Harvard political scientist, Robert Putnam, did a study about immigration and ethnic diversity.The results are shocking and not what he expected. It's damaging to the pro-illegal immigration debate. That could explain why it just came out today. Putnam's study says immigration and diversity not only reduce social capital between ethnic groups, but also within the groups themselves. They don't assimilate. They don't embrace each other. The more diverse the neighborhood, the less residents trust neighbors. People in diverse communities tend "to withdraw even from close friends, to expect the worst from their community and its leaders, to volunteer less, give less to charity and work on community projects less often, to register to vote less, to agitate for social reform more, but have less faith that they can actually make a difference, and to huddle unhappily in front of the television." Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The more people are brought into contact with another race or culture, the more they stick to their own, and the less they trust others. This is the America that our Senate is cramming down our throats as culturalism. People tend to gravitate toward a culture they understand and are comfortable with. Bet you won't see this story on any of the drive-by media. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-06-25jl.html
He could have just gone to LA to see how wonderfully "diversity" works. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I learned nothing. It proves everything I've been saying for the past 10 years. No news here. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Apparently this has went totally over your head, but America, the United States, is a melting pot. It's is the basic principle this country was founded upon. Surely you cannot be that clueless. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! If you don't like diversity Sandy, then take your ass to any of the following countries and STFU about ours: Cuba Vietnam Cambodia Iran Syria and my personal favorite, China You will find very low diversity in any of these countries.
No. Criminal aliens are a bad idea all-around. And legal immigrants don't appear to be doing so well either.
So what exactly are you getting at? Are you bitching about diversity only where the current illegal immigration is concerned or about diversity all the way back to our independence in the 1700s? Diversity has worked for this country for 231 years.
And I guess it has always been peaches and cream over in India with your, what, 18 different documented dialects? http://www.indianchild.com/indian_languages.htm "He who is without sin, cast the first stone" -J.C.
Of course, it has been absolutely peaches and cream. Until the genocidal hordes descended on us from the West and poisoned the country. :bawl: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It's not our fault you can't keep yourselves from being taken over and colonized by Western countries. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Besides, talk to Britain about its contribution to that. But your language diversity goes farther back than that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_languages The U.S. wasn't even a thought in the 13th century. And if I had to guess, those 'Muslim' invasions did not come from Western countries.
Ya way to go with the Muslim invasion. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Urdu is an Indian language and after 800 years of "rule" the Mughals were leading the Hindus against the British.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! http://www.amazon.co.uk/Last-Mughal-Fall-Dynasty-Delhi/dp/074758639X Talk about integration.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Here is the actual study: Why don't you read this study: Robert D. Putnam (2007) E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture Scandinavian Political Studies 30 (2), 137–174. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x
Well, if that's false, your more than welcome to prove me wrong. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I'm not going to disagree with you there, but it was an 800 year rule and integration that the United States had precisely DICK to do with, which was my point to begin with. But I'm sure you'll find some asinine way to link the U.S. to India's problems, even if it was 700+ years ago. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The odd thing is, reading the study, that I'm not sure Sandy would like its conclusions. The conclusion of the author is not "we need to limit immigration." In fact, the author acknowledges the long term benefits of immigration but points out its short-term (primarily local) costs. That's not especially surprising, as most significant change brings with it some uncertainty and adjustment costs. Globalization and free trade, for example, are in the long run interest of the economy, but that doesn't mean there is no short-term pain (when an individual's job moves overseas).
We've never considered diversity a problem in India, so long as people recognised the desire for mutual respect. Not to say that there haven't been shabby rulers or its all a rose garden, but the majority would never, for instance, support war or invasion of another country, forget nuclear bombardment.:shrug:
