Beneath The Surface, Americans Are Ambivalent About Diversity - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Telluride · 07-11-2007, 05:21 PM

Beneath The Surface, Americans Are Ambivalent About Diversity

Quote:

Originally Posted by From The Article

These findings are especially striking because of how quickly and completely the value of diversity seemed to take hold in the last two decades.

Quote:

Originally Posted by From The Article

In their study, based on a national survey of more than 2,000 respondents conducted in 2003, they found that fewer than 5 percent considered diversity mostly a weakness in American life. Forty-three percent said it was mostly a source of strength, and 50 percent replied that it was equally a source of strength and weakness.

But that doesn't tell the whole story. The authors note that in school and on the job, Americans are taught to value difference, and know by now that a positive reaction to diversity is the "culturally acceptable'' answer. Thus even those with strong misgivings may ritually observe that diversity can be a strength.

I'm not sure that the idea of diversity being a strength truly took hold. Apparently what took hold was the realization that questioning whether diversity is beneficial was hazardous to one's social well-being.

Quote:

Originally Posted by From The Article

He emerged convinced diversity was the culprit. But he believes that growing diversity is inevitable and ultimately desirable. He thinks America has to undertake more vigorous efforts to assimilate immigrant communities — more English language instruction, more playgrounds, community centers and schools, and greater financial help for communities bearing the greatest burden of health care, education and other costs.

"What needs to be done is broadening the notion of 'we,''' Putnam said.

He says he is confident this will happen, given the assimilation of the last great wave, at the turn of the 20th century. But as critics have noted, that blending was accomplished over 40 years of very low levels of immigration. Despite the current rancor over illegals, there is little indication that current high levels of immigration will ebb soon.

Ultimately, America has no choice but to contend with diversity, and while Putnam wasn't happy with his findings, he says it is important to confront them.

"People like me who are in favor of a more diverse society don't do ourselves any favor by denying that building a diverse society is a difficult task,'' he said.

If Putnam's study has convinced him that all these supposedly negative effects are caused by diversity, how did he reach the conclusion that diversity is "ultimately desirable"?

I also find it odd that he advocates more vigorous efforts to assimilate immigrant communities. The more people assimilate, the less different they will be. If diversity is a strength, wouldn't he want immigrants to stay as different from native-born Americans as possible?

aceventura3 · 07-12-2007, 04:28 AM

In order for diversity to be a strength people of diverse backgrounds and experience have to be able to work and interact together with some common purpose. If diverse groups stayed isolated there is no benefit to diversity. If that is a given (I am sure some disagree, but it is what I believe), there has to be assimilation for the common good. In this country's history not only have immigrants (or slaves brought here by force) moved to the "mainstream" the "mainstream" has often moved in the direction of the immigrants. Our unique mixture of cultures has lead to something I don't think you can find anywhere else, and I think it makes this country great. Not to mention being able to eat a different style of food almost every day of every month.

tecoyah · 07-12-2007, 04:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

In order for diversity to be a strength people of diverse backgrounds and experience have to be able to work and interact together with some common purpose. If diverse groups stayed isolated there is no benefit to diversity. If that is a given (I am sure some disagree, but it is what I believe), there has to be assimilation for the common good. In this country's history not only have immigrants (or slaves brought here by force) moved to the "mainstream" the "mainstream" has often moved in the direction of the immigrants. Our unique mixture of cultures has lead to something I don't think you can find anywhere else, and I think it makes this country great. Not to mention being able to eat a different style of food almost every day of every month.

100% agreed,very well put

especially the food aspect...heh

Telluride · 07-12-2007, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

In order for diversity to be a strength people of diverse backgrounds and experience have to be able to work and interact together with some common purpose. If diverse groups stayed isolated there is no benefit to diversity. If that is a given (I am sure some disagree, but it is what I believe), there has to be assimilation for the common good.

It sounds like you're arguing that diversity is good...but only to a certain degree. Is that correct?

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

In this country's history not only have immigrants (or slaves brought here by force) moved to the "mainstream" the "mainstream" has often moved in the direction of the immigrants. Our unique mixture of cultures has lead to something I don't think you can find anywhere else, and I think it makes this country great. Not to mention being able to eat a different style of food almost every day of every month.

Fair enough. But not all Americans like various types of ethnic food or our past/present/likely future version of culture, for example. My personal experience is that people often claim that diversity is a strength the same way you would say that the earth is round; like it's an irrefutable scientific fact. I'm not sure how they reached this conclusion, since human history is basically a long series of people oppressing, fighting and even mass-murdering those who are different from them.

I think that the perceived benefits of diversity (or lack thereof) are pretty subjective to the individual.

ubertuber · 07-12-2007, 06:28 PM

I think he's arguing that diversity is good, as long as it remains tied to a context. It's an interesting thought, and to me it calls into question if diversity is really diversity if it must submit to the larger society...

Of course, I may be misunderstanding Ace's point. I don't mean to put words in his mouth - he's certainly capable of speaking for himself.

jorgelito · 07-12-2007, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

In order for diversity to be a strength people of diverse backgrounds and experience have to be able to work and interact together with some common purpose. If diverse groups stayed isolated there is no benefit to diversity. If that is a given (I am sure some disagree, but it is what I believe), there has to be assimilation for the common good. In this country's history not only have immigrants (or slaves brought here by force) moved to the "mainstream" the "mainstream" has often moved in the direction of the immigrants. Our unique mixture of cultures has lead to something I don't think you can find anywhere else, and I think it makes this country great. Not to mention being able to eat a different style of food almost every day of every month.

Excellent post Ace, very well put. I agree.

Telluride · 07-13-2007, 05:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubertuber

I think he's arguing that diversity is good, as long as it remains tied to a context. It's an interesting thought, and to me it calls into question if diversity is really diversity if it must submit to the larger society...

Of course, I may be misunderstanding Ace's point. I don't mean to put words in his mouth - he's certainly capable of speaking for himself.

I was thinking that very thing (except I was questioning the article, not Ace) when I said this in my first post:

"I also find it odd that he advocates more vigorous efforts to assimilate immigrant communities. The more people assimilate, the less different they will be. If diversity is a strength, wouldn't he want immigrants to stay as different from native-born Americans as possible?"

If immigrants have to become Americanized before they become assets to society, it would seem that any objective benefit we get from their presence is based on their sameness rather than their differences.

07-12-2007, 04:28 AM	#2 (permalink)
aceventura3 Junkie Location: Ventura County	In order for diversity to be a strength people of diverse backgrounds and experience have to be able to work and interact together with some common purpose. If diverse groups stayed isolated there is no benefit to diversity. If that is a given (I am sure some disagree, but it is what I believe), there has to be assimilation for the common good. In this country's history not only have immigrants (or slaves brought here by force) moved to the "mainstream" the "mainstream" has often moved in the direction of the immigrants. Our unique mixture of cultures has lead to something I don't think you can find anywhere else, and I think it makes this country great. Not to mention being able to eat a different style of food almost every day of every month. __________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

07-12-2007, 06:28 PM	#5 (permalink)
ubertuber spudly Location: Ellay	I think he's arguing that diversity is good, as long as it remains tied to a context. It's an interesting thought, and to me it calls into question if diversity is really diversity if it must submit to the larger society... Of course, I may be misunderstanding Ace's point. I don't mean to put words in his mouth - he's certainly capable of speaking for himself. __________________ Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam