Good vs Bad Diversity | My View | For The Sheeple

Much of the western world has gone insane with diversity quotas, which is mostly a bad thing because of the type of diversity that is being focused on. Good diversity does exist. However, it has nothing to do with race, gender, sexuality, or any other common identity group. This is my view. For all the sheeple.

Some people assume that if you oppose racial or gender diversity quotas, then that makes you either a racist or sexist. In reality, it’s actually closer to the opposite. A quota based on race is racial favouritism, which automatically means it’s also racial discrimination. My view is, forced diversity is regressive, and it takes us down the path of tribalism, which will lead to more divisions. It’s the same problematic thinking. All it does is to switch the discrimination from a minority group, to a majority group.

Bad Diversity

Unfortunately, the type of diversity that many politicians and companies are focusing on due to extreme political correctness is a very superficial, shallow diversity. It is the diversity of primarily race and gender. However, it also includes other minority groups. This is bad diversity, because it’s separating people into their superficial group identities. People are not being judged by the content of their character, but rather their skin colour, religious beliefs, sexuality and gender.

This type of shallow diversity is leading to a lot of what is known as moral posturing. It’s more about image than anything else. It’s fake progress, fake morality for the purpose of appearances. There are companies that are pushing this type of shallow diversity for the sake of image, yet the same companies can have some deep-rooted problems with bullying, harassment, favouritism, discrimination and general corruption. It’s hypocrisy.

There are many companies that waste money on moral posturing while the share price continues to drop. This hurts business and people’s jobs for a fake positive progressive image.

There are some individuals that also support this type of diversity for the sake of image, masked as morality, but really it’s just narcissism, virtual signalling and posturing. If it’s not moral posturing, it’s out of ignorance, probably a bit of both. Herd morality and conformity are also likely to be a large contributors to this type of thinking, or more accurately, non-thinking.

There is perhaps a bigger issue with this type of diversity. The focus of shallow indicators like race and gender is only going to increase divisions between people. When we focus on dividing people in such shallow ways (group identity), it’s only going to lead to more tribalism and division. The more the radicals strive for equality in race and gender, the greater the divides will get. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Wasn’t it Martin Luthor King that said something along the lines of, he wants his kids to live in a world where people are not judged by the colour of their skin, but rather the content of their character. You can add gender and other groups to that as well. Unfortunately, people seem to have forgotten the lessons of the past, because, judging by skin colour, sexuality, gender and other groups, is on the rise.  

Good Diversity

Good diversity is when you focus on the individual, the content of a person’s character, which includes morality and general personality traits. So individual identity is primary, group identity is secondary, which is the opposite of what is actually happening.

How do people differ using the main stream psychology model, the big five personality traits?

It’s especially important to have a diversity of ideas and thinking, and this comes from different personality traits. People with different personalities will have various different strengths and weaknesses. Creative people are high in the trait of openness and tend to be open in their thinking and sensitive to aesthetics. Conscientious people are dutiful, orderly, hardworking, and efficient. They are not creative, but often make good managers. Agreeable people will make good carers, because they are naturally compassionate. These traits also predict political views.

Some people are also very good at being practical and paying attention to details, while others are in their heads making connections, seeing patterns, using their intuition and focusing on the big picture. There are often strengths and weaknesses to each type.

Some people are also highly moral and focus on doing the right thing, while others can be self-centered, selfish and will screw people over to get ahead. We also have those that are considered to be sociopaths or psychopaths that have little to zero conscience. You really don’t want these people having power over others, especially being the leader of an undemocratic country. This has already happened and it didn’t go well.

The point is, people’s temperaments can differ greatly, and they can see the world and think in very different ways.

This is what we should be concentrating on. Meaningful and more complex diversity that doesn’t judge on race or gender, but rather the individual’s character. This will result in natural diversity, and not the shallow forced diversity that we are seeing now.

Unfortunately, so many people are ignorant, short-sighted, shallow and simplistic in their thinking, with a motive of self-interest masquerading as forward thinking and morality.

Final Comments

If someone still can’t understand this point of view. They are perhaps not intelligent enough to see complexity. They are riddled with cognitive biases and distortions. Or, they are brainwashed by the media and those that promote identity politics. They can’t escape conformity. Or, they are intentionally misinterpreting the information out of ego, and generally for their own selfish, shallow, and twisted reasons.