What Taylor is saying is basically how everyone else outside the western world thinks
I don't know much about Jared Taylor, so I looked him up. Interesting tid-bit: Taylor was born in Japan and lived there, where he was educated, until age 16.
In 1983, Taylor, who has a graduate degree in economics, wrote a book called Shadows of the Rising Sun. He argued at the time that Japanese business management models wouldn't translate well in the US because such models discouraged individualism and because the people of Japan placed too great an emphasis on a sense of cultural supremacy. [Content info lifted largely from a post on the Kirkus Reviews website.]
(Taylor is a scientific racist' in much the same way as the “IQ evangelist” we discussed here in December 2017.)
If diversity is a strength then does this mean Japan,China and SK are weak?
In that regard, yes. And Jared Taylor considered a lack of individualism, which is a type of diversity, to be a weakness in Japanese society even despite his admiration for it and his (unquestioning?) acceptance of data suggesting people of Asian descent have, on average, higher IQs than do whites.
He considered examples of Japanese cultural chauvinism to be weakness.
We are all different species of the same animal.
Uhhh, no. FFS!
UC Berkeley maintains a subsite on Understanding Evolution. From the article, “Defining a Species”:
A species is often defined as a group of individuals that actually or potentially interbreed in nature. In this sense, a species is the biggest gene pool possible under natural conditions.
The term the OP is looking for is variety.'
I can assure you if you went outside the west,you will be racially discriminated openly with no apologies.
And I can assure you that people within the West will discriminate, in employment for example, against members of their own ethnicity who share the same culture based on a lot of things with no bearing on merit e.g., height alone (PDF).
People can find all kinds of reasons to discriminate, and many of those reasons are illegitimate in that the features chosen as grounds for dismissing a candidate have no bearing whatsoever on whether he or she could do the job. (I'm not even talking about thorny issues, but about matters of personal preference such as hair colour or other trivialities.)
This diversity experiment,like everything else needs moderation.
Just a personal peeve, but I wish these idiots would stop referring to every cultural shift or instance of societal evolution they disagree with as an “experiment.”
Stalin's “Five-Year Plans” were failed economic experiments. Extending the same legal rights to everyone, while encouraging a diversity of background and opinion among (for example) citizens of a nation or employees of a company, shouldn’t be discussed using the same fucking terminology. It's clearly pejorative in this context.
