Thread by @parrhizzia

I found the entire Tucker Carlson segment, which I VERY hesitantly repost here. I want to declare my biases: I believe people like Carlson and Bannon are professional propagandists, bad faith actors, who are pushing white supremacy.

No, they aren’t handing out tiki torches or white hoods, but they are introducing the lie that "you are not racist to blame 'others' for your problems."

This clip is an excellent example of how they elicit the maximum emotional response while carefully inserting this lie.

His technique here is bait and switch. I list all the questions he poses in the clip, starting with the diversity question, before he switches to off-topic, but emotional questions. This intentional technique does not allow for an actual debate about the value of diversity.

First are the "bait" diversity questions:
How has our current immigration system made America more stable and prosperous? What happened to the State of California? How precisely is diversity our strength? Can’t understand the language or share no common values.

Next are the non-diversity "switch" questions: (forgive me the list is long)
Surrender our freedom of speech to tech companies. Why if these ideas are true, should they be shamed silenced or fired?

Why is it acceptable to attack people because of their skin colour? If it’s possible to change your sex, can you change your race too? Why start new wars in Syria and Iran? 30 years after the Berlin Wall fell, why should we treat Russia as our enemy instead of China?

How is it far to bail out reckless financial that caused the last economic collapse? Which other enterprises are eligible for tax dollars? Is San Francisco better off covered in needles and human waste? Is Baltimore better since the police decided to stop enforcing the law?

And finally the LAST non-diversity question: How are Detroit and Gary, Indiana doing?

A whole segment is gone, without ANY discussion or ANY data on the question of diversity itself. He ends with this: Before cancelling democracy, Washington should answer those questions.

So, there you have it. If you love diversity, you are for "cancelling democracy".

So, the majority of this "discussion" was simply off-topic, non-diversity emotive questions. As they have nothing to do with the subject, I will ignore them till a later tirade. #whataboutism.

Now Carlson and Bannon carefully redefine diversity to be
a) people who don’t speak the same language at home and
b) people who don’t share our common values.

This is NOT the definition of diversity in America. I would loosely define diversity as:

"People of different backgrounds (nation of origin, race, sex, color) who SHARE A COMMON SET OF CORE BELIEFS."

That latter is the vital element that is ignored. Integration does not mean homogeneity of skin, integration means acceptance of that Country's core beliefs.

Now, to his actual diversity questions:
1. How has our current immigration system made America more stable and more prosperous?

He intentionally conflates two separate subjects - immigration and diversity. While increased immigration tends towards increased diversity,

the two are not the same. To be specific, immigration is people coming into the country, but diversity is the measure of difference (race, religion, etc) of people already in the country. He is relying on his viewer's hatred of immigration to color their views on diversity.

Next: What happened to the State of California?

Now any state can be judged by MANY metrics - see below.

usnews.com/news/best-stat…

California ranks differently on different metrics and poorly on others. You could say “California is no 1” by using the public health metric, or

say “California is the worst” by looking at Urban Air Quality. It is a bad faith argument to pick just one metric. But I realise that his viewers correlate California with BAD, because it is full of "liberals". Anyway, he makes NO point about diversity with this question.

Next: How precisely is diversity a strength?

I’ll leave aside all moral arguments because I suspect we have different definitions of what being moral is. But on the MOST basic level, as humans, genetic diversity is a healthy thing for any population.

Also, an ability to discuss historical problems. Our Jewish brothers and sisters can describe the horrors of fascism. People of Russian extraction can describe the horrors of Communism. These ideas will repeat every generation, but a diverse populace gives us a broader memory.

Also, increased prosperity. As someone who works in the knowledge economy, the diversity of ideas and backgrounds is VERY valuable. If everyone who works for me had graduated from the same engineering school - how much added value would they have?

But people who have graduated from different places, with different methods of solving problems are synergistically valuable. Consider where the new knowledge is coming from in the US. From the highly diverse places - NYC, LA, SF, Austin & Chicago. Where different people meet.

Also, as silly as this sounds, food and culture. If you have never broken bread with a family of Mexican heritage, you have missed out. If you have never been to a black church on Sunday, you have missed out. These elements don’t hurt the country, they give it it’s flavour.

Clearly, Carlson wants a less diverse country. How less diverse? Only white people? Only white Christians? Only white protestant Christians? Only white protestant Christians from England? How long before YOU fall off the list? Do you support Gov mandated DNA tests?

And what do we do with all these TOO-diverse people? Send them back to THEIR country? How many generations do you have to be before you are OK? What skin shade is acceptable? Which sects of white Christianity are OK? Should we introduce an "Inquisition" to find who can stay?

Finally, the original proposition: "Cohesion and unity are born of common experience, especially common struggle and success over adversity."

We have examples of that: after 9/11 the country came together to fight terrorism. Churchill fought the NAZIs with the same principle.

Even Hitler brought the Germans together after WW 1 with the same principal. And it works, for a time, if you squint real hard. But NAZIs were mostly white Christians and the people fighting them were mostly white Christians. Low diversity does not cause nor prevent wars.

Rather, look at the diversity of people at a SpaceX launch. They have come together to create something fantastic. All colors, all sexes. That is American diversity, with no need for a war, but people striving to achieve a goal. As @Google says: different but together.