Regardless of the constant claim that diversity is a strength, we must realize that it really is a weakness.
As Thomas Sowell explained, "It has not been our diversity, but our ability to overcome the problems inherent in diversity, and to act together as Americans, that has been our strength."
Their solution is to import immigrants and destroy the identities of these member countries so that a superpower can be born after homogenization is complete. The problem is that it won't work. They are heading down the road to destabalization and violence. Another failed state like the USSR and Nazi Germany. But instead of wars between countries, they will have internal wars. Civil wars drag on forever and never reach an definite outcome. They just continue to smolder.
Each country must retain their sovereignty and make their own domestic laws, treaties, immigration laws and trade agreements - while preserving their cultures and languages because "multicultural" really means "monoculture." What a boring world that would be.
But going it alone in this world doesn't seem to work anymore. The smaller countries will not be able to compete in the global game of politics and economy.
One solution to a gargantuan, ineffective union like the EU, is to allow groups of countries with similar customs, languages, religions and heritage form smaller unions. They'll benefit from block trading, unified group treaties, and common defense. Much in the same way as the United States of America. The success of the United States lies in the fact that the diverse 50 sovereign states are similar enough that they can forge a united, national character.
That will never happen when you try to put dissimilar countries like, say Turkey and Belgium, under one umbrella. (Turkey is not a member but is trying.)
If similar countries would unite in the same way as the Visegrad Group (Poland, Czechia, Slovakia and Hungary), then we would have the best of both worlds. These medium-sized federations can protect each other militarily and benefit from a shared economy. All while maintaining their own unique national identities, something they can capitalize on to attract tourism.
Their solution is to import immigrants and destroy the identities of these member countries so that a superpower can be born after homogenization is complete. The problem is that it won't work. They are heading down the road to destabalization and violence. Another failed state like the USSR and Nazi Germany. But instead of wars between countries, they will have internal wars. Civil wars drag on forever and never reach an definite outcome. They just continue to smolder.
But going it alone in this world doesn't seem to work anymore. The smaller countries will not be able to compete in the global game of politics and economy.
One solution to a gargantuan, ineffective union like the EU, is to allow groups of countries with similar customs, languages, religions and heritage form smaller unions. They'll benefit from block trading, unified group treaties, and common defense. Much in the same way as the United States of America. The success of the United States lies in the fact that the diverse 50 sovereign states are similar enough that they can forge a united, national character.
That will never happen when you try to put dissimilar countries like, say Turkey and Belgium, under one umbrella. (Turkey is not a member but is trying.)If similar countries would unite in the same way as the Visegrad Group (Poland, Czechia, Slovakia and Hungary), then we would have the best of both worlds. These medium-sized federations can protect each other militarily and benefit from a shared economy. All while maintaining their own unique national identities, something they can capitalize on to attract tourism.
Another example a successful small regional union is Mercosur. An economic union between Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Argentina. As well as their associate members of Chile, Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, Guyana, Ecuador and Suriname. (Venezuela has been suspended as of this writing.)
This would decrease the chance of war. You won't have violent border disputes with someone on your own team. And non-allied countries would think twice about invading a given country when there are 4 to 8 other countries watching their back.
This is a map showing the possible breakdown of the various unions. The key is that they voluntarily form these unions. The larger countries are already a union of smaller states, provinces or departments, so they have no need to unite with anyone. Beyond a certain size, bigger is not better. It is actually worse - having reached a point of diminishing returns, especially for small businesses.
This would decrease the chance of war. You won't have violent border disputes with someone on your own team. And non-allied countries would think twice about invading a given country when there are 4 to 8 other countries watching their back.
This is a map showing the possible breakdown of the various unions. The key is that they voluntarily form these unions. The larger countries are already a union of smaller states, provinces or departments, so they have no need to unite with anyone. Beyond a certain size, bigger is not better. It is actually worse - having reached a point of diminishing returns, especially for small businesses.
"If there is any place in the Guinness Book of World Records for words repeated the most often, over the most years, without one speck of evidence, “diversity” should be a prime candidate.
Is diversity our strength? Or anybody’s strength, anywhere in the world? . . . Have the Balkans been blessed by their heterogeneity — or does the very word “Balkanization” remind us of centuries of strife, bloodshed and unspeakable atrocities, extending into our own times? . . .
It has not been our diversity, but our ability to overcome the problems inherent in diversity, and to act together as Americans, that has been our strength."
- Thomas Sowell, Is Diversity Our Strength? American Spectator; June 14, 2016
Additional learning:
No comments:
Post a Comment