It allows individuals to learn new skills and ideas that allow society to evolve and improve. It brings the opportunity to work together despite differences. It allows individuals and groups to express themselves freely as well as understand others and therefore help them. It brings a better understanding of different cultures and diverse groups, Whereas a lack of understanding often leads to predjudice. It brings wealth and enriches society.
Cultural diversity is a strength. A country that accepts diversity with open arms attracts talent from all over the world. Unity is often appreciated in America. It's okay to have different opinions and different ways of looking at things, in fact, its better. Problems get solved quicker and we advance further when we have multiple forms of interpretation. If everyone views everything the same exact way or even in very similar ways, progress is killed and advancement is halted. It certainly is contrarian to view diversity as a bad force, but contrarian does not mean correct no matter how much people want it to.
People of different cultures and places can each bring their own unique contribution to a group. With different experiences an beliefs, the group would be much stronger, than if it were made up of ONE culture with the SAME point of view, the SAME experience. This is why I think that cultural diversity is absolutely a strength.
Having knowledge base on other race, and cultural is an unique thing in this world.
People who don't like that should either move to another planet. Because the way i view this whole thing. We all live on this one planet, we can't split it in half. So no matter what happen we will always come together.
And life will be so boring, because every one will be so afraid to get out of their comfort zone. Getting to know a different way of life is a great thing. Only close minded people cant see the richness in that.
Too much diversity leads to fragmentation and subgroup isolation. Diversity lasting for a short time is good if eventually some level of common communication and integration is achieved. However I see everyday that maintaining a society in a fragmented and disconnected state for a long period is self defeating.
For example the United Stated have benefited from the influx of people from Europe, Africa and Asia, and the attraction of the American Pop culture has resulted in a good level of integration and the U.S. has become a powerful country. However the segregation in the American South had a negative impact on the American society until the end of segregation and the scars still survive.
The most powerful countries of this world such as South-Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Germany, Israel and China rely on a relatively homogenous society based on some commonly shared values.
Of course there are some old isolated societies that are not that successful. However, I can't find a highly diverse society in this world that has been diverse for many generations and can claim to be highly functional.
A society needs some brief periods of chaos to absorb new ideas and practices and develop a sense of itself, but I think that the society thrives when it eventually reaches a more stable state where its people share common values.
The past several presidents have all repeated the mantra that diversity is America's greatest strength. But cultural diversity in of itself is neutral at best. Homogeneous populations tend to have greater trust among neighbors. Societies with strict immigration policies like Japan tend to be healthy and cohesive. When given the chance, people in a diverse area self-segregate. Forced diversity programs create division and distrust in society.
Bung the booce Bung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booceBung the booce
Multicultural countries, historically, are always weaker than homogeneous ones (I reference the book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order by Samuel P. Huntington). The more multicultural a country becomes, the more close it nears to collapse. This was certainly the case for the Ancient Roman Empire (to name just one example). Multicultural countries also tend to be mature societies in the sunset of their existence. I am not making a case for or against multiculturalism, but merely stating a consistent historical fact.
Cultural diversity divides people and creates conflicts.
Sure, You would get more types of food, But is it really worth compromising your functioning society?
Not all cultures are created equal, Some are more tolerable and some are very strict. I believe every culture has the right to exist on their own land.
To make it as simple as possible, If everyone was diverese and all had their own set of beliefs and morals that restricted them from from another group or restrictment of needed materials that by itself is not a plus. Yes being able to add new information and ideas helps especially from different perspective or areas of origin, But if there is no unity or any form of true coalition there can't be progress. To summarize they would all be on their own team. And if there's too many teams on a field doing too many different things there's no room to add or change anything without messing someone else's work.
As we go through this statement we see the word unity and the word diversity is a whole different in nature. . . Though we have both ups and downs but in most cases cultural diversity make things worst enough to be noticed. Firstly the problems in understanding the language of different culture is nearly impossible as it has the bad effects on understand the other person. .
Attracting talent from all over the world has nothing to do with cultural diversity. Diversity of culture causes an us and them mentality and brings Balkanization of countries rather than unitedness. Especially in the United States, in order for unity to be maintain the common European culture and values must be maintained as well. This has nothing to do with race. This is cultural, although racial diversity can cause tension as well. By the way, not all cultures are beautiful. Some are contrary to western values. We don't want people like that in the west. Only white countries are lectured about "diversity" and "multiculturalism". How come no one refers to Mexico as a country of immigrants.
The strength of America’s unique sociological and demographic success has been predicated on both unity and assimilation. “Diversity is our strength” is neo-Marxist propaganda that is synonmious with: demographic change. Diverse opinions that do not challenge the stability of an existing hegemonic culture are usually helpful and welcomed. However, there must exist cross-cutting immigrant groups to not only check the migratory power of the new arrivals, i.E: Irish and Italians. But to also ensure proper assimilation. Furthermore, a system in place to control the permanent flow of migrants must be implemented to protect a nation’s fiscal health. Unabetted migration of homogeneous people to a country is a long-term demographic threat to the stability and culture of that nation. Any individual that blindly adheres to this abortion of a philosophy is either an invalid, or, much worse, a cultural Marxist.
Having multiple cultures or races in a society makes it more difficult for that society to be cohesive. For example the constant racial tension between Americans and African Americans and more recently hispanics. Even though equal rights are given more and more is demanded of different groups to give to others. Imagine a going to China and half the people are Jewish and Russian, would that seem right to you or anyone sane?