The essay to a degree “mind blowing.”
This is the first time I have been presented with a logical argument against
diversity that, at least on the surface is not bias. I agree with the author, when the countries inhabitants
speak similar languages, have a similar religion, etc, naturally they would be more
united. But that does not unity is essentially
a good thing. As it was pointed out, a
unified community (similar language, region, etc) makes you trust your neighbors
more. I found this statement odd because
I don’t see myself trusting my neighbor more if they had a similar background
as mine.
The question that seems to be the backbone of the essay is, should a
country give up unity (which according to an article is better for a country)
in order to promote a diversity and equality.
The question is difficult because it can go both ways. So I decided to look at the framework of societies
from the perspectives of other animals.
I thought of bees when trying to think of a unified society in other
animals. Bees are very effective in what
they do, but than again the majority of them are zombies (in the sense that
they just follow orders). The more
diverse animals are the monkeys. It has
been reported that the Capuchin monkey and the Squirrel monkeys live together in
the wild. Experiments have been done
where they concluded that the two species of monkey actually want to associate with
each other, although both monkey have different goals. If the monkeys can pull off living with different
monkeys, in time I think so can we.
In the end, I don’t think that diversity can be escaped in a global
economy. There are some countries such
as North Korea that try to stay “pure,” but I dough they will be for long.
