Again, the fact that black people like fried chicken is for some reason a "cultural value" to liberals. They elevate fried chicken over anything of actual meaning, "fried chicken", "rap music", "the jeffersons" is meaningful "black culture".
that reminds me of a round table interview with north korean defectors I watched. they asked them what they like most about their new life outside of NK. they all give dry answers about feeling free or whatever, but the last guy made some really awkward silence when he admitted that no one in this new world is happy, and that he was happier in north korea.
do you think the Kim family would treat me well if I just went complete traitor and defected to north korea? I could be the token white guy they use to say "look see even white people love the dear leader"
becoming the dennis rodman of white people, in a sense
why would the north koreans care if white people love them
idk but I read about some american soldier that defected after the korean war and basically played that role.
refpsi: the allowance of racial and ethnic affirmations to certain sects of people is because they're in the pipeline to become interchangeable cogs in the system.
quotas are specifically enacted to advocate for loyalty to the system; ultimately loyalty to "your own people" must be supplanted with belonging to the system.
why are there no white values? there can be none other than "corporatism". everything else is demonized.
there's an ongoing conflation that diversity is a function of skin color, or upbringing, or even political or ideological values, but these only can be seen in the view of a centralized mass.
real diversity is a multitude of independent, anti-fragile tribes existing under multiple political or economic frameworks.
one CANNOT derive meaning from whatever has been bred into us evolutionarily, not beacuse it's immoral or wrong, but because it's one of the few things that could bind groups and meaningfully attack the industrial economic system.
the only bindings that are allowable and not blasphemous are the like of "we all like the beatles."
errata: special interests groups for "minorities" on the basis of racial/gender lines are ONLY ALLOWABLE because the main interest is to catapault them into functioning parts of the system.
are you so sure? this is said from likely a position of relative economic/political prosperity.
if everything broke down economically/politically, would you still be so sure of this statement?
a large portion of this "anti-ethnostate/diversity" has been sold under the context of economics.
what happens if/when the economics or political system breaks down? would you be so different than the people who hate mexicans because their economics broke down aswell?
ultimately in my mind communities should be constructed such that they operate in the worst possible conditions; sorry your love for "thai food" really doesn't matter.
the entities that can't meet core needs just regress back to horrible discrimination, racism, and violence and it'd be foolish to say that these people ultimately have different values than us or that we're somehow different.
that being said intra-community violence is bad but I'm not sure tribal violence is bad.
yes. I picked those two examples because I experienced it. An LA chinese guy and a guy from wisconsin were my neighbors for a year and it became very clear to me who I had a greater connection to.
but you're saying this from a context of never having any stress or external threat placed upon you; what is "your greater" connection based upon
did you guys share the same cell phone plan provider?
the core connection is based upon what? shared interests, political views, personality?
the fact that both of you like the same television shows ultimately means nothing; if scarcity is introduced into the equation and those goods, commodities cease to exist what is there to bind you?
your shared memories of the restaurant 3 blocks away?