Posted on 05/25/2015 12:44:37 PM PDT by artichokegrower
The New York Times published an article about mostly White dotcommers moving into a Hispanic neighborhood of San Francisco called the Mission District. But nowhere in this article did the Times ever use the word "diversity." This is puzzling, because in every other article where they talk about adding more Blacks or Hispanics to a white population, they always celebrate that as the merits of diversity. But not this time
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
More is never enough.
Diversity is the destruction of Good.
>http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2014/07/diversity-destruction.html<
...Diversity is an anti-religion, and anti-ideology, a nepotism which promotes everything except one’s own family.
Diversity therefore equals the destruction of any and all religions and of all positive ideologies.
Because Diversity can only be destructive: whatever IS is insufficiently or inexactly diverse.
Whatever IS must therefore be destroyed in order to make it MORE Diverse.
And there is no conceivable or measurable end to it. Yesterday’s Diversity is today’s intolerable lack of Diversity.
Diversity is the destruction of Good; and it is the destruction of all types of Good - however defined. All are chewed up and spat out by Diversity.
Diversity is the promotion of chaos by the destruction of Good; and then there-naming of chaos as Good.
Just loved the “excrement map”. Had never seen that before. ROFL. And, the hypocrisy rolls on....
‘Diversity’ is a euphemism for eliminating the white man. To the extent it doesn’t serve that purpose, it is not ‘diversity’.
In the Great Salad Bowl of diversity, whites are the iceberg lettuce. Adding more of us just takes away space for the “good stuff” of diversity.
Non-whites moving into a neighborhood is diversity. Whites moving into a neighborhood is gentrification.
And whites moving out is white flight, which is also eeeeeeevil.
Nobody complained when the Hispanics moved the bums out of the Mission District.
A truly excellent analogy!
97% of one group is diverse? lol
Ethnic Minorities Deserve Safe Spaces Without White People
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3293206/posts
I don’t know much about SanFran, but I know that it is rare here to run into a Hispanic/Latino who is not Caucasian-almost all of us are. Latinos who are black have roots in the Caribbean-Cuba, Puerto Rico, etc-or one of a few areas in Central and South America, and most of the Asian ones are from the Philippines. Is it that different in Cali?
And why does it matter in any case-why are people there that obsessed with who moves into their neighborhoods as long as they aren’t gang bangers and criminals?
I used to live and drink in the Mission back in the 80’s. Good times.
All the upper middle class white journalists at the Times would prefer a ghetto to a safe, clean neighborhood. The utter degeneracy of the Left never fails to sicken.
“And why does it matter in any case-why are people there that obsessed with who moves into their neighborhoods as long as they aren’t gang bangers and criminals?”
Had a neighbor once that had to move but couldn’t sell his house due to the market back in the early 80’s. That and the loan had a big penalty inorder to pay it off early.
He was out of town but we let him know about the ‘renters’. Turns out there were over twenty people living in his house.
Thanks for cross posting that. This is an example of what I was talking about in my post in that thread (101, I think)
15% of the world’s population is white, and lives mainly in North America, Europe, Aus/NZ ...
85% of the world’s population are POC (People of Color) and that includes all areas aside from North America, Europe, Aus/NZ ... there’s your “safe space”, i.e., the whole world outside of North America, Europe, Aus/NZ.
Go. Now. Be safe.
Good post. Let’s look at it from a different perspective.
For example.
50% of Mexican heritage in Chicagoland are PAN, the party of traditional Catholics and small businessmen ... and a rare libertarian.
40% of Mexican heritage in Chicagoland are PRI, the party of corruption where big government is required to spread the corruption to so many.
8% are PRD and those are split between liberation theology Catholics and aetheists, although it is impossible to tell which is which.
2% are none of the above.
The same with those from India. Half are the party of Mordi, seeking to move towards less corruption and more capitalism. Half just want to know where to pay the bribe to keep the health inspector off their back at the quickie mart.
The same with Puerto Ricans. 49% are Republicans for statehood (albeit many are RINOS). 49% are Democrats for colonialism. 2% are for indpendence of which half are alligned with the FALN and half with the PSP.
A group can be sliced and diced many different ways.
White devils only move to such areas to drive out the minorities, to steal their culture and to diminish their rights derived from occupation.
In other words these anti-American enclaves want no exposure to American culture, Constitutional Freedoms and Rule of Law, all of which are far superior and more excellent than they care to know.
Like Unions the enclaves need to be busted, this should become a trend that only the bravest of Americans will pursue, we should all be tired of running.
BTW has anyone else noticed by way of political correctness being American is becoming synonymous with being White.
Diversity = No White Men.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.