Diversity - A Blessing or a Curse?

"Diversity is a strength." - We hear this often, but is it true?  For those who oppose "Diversity," you are labeled racist, ignorant, etc. but are proponents of "Diversity" truly more educated than them?  Lets see:

http://ose.utsc.utoronto.ca/ose/story.php?id=2135

"Previous research shows people are less likely to feel connected to people outside their own ethnic groups, and we wanted to know why,"
says Gutsell.  "What we found is that there is a basic difference in the way peoples' brains react to those from other ethnic backgrounds."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Salter#Diversity_research

"More ethnically homogeneous nations are better able to build public goods, are more democratic, less corrupt, have higher productivity
and less inequality, are more trusting and care more for the disadvantaged, develop social and economic capital faster, have lower crime
rates, are more resistant to external shocks, and are better global citizens, for example by giving more foreign aid.  Moreover, they are
less prone to civil war, the greatest source of violent death in the twentieth century."

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0095660

"Our analysis shows that peace does not depend on integrated coexistance, but rather on well defined topographical and political
boundaries separating groups"


http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2013/study-asks-is-a-better-world-possible/

"Policymakers have attempted to create communities where a diverse group of residents not only live close to one other but also
interact freely - in other words, neighborhoods that are both integrated and socially cohesive."
"The most integrated a neighborhood is, the less socially cohesive it becomes, and vice versa."
"It's not that local leaders and policymakers aren't trying hard enough. Rather, we now think it's because the goals of integration
and cohesion are just not compatible with each other."

How Ethnocentrists Rule - https://egtheory.wordpress.com/2013/06/30/how-ethnocentrics-rule/

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full
"...the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects.
In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogeneous settings... virtually all measures of civic health
are lower in more diverse settings."

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-06-25jl.html

Putnam’s study reveals that immigration and diversity not only reduce social capital between ethnic groups, but also within the groups themselves.
Trust, even for members of one’s own race, is lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, friendships fewer. The problem isn’t ethnic conflict or troubled
racial relations, but withdrawal and isolation. Putnam writes: “In colloquial language, people living in ethnically diverse settings appear to ‘hunker down’—that
is, to pull in like a turtle.”

http://thealternativeright.com/2016/02/29/ethnic-diversity-and-social-cohesion/

"In conclusion, the totality of evidence clearly shows that ethnic diversity damages how well people get along,
how much they trust one another, and how satisfied they are with their lives. These findings should be kept in
mind when thinking about any form of racial diversity, regardless of the races involved."

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

This paper looked at diversity and social capital across 40 regions in the US. After controlling for poverty,
 crime, ect., it found that the more diverse a community was the less trust residents reported having in their
 neighbors, the less people trusted local government and media, the less people voted, the less people gave to
 charity, the less people worked on community projects, the fewer friends people had, and the less happy and
satisfied with their lives people were.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/12/131212100225.htm

This study looked at 75K people across nearly 400 congregations. It found that being a member of the dominant
racial group of the congregation predicted a greater sense of belonging in the church, having more friends in
the church, and participating in more church activities.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121018162205.htm

This study looked at over 5000 African american and Latino seniors and found that those seniors who lived in
areas with many people who shared their ethnicity were much less likely to have cancer or heart problems.

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

This study looked at "own group density" and mental health. It found that a 10% drop in own group density
(the proportion of the population that is a person's race) was associated with a 7% increase in psychotic
experiences and an increase in social adversity.

http://www.realcleareducation.com/articles/2015/03/06/minority_teachers_in_the_classroom_1167.html

This analysis of 3 million students over a 7 year period found that students had higher test scores when their
 teacher was of their own race. This was true even after controlling for poverty, past grades, etc.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2566511/pdf/nihms-69295.pdf

This study showed that 3 months olds, but not new borns, strongly prefer to look at faces of their own ethnic
group. I think the most plausible interpenetration of this is that infants are "programmed" to learn to prefer
 people who look like their parents.

