
Not a liberal but I find the notion unsupported. Diversity is neither a positive nor negative. Trying to think less white isn't going to solve anything but neither is continuing affirmative action. Best person for the position, regardless of race, ethnic background, sexual proclivities (as long as they are legal), veteran status, or religious beliefs. Exceptions can obviously be made for companies affiliated with ministry. Certain dress codes should be enforceable regardless of one's personal religious or cultural holdings.
Today, tomorrow, and forever.DeplorablePatriot » 31 Aug 2022, 1:22 pm » wrote: ↑ In the USA.
Would anyone like to dispute this? It proves overwhelmingly true in every circumstance. Why then, the push for diversity when it degrades a community?
Unfortunately, one of our Presidential candidates was shot, merely because he knew this, and was far ahead of his time. He could foresee how diversity would bring American cities into the gutter.
Here he is, one of my heroes:
That doesn't address the topic.Neo » 31 Aug 2022, 2:33 pm » wrote: ↑ Not a liberal but I find the notion unsupported. Diversity is neither a positive nor negative. Trying to think less white isn't going to solve anything but neither is continuing affirmative action.
That DOES address the topic - if the topic is, "Whom should I hire?"Neo » 31 Aug 2022, 2:33 pm » wrote: ↑Best person for the position, regardless of race, ethnic background, sexual proclivities (as long as they are legal), veteran status, or religious beliefs. Exceptions can obviously be made for companies affiliated with ministry. Certain dress codes should be enforceable regardless of one's personal religious or cultural holdings.
You finally HALF addressed the topic. But the topic is PRECISELY "diversity for diversity's sake."Neo » 31 Aug 2022, 2:33 pm » wrote: ↑ I am a fan of Diversity. Not a fan of a popular culture that lionizes criminality and celebrates thuggery as virtue. Not a fan of diversity for diversities sake.
GHETTOBLASTER » 31 Aug 2022, 3:14 pm » wrote: ↑ Portland and Seattle [demographic change of the past 50 years] are prime examples of what happens when the Negro population rises above a certain CRITICAL MASS.
They are 1/8th of our general population and commit 1/2 of all violent crime.
Anyone care to take just those two figures [1/8 X 1/2] and calculate THE COMPOUND PROBABILITY OF A NEGRO COMMITING A VIOLENT CRIME AS opposed TO ALL OTHER RACES COMBINED...?
Hmmm.?
Any Takers...?
A free beer for all correct answers...!!
There are others which add to the problem as well. Illegal aliens of many nationalities. No vetting for those folks. You get whatever walks through your door.SJConspirator » 31 Aug 2022, 3:16 pm » wrote: ↑ Wild guess..
Negro is 16 times more likely than others to be a criminal
And they shouldn't be free to pursue criminal notoriety today. But alas, they are. Civil rights backfired much more than it helped. I guess they were happier working for the man. An indication that they do not do well unsupervised and trained.Neo » 31 Aug 2022, 4:26 pm » wrote: ↑ Pre civil rights movement blacks enjoyed stable multigenerational households. Crime was extremely low relative to today. The shift was one of culture. Gangsters were ginnies, or dagos, or micks. Blacks weren't free to pursue criminal notoriety.
That is one possible read.DeplorablePatriot » 31 Aug 2022, 4:56 pm » wrote: ↑ And they shouldn't be free to pursue criminal notoriety today. But alas, they are. Civil rights backfired much more than it helped. I guess they were happier working for the man. An indication that they do not do well unsupervised and trained.
Only liberals and progressives group people by external characteristics and speak about them in a monolithic way. You sound like an idiot when you emulate them.DeplorablePatriot » 31 Aug 2022, 4:56 pm » wrote: ↑ And they shouldn't be free to pursue criminal notoriety today. But alas, they are. Civil rights backfired much more than it helped. I guess they were happier working for the man. An indication that they do not do well unsupervised and trained.

why won't you accept diversity is evolving while adapting to time occupying space as ancestrally delivered so far. You seek understanding eternal life when your body is actually living as eternally separated now as existing since conceived to replace your previous 4 generations.DeplorablePatriot » 31 Aug 2022, 1:22 pm » wrote: ↑ In the USA.
Would anyone like to dispute this? It proves overwhelmingly true in every circumstance. Why then, the push for diversity when it degrades a community?
Unfortunately, one of our Presidential candidates was shot, merely because he knew this, and was far ahead of his time. He could foresee how diversity would bring American cities into the gutter.
Here he is, one of my heroes:
omh » 01 Sep 2022, 5:28 am » wrote: ↑ why won't you accept diversity is evolving while adapting to time occupying space as ancestrally delivered so far. You seek understanding eternal life when your body is actually living as eternally separated now as existing since conceived to replace your previous 4 generations.
Adapt or become extinct in what your brain naturally navigates being part of this species currently here. Your social mind obeys ideas life cannot be limited to eternally separated as displaced here now.
Put about 80 pounds of weight on David Hogg and 30 years of age, he looks like an ancestor of the guy in the photo.
you sure can avoid series parallel proximity to being proportionately here is easily translated as spontaneously alive since conceived of something never lived before and won't be reproduced again occupying space as specifically here performing ideologies into reality demanding everyone ignore genetics naturally eternally separates what exists now.DeplorablePatriot » 01 Sep 2022, 11:33 am » wrote: ↑ I accept that diversity is increasing, not evolving. It's not turning from simple to complex, just more prevalent.
I won't adapt. But yes, we all will become extinct. Nothing new there.
WINNER WINNER..!!!!SJConspirator » 31 Aug 2022, 3:16 pm » wrote: ↑ Wild guess..
Negro is 16 times more likely than others to be a criminal

Maybe you can answer this.GHETTOBLASTER » 01 Sep 2022, 5:19 pm » wrote: ↑ WINNER WINNER..!!!!
Expect to see a keg of KEYSTONE LIGHT show up any day now..!!![]()
Of course this most basic set of numbers "over simplifies" all the other factors that butt hurt Libtards always want taken under consideration...like all the harm that Slavery of the 1700s to 1800s did to the ****** cognitive / decision making abilities...
The Liberal Elite live in privately gated communities with armed security and they send their children to PRIVATE SCHOOLS where the chances of being APETACKED BY A GROIDLE OF WILD, CHIMPING AND SCREECHING ****** IS SLIM AND NONE.....DeplorablePatriot » 01 Sep 2022, 5:47 pm » wrote: ↑ Maybe you can answer this.
Why is it that liberals cannot control their ******? They own them, therefore, they should control them.