Welcome to our new upgraded phpbb 3.2 forum! The upgrade is now complete. See announcement and new features here, or report any problems or issues here. Thanks for your patience.
Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.
View Active Topics View Your Posts Latest 100 Topics FAQ Topics Switch to Mobile
Discuss and talk about any general topic.
4 posts • Page 1 of 1
It's absolutely hypocritical how Western countries (including South Africa which has a significant white population) claim to be free and tolerant, yet in reality are the most racist places. Eliminating political correctness, I am gradually coming to the conclusion that countries having a dominant ethnolinguistic group comprising at least 90% of the population and are not immigrant nations have a lot less social issues. In Vietnam, the predominant ethnolinguistic group is the Kinh. Han Chinese have a high degree of North-South diversity and intermixing with other groups but shared culture, history and language (for the most part) is strong enough to create a collective Chinese identity. Japan and South Korea, despite my dislike of many aspects in their culture and society, are even more homogeneous than China and are some of the most advanced countries in the world.
It seems that countries where there are competing ethnic groups, cultures and religions seem to have the most problems. The Black-White divide in the US and South Africa, the tensions between various Indian groups (Hindis, Punjabis, Aryan / Dravidian etc.), Latin American countries, and Malays (60%) vs. ethnic Chinese (26%) in Malaysia are a few examples. Multiracial countries that were founded by immigrants / colonists or those that allow mass immigration become rife with chaos sooner or later. It's an undeniable truth. Two curious case are the Philippines and Indonesia where the people are Austronesian but have a Tagalog / Javanese vs. Cebuano and others / non-Javanese rivalry.
It's definitely better. Although culture is objectively more meaningful and important for the health of a society, humanity is unable to put race aside. Ergo, it's far better to have a homogenous nation as opposed to a diverse country. My political views on this are that I think there should be free association - people would naturally go with their own race anyway, just like they do anyway even when governments force "diversity." On the national level, though, "diversity" will never lead to anything but dysfunction, hatred, and violence (like we're seeing in America.)
The real hypocrites are the liberal white politicians who live in white neighborhoods and send their children to expensive private schools so that they can avoid racial diversity while supporting policies that force diversity on everyone else.
I don't care what ethnic or race back ground a country is but you must be able to have a economic model that is sustainable and works toward a prosperous future on many fronts, the elite are pushing a backward society on us so they can come in and steal all the natural resources and properties of the world and build a one world slave state in the process enforced at gun point.
Time to Hide!