Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This reminds me of the EIU's democracy index. I was struck when looking at the 2018 list by the top few countries:

1.Norway 9.87
2. Iceland 9.58
3. Sweden 9.39
4. New Zealand 9.26
5. Denmark 9.22
6. Ireland 9.15
6. Canada 9.15
8. Finland 9.14
9. Australia 9.09
10. Switzerland 9.03
...25. United States 7.96

Seems like it's a lot easier to be more democratic in a homogenous society.

Those are all white countries. Now do homgenous non-white countries.

Anonymous wrote:The places in the U.S. with the fewest immigrants and the most homogeneity are the places that fear immigrants the most and are doing the worst economically.

Anonymous wrote:

“But as the foreign-born share of the population rises, xenophobia often festers and threatens egalitarian policymaking”

This is idiotic, yet the DC/NY media loves lines like this.

The other big thing that's different in the US between 1975 and today is the rise of rightwing propaganda media. Murdoch went from losing $100M per year on the NY Post in the 70s to owning Fox and WSJ. Mercer funded Breitbart. Koches funded Daily Caller. Limbaugh and iHeart Radio and the rest of the poisonous liars on rightwing radio. Wilkses and Daily Wire and Prager "U" – the list goes on and on.

Now Britons are waking up to the fact their country is being poisoned by Murdoch and rightwing media too.

The major problem we have is NOT immigrants. It's our media.




p.s. Derek Thompson: The Atlantic writer Derek Thompson’s college article comparing the Middle East to a college bar scene https://astepinthewritedirection.com/2015/09/07/derek-thompson/

Anonymous wrote:This reminds me of the EIU's democracy index. I was struck when looking at the 2018 list by the top few countries:

1.Norway 9.87
2. Iceland 9.58
3. Sweden 9.39
4. New Zealand 9.26
5. Denmark 9.22
6. Ireland 9.15
6. Canada 9.15
8. Finland 9.14
9. Australia 9.09
10. Switzerland 9.03
...25. United States 7.96

Seems like it's a lot easier to be more democratic in a homogenous society.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The places in the U.S. with the fewest immigrants and the most homogeneity are the places that fear immigrants the most and are doing the worst economically.

Tell that to people in parts of Silver Spring who can barely put food on the table. majority minority, impoverished areas, multiple families in one unit

Do you really think that the folks in rentals in urban/suburban, high-density, impoverished areas are doing better than those in the outer burbs or in the Midwest?

homogeneity - the quality or state of being all the same or all of the same kind

Majority Hispanic, majority black, majority white = homogeneous groups, each with its own set of problems, no?

Wake up, people!

Anonymous wrote:The places in the U.S. with the fewest immigrants and the most homogeneity are the places that fear immigrants the most and are doing the worst economically.

“But as the foreign-born share of the population rises, xenophobia often festers and threatens egalitarian policymaking”

Anonymous wrote:I made this thread almost 5 years ago.

Today, this popped up on my twitter timeline:

https://twitter.com/MattGrossmann/status/1113258527244656640

Dude is a michigan state political scientist currently at Harvard/MIT and a niskanen center fellow.

"In racially homogeneous states, the public responds to rising economic inequality with economic liberalism; in more diverse states, the public responds to inequality with economic conservatism (& less support for welfare/education)"

quoting a paper written by an academic at UNC.

Looks like over the last half decade, my initial thesis has been proven more and more correct.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A question for progressives:

In general, democrats/liberals in the US support more immigration, amnesty of those here illegally, and other policies that support heterogeneity.

However progressive economic policies seem to only flourish within homogeneity.

Which is more important to progressives? The former or the later?

I already had my own opinions on this but this article made me think of it again today:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/385035/homogeneity-their-strength-kevin-d-williamson

I have voted D in all elections for full disclosure.

Liberals/SWPL's act the same 'white flightish' ways that caused de-urbanization as well - look at white people commenting regarding cupertino, tj, and other schools if too many asians come in.

Your article could be summed up "socialism works in Norway because they are ethnically pure and people help their own kind". What a crock.

But isn't that the case?

Look at subgroups in the US. They can be insular b/c they wish to retain their cultural norms.

OP here, not PP's. I think the PP you responded to would say that, that is ok since that doesn't/isn't overtly setting national policy.

It isn't a case of 'purity' and more that is there any credence that people are more open to helping one of their own.

that seems to be true? You see it even in the most trivial stuff like networking for jobs.

I think it's human nature.

I have a tight group of friends who share my culture. We network for each other. However, as a female in a huge system, I also have like-minded female friends as my network. We've gotten jobs for each other.

People need to feel a part of a group, and if a country is heterogeneous - meaning it shares a culture - of course it's easier to embrace progressive moves, as chances are you're not offending Group A to benefit Group B.

In some respects it's actually refreshing.

The USA, when you get to the root of our issues which really haven't been resolved, is an ugly nation. [/quote

this

In homogeneous nations, there's not a lot of convincing to do when initiating change, as values and norms are shared beliefs.

This country is ugly b/c we can't figure out who we are.

We were the melting pot. That didn't work. Then we were the salad - each bringing a component to the mix in order to create a delicious bowl of greens. That didn't work, although that's what I BELIEVE many wish to think. But when the Caesar dressing didn't mix well with the tortilla strip, the whole salad sort of fell apart.

So now we're looking at the Greek salad, with kalamata olives and pepperoncinis. There's the cobb salad with eggs, bacon, cherry tomatoes, and a whole bunch of other stuff. And what about the fruity salad with blueberries and strawberries tossed into the spring mix and lightly coated in a raspberry vinaigrette?

They're all delicious, but if you mix their ingredients together, you end up with something very unappetizing. And then there are meat and potatoes meals that may or may not include a salad on the side.

Hell, English isn't even the official language of the States. You can't communicate if you don't know each other's languages.

so . . .