Will this country be doomed if too diversified?

[nwctzn]

If fighting over a pie is ugly, you as an individual should not quit to make it less uglier. But You hope other quit, especially
after you already get your share.

The bottomline is we as indivduals don't have to think in long-run big pictureterm. But if we are to discuss it, I can see that
in 200 years yoour original country will sill be inhabited by descendents of current people of your country. But America will most likely be different. American can not depend on immigration forever. It better become a nation-coountry like all other nations.

I disagree with your "nation-country" comment. My "original" country is also pretty diverse and will be more diverse in 200 years. I like diversity, I am naturalized, and the US is my home now.

I work in an engineering field and have seen the power of diversity. When many diverse people come together, many scientific advancements were and are still achieved which in the end benefits both national US interests and the global scientific and economic structure.

And this is my last post in this thread.

--

 

[jack.k]

WBH, you seem to have an irrational view of America and immigrants in general. What are you fearing? A non-white America? I don't understand your premise perhaps because you don't present any logical points in your discussions. America was ever intended to be homogenous, look up why America was founded again. And no, diversity will not doom this nation. A poor economy and irresponsible policies is what makes a country doomed, not the genes or features of its inhabitants. You're also worrying about 200 years into the future. Do you know how long 200 years is? Who knows how the world will be like by that time.

 

[tedS]

WBH, you seem to have an irrational view of America and immigrants in general. What are you fearing? A non-white America? I don't understand your premise perhaps because you don't present any logical points in your discussions. America was ever intended to be homogenous, look up why America was founded again. And no, diversity will not doom this nation. A poor economy and irresponsible policies is what makes a country doomed, not the genes or features of its inhabitants. You're also worrying about 200 years into the future. Do you know how long 200 years is? Who knows how the world will be like by that time.

Arguably, people of European descent have done better than other people in the last 500 years at the least. The early immigrants to America were pre-dominantly European. I think the recent trend is more non-Eurpoean immigrants.

European immigrants shared values such as, but not limited to, culture, religion, way of life etc. Hence it was not dificult for them to come to American and adopt the American lifestyle, which made the country great.

Non-Europeans do not have the same values or culture or religions. They also tend to have their own sub-cities - hence the Chinatowns and Indian Bazaars in NYC.

Recent history would dictate that Europena cultures have thrived and non-European have not. But the non-Eurpenas are immigrating to this country opting to stick with their own separate identities. That is suboptimal.

So may main points are:

- European immigrants more readily adopted America in its essence than non-European immigrants.
- European countries have fared better economically and socially in the last few hundred years if not more.

P.S. I am a non-European immigrant.

 

[jack.k]

You do realize European immigrants suffered through similar discrimination in the past, it's always the case of first/second/etc generation immigrants regardless where they come from, and the American culture is a mix of different cultures. Personally I like the Chinatowns and Bazaars, I even live close to a Danish town with the architecture and costumes and all, this is what makes America exciting (and prosperous) with all its diversity. I wouldn't want to live in some grey society with a pseudo American culture. Empires have fallen due to superiority issues which is both an illusion and a delusion.

And yeah, Europe is doing wonderfully now.

 

[WBH]

WBH, you seem to have an irrational view of America and immigrants in general. What are you fearing? A non-white America? I don't understand your premise perhaps because you don't present any logical points in your discussions. America was ever intended to be homogenous, look up why America was founded again. And no, diversity will not doom this nation. A poor economy and irresponsible policies is what makes a country doomed, not the genes or features of its inhabitants. You're also worrying about 200 years into the future. Do you know how long 200 years is? Who knows how the world will be like by that time.

The issue is that Euroeman dominated countries are usually better off in economy and off rreesponsibility.
EvenGreece in deep water now is much better off than the majority of the rest of the world. Most of sceintific innovations if not all starts in European countries or countries dominated by their descendants. Such countries like New Zealand with a
small population even can produce several Nobel Prize laureats while other countries with hundreds of million people can not.

Eventually demographcis determine the future of the country. Many advanced countries in teh world
with fertility rate barely above 1 are doomed

 

[WBH]

Personally I like the Chinatowns and Bazaars, I even live close to a Danish town with the architecture and costumes and all, this is what makes America exciting (and prosperous) with all its diversity.

If 80% the is homogeneous and 20% is left for diversity, that is OK and perhaps optimal.
But when the diversity part account for most, who knows what will follow.

In the cold war, many Americans gloated and predicted the demise of USSR simply because the ethnic Russia
were merely half the total Soviet population and non-Russian populations were outgrowing Russians.
That tehory work for other countries too. There is no American excetionism as there were no Soviet exceptionism

 

[WBH]

America was ever intended to be homogenous, look up why America was founded again.

Let's face it. As our citizenship civic test materials clearly said, America was founded because high taxes imposed by Britain. If the issue had been resolved peacefully, America would have been just like Canada, Austrailia, part of Anglo-Saxon empire

 

[jack.k]

Let's face it. As our citizenship civic test materials clearly said, America was founded because high taxes imposed by Britain. If the issue had been resolved peacefully, America would have been just like Canada, Austrailia, part of Anglo-Saxon empire

America was not founded because of high taxes. America was 'founded' by Europeans to escape monarchies and persecution, among other things including famine. So in other words people wanted a better life and freedom. That's why my family immigrated, as I'm sure you, and every other immigrant past present and future. Also, Canada and Australia are part of the Commonwealth. America wanted to escape from all that and wanted autonomy. I'm not old enough to have lived through the cold war and the USSR, but comparing the USSR to America is like apples and oranges.

