and the advancement of politically correct indoctrination is the uniform destruction of America.
Start a conversation using these share links: