First let's define what exactly is meant by multiculturalism, because it seems we're not even arguing over the same thing. If you read through my past replies to you carefully, you should notice that I typically prefaced "multiculturalism" with qualifiers like "societal-scaled" or "large-scaled", which only really exist in the most metropolitan cities in the Western world: NYC, LA, Toronto, London, Paris, etc. That is the type of multiculturalism, which is actually what most people interpret the term to mean nowadays, that I am against and attacking. You on the other hand seemed to be implying, intentionally or not, that I was against any form of human movement. That's a complete strawman, and I've made it quite clear explicitly that small-scaled "multiculturalism" is to be encouraged, except that form of interactions between different groups of people is not what's associated with the modern concept of "multiculturalism". In other words, you once again resorted to semantic arguments, just like when you tried to make it sound like I was against technological and economic progress when I first criticized social progressivism.
And I wholly reject your completely unsubstantiated conjecture that multiculturalism is necessary for technological and economic progress. Seriously, how the hell do you even come up with this kind of drivel? Once again, the exchange of ideas between different groups of people is important, but there's absolutely no need for large numbers of different groups to inhabit and encroaching on each other's living spaces in order to achieve that. Exchange of valuable ideas and information are usually done between the intellectual classes of the various groups of people anyway, and they're the ones that disproportionately drive the civilizational progress. There's absolutely no reason to import the average Joes from groups XYZ into one's home nation.
Jethreezy, Reddit 7 Comments
[2/16/2017 7:57:09 AM]
Fundie Index: 4