People from all walks of life from Europe, to Asia, to the Middle East, to Africa, Oceania etc. bring value to the states. If only Anglo-Saxons were to immigrate, America would have never had Albert Einstein among other great minds. I think it is totally ridiculous how some people like you state fallacies to try to make people think genes would destroy a nation. Such minds and ideology is twisted, go read Mein Kampf if you're interested in the subject.

Anyway, I'm done with this topic. Good luck to you.

 

[König]

Agree with Jack. I do not think that WBH's views will resonate with most of forum members. Saying that the Anglo-Saxon culture is superior to anything else is absurd.

 

[WBH]

Agree with Jack. I do not think that WBH's views will resonate with most of forum members. Saying that the Anglo-Saxon culture is superior to anything else is absurd.

I am not saying it is superior. My point is that if the country started Anglo-Saxon dominant, it better stay
that way. It is just like any other country in the world wants to remain their own way.

 

[König]

My point is that if the country started Anglo-Saxon dominant, it better stay
that way.

Look at Brazil. It started as a Portuguese-dominant colony, and what it have become now? Great mix of cultures and races, and it is not going to break-up any time soon. Of course, most of republicans here would rather die than to see this happening to the USA, but my point is that it does not cause collapse.

 

[WBH]

Look at Brazil. It started as a Portuguese-dominant colony, and what it have become now? Great mix of cultures and races, and it is not going to break-up any time soon. Of course, most of republicans here would rather die than to see this happening to the USA, but my point is that it does not cause collapse.

There is nothing wrong and in fact oen shoudl adopt a baby. but the first choice should be to bear chidlren.

If citizens of a country many years from now are not really blood descendants of current citizens, how
does it matter? There is nothing wrong to adopt children but teh first choice should be to bear obne's own babies.

The land is limited and there is no more frontier to explore. Opening up for immigration can not go on forever. Since all other nation-countries maintain their ethnic and cultureal identities regardless
of civil wars, regime change, or whatever disasters, it would be a great irony if America
eventually will changes and become a loser in the long run term.

Of course it is ridicuculous on teh moral level for me to say so. It is pretty much like an adopted
child grows up and tells his/her adopted parents that they shoudl not adopt but bear more of ther
own chidlren. In also as I said on individual level, I don't care and won't make difference even If I
do.

 

[König]

I think I lost you somewhere, WBH. Or we are talking about different things. If the number of births in a white Anglo-Saxon population cannot sustain the Anglo-Saxon population, then closing up immigration will not help the matter. Two and a half kids per WASP family is an old statistics. If you cannot bear your own children, you have to adopt. Alternatively, you can die alone in solitude. It's up to you.

 

[WBH]

I think I lost you somewhere, WBH. Or we are talking about different things. If the number of births in a white Anglo-Saxon population cannot sustain the Anglo-Saxon population, then closing up immigration will not help the matter. Two and a half kids per WASP family is an old statistics. If you cannot bear your own children, you have to adopt. Alternatively, you can die alone in solitude. It's up to you.

That is eaxactly the problem I am talking about. All carrier groups, Fifth stealth fighetr, most update drones are useless junk if you can not sutain yoru own population growth. No matter how many enemy fighters
you shott down, thiis country will be taken over by descendents of that enemy country if you can not susntain at least 2.1 fertility rate on your own lands. 200 years from now, that X country will still be X country and America will be much inhibited by peopel from that country. Let that X country be any current enemy of America.

That is why I voted Ron Paul in primary election but too bad he lost

 

[PRAHA]

That is eaxactly the problem I am talking about. All carrier groups, Fifth stealth fighetr, most update drones are useless junk if you can not sutain yoru own population growth. No matter how many enemy fighters
you shott down, thiis country will be taken over by descendents of that enemy country if you can not susntain at least 2.1 fertility rate on your own lands. 200 years from now, that X country will still be X country and America will be much inhibited by peopel from that country. Let that X country be any current enemy of America.

That is why I voted Ron Paul in primary election but too bad he lost

TO SURVIVE THIS COUNTRY NEEDS GROWTH -INDUSTRIAL /ECONOMICAL ..if that is not happening for a prolonged time ..its GAME OVER and all POSSIBILITIES ARE ON THE TABLE all of them pretty bad and one worse than the other

 

[WBH]

TO SURVIVE THIS COUNTRY NEEDS GROWTH -INDUSTRIAL /ECONOMICAL ..if that is not happening for a prolonged time ..its GAME OVER and all POSSIBILITIES ARE ON THE TABLE all of them pretty bad and one worse than the other

At indivdiduakl levels, the good advice is to have mny children as possible. Many highly educated people
tend to have only one child, reasoing that they can concentrate their efforts and resources to bring their only chidl up to enter Ivy League. This is strategically wrong. Having Two kids go to second or thrid class univeristy is much better than haiving only one going to Harvard. The reason is arthmetically simple:
64 such elite people will only have only one left and then become extinct in time of 5 generations.

More childrens is teh way to go even they grow up to be medioccre (most of people grow up tio be mediocre anyway)