What is unity good for?

[Anonymouse]

Survival is the first instinct to man, that is, if you consider us to be animals on the evolutionary chain.

[loseyourname]

Survival of the individual.

There have been interesting studies done on apparent altruism in the animal kingdom about his sort of thing. Given that a sibling has a 1 in 2 chance of having the same genes as you, an animal that exhibits altruism will lay down its life for two siblings. A cousin has a 1 in 8 chance, and so the animal will lay down its life for eight cousins.

Your genes will live on so long as you have children. That is the only evolutionary instinct.

[Anonymouse]

It is an instinctive reaction to preserve the culture, race, or species intact, to like the like and avoid the difference. You are clearly cherry picking "individual" to conform to your idea of having everyone mix in. Nothing is more natural, normal, and healthy than to seek the company and survival of people like oneself. That is evolutionary altruism. Let's not forget that altruism means that individuals are accepting or hostile to others based on their likeness.

Now as far as multiracial and multicultural societies go, they never last, and historically this is the case. Every nation starts out either homogenous or with a clear defined majority that defines itself and asserts itself. Once this changes that society, and culture changes, and hence how civilizations rise and fall. The Roman Empire is the best example, on par, with America. There are many other empires such as the Soviet Union as well. Look at Iraq, a prime example of multiculturalism, and why one cannot have them all under a single government. The only way you can rule a multicultral or multiethnic people is through a strong central government as in the United States, or a strong tyrant like Saddam.

[Darorinag]

Wrong to who, Dan? There is nothing absolutely wrong about the dispersal of a culture. If you really believed that, you wouldn't support the efforts of the Nazis or of the British imperialists.

How so? The Nazis favoured their culture over others'. I'm not talking about a universal respect for all cultures. I'm talking about respecting one's own culture. I have no reason or obligation to respect anyone else's culture. If I respect your culture, take it as a privilege, not a right. I don't OWE anyone respect.

[loseyourname]

That's exactly what I'm saying, Dan. You don't believe it is inherently right to preserve culture. You only selfishly want your own culture preserved.

[Darorinag]

I wouldn't have wanted to preserve the Armenian culture if I were a Paki. I would've wanted to preserve the Paki culture despite the fact that there are many many Pakis unlike the case of the Armenians. Cultural preservation is important. I still don't understand why Armenians turned out to be like this. Armenians were very nationalistic for a long time. I guess communism ruined it all for us..

[loseyourname]

It is an instinctive reaction to preserve the culture, race, or species intact, to like the like and avoid the difference.

Back that up with something, Mousy, because I, and a lot of other people I know, have no instinct to preserve our culture. Seems to me you have been taught to preserve your culture.

You are clearly cherry picking "individual" to conform to your idea of having everyone mix in.

What the hell are you talking about?

Nothing is more natural, normal, and healthy than to seek the company and survival of people like oneself. That is evolutionary altruism. Let's not forget that altruism means that individuals are accepting or hostile to others based on their likeness.

I just told you what evolutionary altruism is. It is a desire to have your genes passed on, whether they come from you or from a close relative. It makes no difference who you breed with - if you breed, your genes are passed on.

Now as far as multiracial and multicultural societies go, they never last, and historically this is the case.

This is precisely because the disparate races or ethnic groups in question do not assimilate. They remain distinct groups with distinct agendas and beliefs. The reason the US has been so successful thus far is that most immigrants have successfully assimilated and have become more American than anything else. As long as this continues to be the case, I don't see the problem.

[Anonymouse]

Back that up with something, Mousy, because I, and a lot of other people I know, have no instinct to preserve our culture. Seems to me you have been taught to preserve your culture.

Everyone is part of a culture whether they like it or not. You are a part of the American culture and you seek to preserve that. You exclaimed how you wanted people to assimilate and adopt this culture. You choose an individual based on the cultural likeness. Would you marry a Hindu girl that is pure Hindu with no cultural dip in American culture and speaks no English? You also exclaimed humans are social creatures and culture is the expression of social creatures. No one is "taught" to preserve it. I certainly wasn't. My mom preferred I marry an Armenian, she never said it had to be a priority, in fact she did say "Anyone who makes you happy". With that said, it is entirely my decision.

