by Brett Stevens on October 18, 2017

Diversity makes no sense. Different groups act differently because they come from different origins, therefore different traits were rewarded, therefore they are wired differently. Even more, every group has an interest in being itself, because no one has your back like someone who is genetically bonded to you, like an extended family.

When fools — driven by the siren song of power and wealth that equality promises — decide to mix these groups, they unleash the stored tensions there. Each group realizes that its winning strategy is to appear the victim while secretly acting against other groups, so that it can assume power and either drive them out or genetically absorb them, a strategy which only works for third world groups.

These truths were well-known to those who came before us. In fact, most of what is written on this blog would appear common sense to them, but after years of assault with propaganda and the bad breeding that comes with egalitarianism, most of our people are stupefied and unable to see the plain reality of any situation.

No one is surprised when they sleep through something momentous like the adoption of sharia law in the UK:

An estimated 30 sharia councils exist in the UK, giving Islamic divorce certificates and advice on other aspects of religious law. They have garnered fierce criticism, particularly for their treatment of women seeking religious divorces, who make up the core clientele. Sharia is the Islamic legal system, derived from the Koran and the rulings of Islamic scholars, known as fatwas. As well as providing a code for living â€“ including prayers, fasting and donations to the poor â€“ sharia in some countries such as Saudi Arabia also lays down punishments as extreme as cutting off a hand or death by stoning for adultery.

Diversity places the host nation into a paradox: it either demands that its newcomers “assimilate,” which destroys their culture and identity, or it hosts them in Chinatowns, where they can have their culture and practices, but still interact with the mainstream. The Chinatown model has won out, and so the UK has sharia courts.

Naturally this bodes for conflict much as diversity itself does. Sharia law is distinct from English law, or there would be no need for sharia courts; this difference means that clashes are inevitable. And when they happen, loyalty will be divided, because much as with the paradox of diversity, migrants must either reject who they are or accept being second-class citizens living in their own ghetto.

Future generations will look back on this stuff and laugh. They will see that because we chose equality, we rejected the distinction between right or wrong and good or bad, and as a result, mired ourselves in the “grey areas” and failed to see where incompatibility clearly existed. As a result, we stockpiled causes for future conflict while obediently denying that any paradox existed.

Tags: chinatowns, diversity, sharia courts, sharia law

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.