>>29432985
>Jimmy’s awesome. I hate to be the one to have to carry this message forward, but a legitimately liberal society is simply incompatible with a diverse/pluralistic society. In such a situation, you don’t even have to encourage the various constituencies to be at enmity or competition, they’ll default to that naturally. Civic engagement will plummet. Trust in society will vanish and friendliness will disappear. This is devastating for liberals to confront. It is an idealized notion so deeply embedded in what they consider progressive politics, but they fail to understand that the two are not just incompatible, they’re inimical. There’s no way around that. And now are faced with the choice.
>I don’t know if these people are able to make such a choice. They’re going to have to at some point recognize that it is a choice. I wish it weren’t so as well. But it is, and it’s fruitless to delude yourself otherwise.
among the only useful things from Political Science is the work of Robert Putnam and his concept of social capital--the social bonds in a community--that measurably improve the quality of that community.
After documenting the relationship between social capital and positive outcomes he under took a 10 year study to determine what precisely encourages social capital.
His first book, Bowling Alone, made him a rockstar in the world of Political Science, but his results from the long-term study would turn him into a pariah. Just as you say, the dominant variable that predicted high social capital turned out to be....
Racial homogeneity.
Once his results were made public the Satanic effort to force mass immigration began.
These people are sick.
