Stephen Clay McGehee pointed me to this little bit of wizardry from Fred Reed about the dissolution of America by diversity:
Here we come to the joys of diversity. Cultures can be too different to live together.
There is no agreement, anywhere, at any level, over anything. Hardcore conservatives insist that the coronavirus is no worse than the common flu as hospitals report overwhelmed ICUs and epidemiologists cry the alarm. Blue states favor lockdown while red states open up. Libertarians peddle cockamamie conspiracy theories. Mask laws are ignored or fought over. China, South Korea, Singapore shut down, control the virus, go back to work. Not America. Nobody is in charge.
Nothing holds the country together. There is no social glue, no dominant culture. We have no shared history, language, dialect, ethnicity, or religion. Diversity turns the country into rubble.
Diversity? It is the end of America. The country once was overwhelmingly white, European, Anglophone, and Christian. It worked, as approximate monocultures usually do. No longer.
I have covered the argument against diversity since the early 1990s, when it became clear to me as a dope-smoking teenage metalhead that there were plenty of good people from every group, but that each group needed its own standards and when combined, groups fought over standards, values, customs, aesthetics, calendar, and everything else. Natural selection never ended; each group wants to dominate all others if it can get to them, in the same way that Dunning-Kruger proles always want to overthrow the people more naturally talented than they are.
I summarized my views in Beyond Racism: Race is Important, Racism is Not, Surviving Multiculturalism, Race-Mixing Is Not The Future, Unless You Want To Be A Third-World Society, “Racism” does not exist, Why I am not a White Nationalist or neo-Nazi, Pan-Nationalism, The Nationalism FAQ, Aristotle And Plato On Why Diversity Is Tyranny, Science Confirms It: Diversity Destroys Civilization, Equality: A Consequence Of Diversity?, and Why nationalism is rising: it works!.
These covered the same view I advanced back in the early 1990s which became the basis for The Hessian Studies Center, a satire of pluralism at the same time it was a power grab for my favorite musical genre. If other people got to wear their ethnic clothes and hairstyles, we want to be able to have death metal tshirts and long hair.
My view is that society either aims toward a transcendent path, or one that makes sense out of reality as a good thing and preserves and maximizes that, or it ends up dedicated to the tangible: materialism, individualism, collectivism, power itself. We need a goal that exists only in the future and in all futures in order to have something we can keep pursuing, and anything else ends at utilitarianism, or the committee mentality that says that whatever most people say makes them happy is the best solution, even if it works poorly. Transcendental outlooks require realism, or measurement of our actions by how they change reality, not by what people think of them.
We know that all human societies so far have self-destructed, usually from their most intelligent people first on down to their least productive and constructive people. They try to do “the right thing,” which is to adapt society to the people around them instead of targeting some realistic/transcendental goal that most do not understand, but this makes society into the shape of an average human being. That being, in a large group, the begins to flatter himself with pretense based on how well he gets along with others, which means that he adjusts his goals and perceptions to what he thinks the group will support. This creates an ever-descending lowest common denominator, or a society built around minimums.
As part of this descent, almost all societies choose to import foreign groups in order to create allies for the anti-majority party. The majority party always wants order and tends to be conservative; the anti-majority party almost always focuses on total freedom of the individual in order to destroy social order so that those who are not naturally competent can rule by the grace of the Crowd. Once the anti-majority party creates enough chaos through diversity, sexual liberation, drugs/alcohol, broken families, and interpersonal enmity, it can camouflage whatever else it does behind this wall of chaos.
Crowds form wherever humans gather without a transcendental/realistic goal. People focus on holding the group together, which means that they make it taboo to mention things that offend any members of the group, and this “inverts” all truths by removing their controversial and realistic aspects, leaving only another version of the message of rationalization, or adjusting what you think is true to what you believe the crowd will support (a utilitarian measure for individualist goals, namely gaining social power, prestige, and wealth). This means that without a strong order, like social hierarchy and realistic leadership, people devolve into a self-consuming mass that ends up at third world status.
About a decade after my initial foray — mostly on USENET and pre-Amerika sites — the first inklings of collapse to multiculturalism appeared. First people noticed that diversity is inherently paradoxical and next, they noted that diversity destroys social trust and creates parasitic dystopias that convert diverse populations into monotone ones that, lacking the original genetic frameworks of their contributing populations, lose all of those unique traits and settle for averages instead. As of the George Floyd riots, diversity is dead in our hearts; no one says “diversity is our strength” anymore, but five years ago it was a daily mantra.
Once we get past enmity for other races, we can see that we simply desire a society of our own people alone. This gives us social trust, social order, a framework for behavior, a unique sense of aesthetics and identity, and a future that has the chance of being transcendental/realistic. The anti-majority people fear that future because it would end their control, and want instead a materialistic/humanistic future where whatever most people think is true becomes official truth and dissenters are banned. That is the ultimate path toward which diversity leads.