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-05-infants-year.html

By 9 months of age babies can tell faces apart more easily when they are of their race and can empathize with faces
 more easily when they are of their own race


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

A Harvard study done for ten years involving over 26,000 people.
Harvard professor of political science Robert D. Putnam conducted a nearly decade long study how multiculturalism affects social trust. He surveyed
26,200 people in 40 American communities, finding that–when the data were adjusted for class income and other factors–the more racially diverse a
community is, the greater the loss of trust. People in diverse communities “don’t trust the local mayor, they don't trust the local paper, they don't
 trust other people and they don’t trust institutions,” writes Putnam. In the presence of such ethnic diversity, Putnam maintains that “…we hunker
down. We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it’s not just that we don’t trust people who are not like us.
 In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us.
Even Halyard knows this is all a pile of “feel good” shit. Like a religion, it relies on persecuting those who don’t agree to keep itself mainstream thought.
After the study was released, Putnam was intimidated and harassed because he was accused of helping racists. He later came out and gave a very vague
 statement saying diversity “had problems but was worth it in the long run” to keep these morons appeased. This statement gives no indication of the
 “long run” and, in fact, is not quantified by anything.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15625622

According to conflict theory, distrust between ethnic groups rises with diversity,
but not within a group. Putnam describes people of all races and socioeconomic
statuses, ages, and both sexes as “hunkering down,” avoiding engagement with their local
 community–both among different ethnic groups and within their own ethnic group. Even when
 controlling for income inequality and crime rates–two factors which conflict theory states
 should be the prime causal factors in declining interethnic group trust–more diversity is
still associated with less communal trust.
Lowered trust in areas with high diversity is also associated with:
Lower confidence in local government, local leaders, and the local news media
Lower political efficacy–that is, confidence in one’s own influence
Lower frequency of registering to vote, but more interest and knowledge about politics and more participation in protest marches and social reform groups.
Higher political advocacy, but lower expectations that it will bring about a desirable result
Less expectation that others will cooperate to solve dilemmas of collective action (e.g. voluntary conservation to ease a water or energy shortage)
Less likelihood of working on a community project
Less likelihood of giving to charity or volunteering
Fewer close friends and confidants
Less happiness and lower perceived quality of life
More time spent watching television and more agreement that “television is my most important form of entertainment”
Putnam’s study was published in 2001. Genetic cluster analysis of the micro satellite markers produced
 four major clusters, which showed near perfect correspondence with the four self-reported race/ethnicity
 categories. Of 3636 subjects, only 5 (0.14%) showed genetic cluster membership different from their self-identified
 race/ethnicity. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15625622

Report #: NECSI 2011-10-01
Cite as: arXiv:1110.1409v1

Good Fences: The Importance of Setting Boundaries for Peaceful Coexistence
Alex Rutherford, Dion Harmon, Justin Werfel, Shlomiya Bar-Yam, Alexander Gard-Murray, Andreas Gros, Yaneer Bar-Yam
We consider the conditions of peace and violence among ethnic groups, testing a theory designed to predict the locations
 of violence and interventions that can promote peace. Characterizing the model’s success in predicting peace requires examples
 where peace prevails despite diversity. Switzerland is recognized as a country of peace, stability, and prosperity. This is
surprising because of its linguistic and religious diversity that in other parts of the world lead to conflict and violence.
Here we analyze how peaceful stability is maintained. Our analysis shows that peace does not depend on integrated coexistence,
 but rather on well-defined topographical and political boundaries separating groups. Mountains and lakes are an important part
 of the boundaries between sharply defined linguistic areas. Political canton and circle (sub-canton) boundaries often separate religious groups.
Where such boundaries do not appear to be sufficient, we find that specific aspects of the population distribution either guarantee
 sufficient separation or sufficient mixing to inhibit intergroup violence according to the quantitative theory of conflict. In exactly
 one region, a porous mountain range does not adequately separate linguistic groups and violent conflict has led to the recent creation
 of the canton of Jura. Our analysis supports the hypothesis that violence between groups can be inhibited by physical and political boundaries.
 A similar analysis of the area of the former Yugoslavia shows that during widespread ethnic violence, existing political boundaries did not
coincide with the boundaries of distinct groups, but the peace prevailed in specific areas where they did coincide. The success of peace in
Switzerland may serve as a model to resolve conflict in other ethnically diverse countries and regions of the world.
Report #: NECSI 2011-10-01
Cite as: arXiv:1110.1409v1

Check out:
- Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt
- The Perils of Diversity
- The Diversity Illusion
- The Path to National Suicide
- Defeating Eurabia

Other books not included, but relevant:
- The Dispossessed Majority:
https://ia800500.us.archive.org/23/items/TheDispossessedMajority/WilmotRobertson-DispossessedMajority-Dm.pdf

Fjordman's writing about multiculturalism as "a communism for the 21st Century":
https://smallresistance.wordpress.com/the-fjordman-files/

Defensive Racism by Edgar J Steele:
https://archive.org/details/DefensiveRacismByEdgarJSteele

Diversity + Proximity = Conflict reference list:
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/diversity-proximity-war-the-reference-list/