Practically any topic can be accurately categorized as fact or dogma by the frequency and intensity of debate. For example, I would guess there’s not presently a single ongoing twitter dispute about whether red or blue light has a shorter wavelength. Whereas dogma is always subject to furious debate. In fact I know of at least one such partisan skirmish right now over whether “Diversity is our strength.” That’s mainly because I started it and Ann Coulter amplified.
Before getting to that, it’s worth noting Miss Coulter, despite presumably having fewer testicles than David French, still indicates a surfeit when compared to the entirety of compensated conservative bloviation. The idea that any from this claque of castrati would re-tweet content from this account is beyond mortal imagination. And yet there goes Ann, still fully income viable, with over two million followers and not a groveling disavowal in sight.
Of course the left lobs its fusillade of hoary shun-words at her blonde Hate-base. But she doesn’t care; the people who consume her content don’t care; and thus the attack simply disintegrates. The left just has words. Without tin-soldiers marching to them, those words evaporate on the wind. Thus their power to destroy is primarily what their opposition gives them. It’s a lesson tremulous conservatives are determined to never learn.
In any event, my own proof-of-dogma contribution came in the form of the following observation.
Such a sentiment is obviously going to gain traction in a Coulter thread. Though, as with any apex Internet personality, there were also plenty of hostile pilot fish nipping at indifferent pectoral fins. Each of them seemingly certain that the perfect bon mot just might blast this twiggy bigot from their twitter kibbutz.
And though that is quite unlikely, what I did appreciate from the critical flatulence was how well represented each of the general leftist nostrums were. Here’s a few intellectual explanations of why diversity is our strength.
You’re eradicated…sounds pretty strong to me.
This argument emphasizes how important it is to clarify who the speaker’s “our” is when celebrating diversity as a strength to us. As an odd aside, the strong replacement hybrid theory finds little purchase in the parlors of Tel Aviv.
Are you actually saying what I think I hear you saying?
Dullards may not be able to defend their dogma, but they always know its contours. And in modern debates, the man left standing with both feet inside the permissible boundaries wins.
As we all learned in school, the Red Tails cleared the skies of the Luftwaffe, while the Second Mariachi Division routed the Wehrmacht. This is one of the silliest and most common trench lines in the diversity defense: any diversity means all diversity.
Thus an organization that is 1% diverse is equivalent to one that is 99%. Leftist pretend to believe this any is all fallacy right up to the point of corporate hiring and college admissions, where it goes out the window entirely. In those modern situations, any diversity definitely does not equal all diversity, and so more diversity is always required. That they blithely switch between a) the practically all-white WW2 US Army was totally diverse and effective, and b) every quite diverse contemporary US organization is not nearly diverse enough to be effective, is something critics have been far too quiet in mocking.
I always appreciate expressions of honest concern from those who want me dead. So it is with leftists who wring their hands over the health of Western genetic stocks in the absence of wholesome African transfusions. Truly there is no more good faith expression than those who look about the bloody and acidic landscape of modern London and worry that its white citizens might be prone to hemophilia and the Hapsburg jaw.
Either live in zero gravity or admit you don’t believe in space.
This is a derivative of the Recipe Paradox. That being the desire to eat foreign dishes, but having no technological means to prepare them without millions of imported foreigners.
Similarly, this critic implies that arts, advancement, and new technologies developed in Tanzania, for instance, have no way of being transmitted for our benefit except in the persons of 10 million migrating Tanzanians. So you either accept mass global colonization or live blindly in limestone caves. It’s your choice, dummy.
My beautiful Jew
This is the impervious solipsism rejoinder. They love and prefer theirs. So why don’t you love and prefer theirs also?…asshole.
If some scientists weren’t white, then what gives you the right to live?
Because it was intentionally conflated by its enemies, the concept of nationalism is conflated with supremacy. It’s a bizarre logical construct. Most parents comprehend indisputably that there are kids who are smarter than their own. Ones also more charming, attractive, athletic, and ambitious. Yet despite this most parents love their own children more than all others and want a safe and prosperous future for them in particular. Have these parents never even heard of Chien-Shiung Wu?
Lie back and enjoy it
Inevitability is the inevitable language of the tyrant and executioner. Though if diversity is inevitable (and it is not) then so is war, disease, decline, death, and the incineration of the Earth. Yet advocates of diversity inevitability refuse to apply their logical amenability to other inevitable outcomes. For instance, they inevitably take antibiotics when they are sick, flee when they are chased with a machete, and rage about a warming planet that is inevitably blackened charcoal. It is almost as if they are treating inevitability as an expedient in this particular case. I may choose to elaborate and I may not.
When all else fails
One item I never hear acknowledged from diversity proponents is its self-eradicating nature. It is biologically assured that integration and cross-breeding of diverse populations will result in homogenization, thus destroying the diversity that was allegedly cherished in the first place. Leftists understand this perfectly when they are appealing for the preservation of distinct genetic animal lines, but since humans all bleed red the concept isn’t Narrative viable.
But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true. And since people viscerally understand it isn’t true, you’ll see very few diversity advocates urging the diversification of their own native habitat. Though they are quite generous with yours.
And that is always the nature of man. Everyone wants open doors for himself, and a key to lock them when the house is his. It’s universal. And that’s why it’s universally shunned in reputable Western discourse. Thank God there are a few disreputables left.