Diversity is a mix of things, a variety, a mélange, it is a difference from the norm. Diversity has become the variance that others are using to push their agenda, making the word diversity an encapsulation for politics, all we do, the jobs we seek, the way we talk and the opportunities before us.
Diversity sounds like a perfect precept for all to follow; who can disagree with wanting to live in a diverse and open culture? Who wants to be accused of being the same as someone else or in agreement with the past, and who in their right mind would want to be accused of a singularity of thought or a desire to live in a certain way with others that feel the same?
Diversity may sound like a utopian Shangri-La, that when achieved nothing is wrong, all opinions are accepted and no one’s actions are questioned or judged. While being diverse in some situations is vitally important the same is true for homogeneity and equality. Making a distinction between future events and actions based on one word is always a mistake and always leads to greater confusion and disagreement. Using the word Diversity as a rallying cry against the sameness that has existed for millennia will cause serious repercussions from those who want to stay the same and for the sameness that will come from the common actions of those toward unseating our present system.
This is less about the word diversity and more about those who want to control through intimidation and continue to demand changes to a system that works and has worked for over 200 years. This country is not strong because of its diversity, it is diverse because of its strength and associated skills that all derive from the commonality of what we are and what we have achieved together by accepting and living within the confines of those endowed freedoms and rights.
The differences we have with others in this nation are also not the issue. Those differences have always been here, we have always had some who disagree and want to overhaul the system, to replace it with something else. Some move toward greater government control, some to a more anachronistic model but overall most like what we have and eventually push the others aside toward that model of sameness and consistency.
Wanting diversity as the end goal and the foundational principle of a society is like wanting a football team where all the players can choose what they want to do for each play. All the talent combined on that team without the guidance of a unified voice would be ineffective, similar to the desires of those who proclaim that Anarchy would be needed in order to gain more organization.
Having a diverse financial portfolio is probably a good thing but having diversity in who manages that portfolio is probably not. We may like the diversity of our neighborhood or at our schools but without the commonality of the system that organizes the lessons, the police who watch the streets and the many other, daily functions that create a system of society, society could not function. Diversity without order is chaos, which opens the discussion of why some are pushing diversity as a singular need within our society.
In the 1960’s our country faced a crisis like what we are seeing now. Racial tensions were high, the Viet Nam War was raging, and the lack of leadership helped to propel this country away from the norms by those demanding more of this or less of that. The entire country was embroiled by others moving in no direction accept away from where they thought they were. This country’s very identity was in question. Diversity was not the word of choice at that time. Words like love and Peace were bandied about in response to the view of those who felt like there was not enough love or not enough peace.
The problem of the past and as it is now is in how the words are used and through the inadequate educational process that relies on standards and accepted practices to advance a scenario where standards and acceptance are not understood or used. Diversity is only a word, but its current meaning encompasses an irrational acceptance of anything different and a refusal to accept the diversified opinions of those outside of a finite list of self-imposed standards, a term that is contradictory.
The hypocritical stance of those who demand diversity and then impose penalties or establish laws is beyond comprehension. These tactics are similar in almost every way to the Terror groups who proclaim peace but bomb their neighbors for believing differently. They are nothing more than a force of action to gain control through the process of terror and intimidation, followed by violence.
This is not diversity, this is a singular ideological movement to limit the opinions of those they do not want to hear. This is a group at war with the goal of total control and annihilation of all those who disagree with their singular message of hate, clouded by the flowery language of liberalism and more specifically the divisive words of inclusion by means of exclusion or in other words, diversity if you agree with them.
I personally like the idea of controlling everyone who is not, just like me. It’s so much easier to govern that way, don’t you think?