I just told you what evolutionary altruism is. It is a desire to have your genes passed on, whether they come from you or from a close relative. It makes no difference who you breed with - if you breed, your genes are passed on.

I just told you what evolutionary altruism is, and that we share indifference and hostility based on likeness and tend to pass on our genes based on that criteria.

This is precisely because the disparate races or ethnic groups in question do not assimilate. They remain distinct groups with distinct agendas and beliefs. The reason the US has been so successful thus far is that most immigrants have successfully assimilated and have become more American than anything else. As long as this continues to be the case, I don't see the problem.

And why should they? It only proves that different peoples produce different cultures and that you can't simply "convert" without losing your own culture, hence why civilizations that did adopt the culture and were sucked into the culture of the peoples they conquered, themselves ceased to possess their own culture. The reason the U.S. has been successful is because of a once dominant culture, at one time, and the market forces. The reason why the U.S. will fall is because of the growing alienation that is caused exactly by immigration policies, "diversity", and cultural and racial groups.

[loseyourname]

Everyone is part of a culture whether they like it or not. You are a part of the American culture and you seek to preserve that.

No, I don't. In fact, I very strongly dislike American culture and would love to see it vanish. I just want to see the nation preserved, because I live in it, and it would be a little inconvenient for me if it fell.

You exclaimed how you wanted people to assimilate and adopt this culture.

All they have to do is adopt, as part of their political agenda, that which is in the nation's best interest, in order to preserve the nation. I don't think very much of the culture we have here is really in the nation's best interest.

You choose an individual based on the cultural likeness. Would you marry a Hindu girl that is pure Hindu with no cultural dip in American culture and speaks no English?

To be honest, I go more for intellectual likeness and good-looks more than anything else. Of course, I wouldn't marry someone that spoke no English, given that it would be rather difficult to communicate with her. Religion isn't an issue. I don't see a Hindu being any more difficult than my current Catholic girlfriend.

You also exclaimed humans are social creatures and culture is the expression of social creatures. No one is "taught" to preserve it.

You are teaching that it should be preserved right now. So is Dan. If someone heeds your call, they have been taught.

I certainly wasn't. My mom preferred I marry an Armenian, she never said it had to be a priority, in fact she did say "Anyone who makes you happy". With that said, it is entirely my decision.

And all these books you have read telling you about how multicultural empires always fall? None of them influenced your thinking? You were simply born with these beliefs?

I just told you what evolutionary altruism is, and that we share indifference and hostility based on likeness and tend to pass on our genes based on that criteria.

Mousy, you are wrong. I can show you the studies pertinent to biological altruism. We share indiffernce and hostility based on how likely it is that the individual we are altruistic toward has our own genes. Anything beyond this is learned altruism. It is not innate.

And why should they?

They moved to this nation because it provided them with an opportunity to improve their lot. It only makes sense to adopt the values that enable this nation to give that opportunity in the first place. Otherwise, stay home.

It only proves that different peoples produce different cultures and that you can't simply "convert" without losing your own culture, hence why civilizations that did adopt the culture and were sucked into the culture of the peoples they conquered, themselves ceased to possess their own culture.

Again, you don't have to lose your culture. You only have to lose any political agenda and values that run contrary to what made this nation able to give the opportunity it gave you. For the most part, all you need to do is to adopt a belief in the values of the founding fathers and to embrace capitalism. I'm guessing you already have. I'm not asking that you love Starbucks and Britney Spears. By all means, hate them as much as I do.

The reason the U.S. has been successful is because of a once dominant culture, at one time, and the market forces. The reason why the U.S. will fall is because of the growing alienation that is caused exactly by immigration policies, "diversity", and cultural and racial groups.

Indeed. I agree that the importation of poverty and the dissolution of the old assimilation creedo might very well do us in. I hope it doesn't come to that. That is why I fight very strongly against immigration policies and I fight toward assimilation and away from diversity.

[Anonymouse]

No, I don't. In fact, I very strongly dislike American culture and would love to see it vanish. I just want to see the nation preserved, because I live in it, and it would be a little inconvenient for me if it fell.

This begs the question for how can you preserve the nation if you don't want to preserve the culture? Nation can mean many things, from the State, to the actual culture.

To be honest, I go more for intellectual likeness and good-looks more than anything else. Of course, I wouldn't marry someone that spoke no English, given that it would be rather difficult to communicate with her. Religion isn't an issue. I don't see a Hindu being any more difficult than my current Catholic girlfriend.

That is my point you marry someone who is more like you culturally than otherwise, and language is the biggest marker of culture.

You are teaching that it should be preserved right now. So is Dan. If someone heeds your call, they have been taught.

I haven't taught anything. I am merely giving a break down of the reality and how this is a prevalent pattern in all history, of how cultures rise and fall, and why the U.S.A won't last if the current trends continue, when the majority Anglo culture becomes submerged and the minority, this society itself will change as well. The same applies to any peoples. This is simply a pattern. One can say that I am teaching the pattern, that doesn't mean one is supposed to preserve anything, since individual choices are precisely individual choices. Nothing is implied aside from the obvious.

And all these books you have read telling you about how multicultural empires always fall? None of them influenced your thinking? You were simply born with these beliefs?

There are no books that say "multicultural empires always fail", that is something that one can learn from history by looking in between the pages. Once you understand history, and how it works ( the process ) you can easily see this too.

Mousy, you are wrong. I can show you the studies pertinent to biological altruism. We share indiffernce and hostility based on how likely it is that the individual we are altruistic toward has our own genes. Anything beyond this is learned altruism. It is not innate.

And what is this individual we are altruistic toward has our own genes but another way of rephrasing that we share likenesses and seek those that share the same, since by far the Swede has more in common with the Swede. Your type of relativism and thinking implies there are no such things as cultures, whereas we clearly see marked racial and cultural differneces. If what you are saying is true, there would have been a monoculture on earth long ago.

They moved to this nation because it provided them with an opportunity to improve their lot. It only makes sense to adopt the values that enable this nation to give that opportunity in the first place. Otherwise, stay home.

The first people you should say that too is the Mexicans. The point is just because you think that should happen, does not mean it is going to happen, numbers and demographics are everything and the centrifugal forces of history are playing about.

Again, you don't have to lose your culture. You only have to lose any political agenda and values that run contrary to what made this nation able to give the opportunity it gave you. For the most part, all you need to do is to adopt a belief in the values of the founding fathers and to embrace capitalism. I'm guessing you already have. I'm not asking that you love Starbucks and Britney Spears. By all means, hate them as much as I do.

You know I am more "American" than many "Americans" are. I am a hardocre laissez-faire capitalist. I speak better English than most, and I am more true to the original principles of a Republic, than most "Americans", yet at the same time, I don't feel that bond or being drawn to it, as I do with my Armenian heritage.

Indeed. I agree that the importation of poverty and the dissolution of the old assimilation creedo might very well do us in. I hope it doesn't come to that. That is why I fight very strongly against immigration policies and I fight toward assimilation and away from diversity.

Hence this goes back to my idea of history and how civilizations rise and fall based on the people that create them, the dominant culture, and how that changes over time, and how thet change in turn affects that civilization, as the civilization begins to reflect more and more of the people that make it up, and less and less of the culture that made it. As America has changed racially and culturally and more immigration, so too it has politically and economically, moving away from its more free market and limited government stance to a more socialistic strong central government welfare-state, from a republic to a "democracy", from a idea of preserving property rights, to "paving the way for equality". We can do the cost-benefit analysis of the Empire politically, and/or economically and it doesn't bode to well for America. But the more proper question is, how have the political and economic changes occured in relation to the changing face of America? What will happen when in 2050 there is a majority non-white America?