Diversity may be fatal (new govt health study)

[markeverett49]

Diversity may be killing older African-Americans and Hispanics, according to a new peer-reviewed study published in the America Journal of Public Health, which shows that people suffer less cancer and heart disease when they live among their racial or ethnic peers.

Read more: dailycaller.com/2012/10/27/diversity-may-be-fatal-says-new-government-health-study/#ixzz2AVX4ctl6

 

[Elizabeth502]

It sounds as if what’s fatal is isolation, not “diversity.” And that would be nothing new. Isolation kills – in infants and in non-infants. We need companionship and affirmation to thrive.

So those who may not have a sense of community would logically suffer and be vulnerable.

 

[RPRPsych]

It sounds as if what’s fatal is isolation, not “diversity.” And that would be nothing new. Isolation kills – in infants and in non-infants. We need companionship and affirmation to thrive.

So those who may not have a sense of community would logically suffer and be vulnerable.

Absolutely. Attachment is a fundamental human need, from cradle to grave, which is why I believe that the new psychiatry has to follow Bowlby (father of attachment theory) and not Freud.

Diversity does not kill; diversity without assimilation or affiliation - leading to estrangement, isolation and exclusion - is the real danger.

 

[benjammin]

I think diversity without assimilation is the problem. I can tell you that anyone who lives in isolation whether it is with their own ethnic group or not is going to have much more health issues.

However, i have heard John Stossel from 20/20 make the argument that less diverse countries are happier. He stated that Scandanavian countries were less diverse, and more happier. They also were okay with paying more taxes because the money went to people like them, where as in the U.S. people say that their taxes go to minorities. I don’t know what scientist did this or how long ago this was, but it was interesting. Don’t know if its entirely true though

 

[markeverett49]

It sounds as if what’s fatal is isolation, not “diversity.” And that would be nothing new.

How do you figure that? It’s not as if those who live in neighborhoods that are not “ethnically dense” are necessarily isolated.

 

[RPRPsych]

However, i have heard John Stossel from 20/20 make the argument that less diverse countries are happier. He stated that Scandanavian countries were less diverse, and more happier. They also were okay with paying more taxes because the money went to people like them, where as in the U.S. people say that their taxes go to minorities. I don’t know what scientist did this or how long ago this was, but it was interesting. Don’t know if its entirely true though

That’s a very interesting point.

But my hunch (and I’m not a sociologist, so take this with a pinch of salt) is that this holds good only if the population is below a certain critical size. Would the same be true of China, for example, which is not diverse, but is much larger?

 

[markeverett49]

I see a problem with the comments about “assimilation” above.

First, one doesn’t assimilate to diversity itself. One assimilates to a broader culture, not a mix of smorgasbord of cultures.

Second, nothing in the studies shows that the people studied felt isolated where they lived. (This may be true but it is wrong to assume it without evidence.)

 

[RPRPsych]

I see a problem with the comments about “assimilation” above.

First, one doesn’t assimilate to diversity itself. One assimilates to a broader culture, not a mix of smorgasbord of cultures.

Second, nothing in the studies shows that the people studied felt isolated where they lived. (This may be true but it is wrong to assume it without evidence.)

True. What I meant by assimilation was “gradually adopting, or partially adopting, the way of life - and to some extent the beliefs - of the dominant culture in their new country.”

After all, every country, no matter how diverse, has a “majority” group of some sort (numerically, politically, economically), and this group often gets to “call the tune” on what is acceptable and what is not.

Let’s take an example. I’m a citizen of India, with my own culture (India is a huge melting pot itself, but let’s ignore that for the time being.) If I emigrated to the United States, I would try to conform - in some way or the other - with American culture, without necessarily letting go of my own culture; I would try to achieve a “happy synthesis”. Assimilation (to me) is the extent to which one succeeds at doing this. If I failed, I’d either remain in an “Indian ghetto” (with its own attendant evils, and a lack of recourse to the “mainstream” if things turned sour), or isolated (if there wasn’t a sizeable Indian community in the place I lived.) And that’s where the trouble would start.

 

[sedonaman]

I have never known a word to become absolute dogma, without a speck of evidence, the way “diversity” has. – Dr. Thomas Sowell

 

[markeverett49]

True. What I meant by assimilation was “gradually adopting, or partially adopting, the way of life - and to some extent the beliefs - of the dominant culture in their new country.”

New country? For African-Americans, America is NOT their new country. (I’ve met several students from Uganda in my time; they were adjusting to life in a new country.) Many Mexican-Americans were born here and this is the only country they’ve ever lived in.

Yes, some people came here from another country but that is not—as I read it–what the study is focused on. For example, if someone came here from Mexico but lived in an ethnically dense area, they would be as the ‘control’ group here. Conversely, someone may live in the neighborhood they grew up in but its ethnic makeup has dramatically changed.

Perhaps more studies need to be done to tease out the various factors. (One can feel isolated in a neighborhood dominated by one’s own group----many people feel as outsiders / isolated for political reasons, religious ones, creative ones, educational ones, and so on.)

 

[RPRPsych]

New country? For African-Americans, America is NOT their new country. (I’ve met several students from Uganda in my time; they were adjusting to life in a new country.) Many Mexican-Americans were born here and this is the only country they’ve ever lived in.

Yes, some people came here from another country but that is not—as I read it–what the study is focused on. For example, if someone came here from Mexico but lived in an ethnically dense area, they would be as the ‘control’ group here. Conversely, someone may live in the neighborhood they grew up in but its ethnic makeup has dramatically changed.

Perhaps more studies need to be done to tease out the various factors. (One can feel isolated in a neighborhood dominated by one’s own group----many people feel as outsiders / isolated for political reasons, religious ones, creative ones, educational ones, and so on.)

True, I was using the immigrant example because it’s the one I’m familiar with (not personally, but among some of my friends and acquaintances.)

I should probably rephrase that to: “of their country”, rather than “of their new country”, when the group concerned are already citizens.

Another sneaking suspicion of mine is that the rate of change of the surroundings may be a key factor - for example, a person whose neighbourhood makeup has changed rapidly (as you mentioned) may be more likely to suffer ill-effects. Research on stress has shown that the average human can only handle a limited amount of change in a given period of time.

And I fully agree that such research is plagued by confounding factors; teasing them out is hard work, and requires both quantitative and qualitative methods.

 

[benjammin]

That’s a very interesting point.

But my hunch (and I’m not a sociologist, so take this with a pinch of salt) is that this holds good only if the population is below a certain critical size. Would the same be true of China, for example, which is not diverse, but is much larger?

It might help though. Granted even in a large homogeneous country where the people are all okay with each other there will be issues. Also, China has that whole communism thing. Scandanavians may be socialists, but they are democratic socialists which means Swedes and Danes can express their opinions

 

[markeverett49]

T
Another sneaking suspicion of mine is that the rate of change of the surroundings may be a key factor - for example, a person whose neighbourhood makeup has changed rapidly (as you mentioned) may be more likely to suffer ill-effects. Research on stress has shown that the average human can only handle a limited amount of change in a given period of time.

I agree about that. I don’t think the study in question was that finely tuned. Something I’ve seen here in South Florida is a small but tight-knit Muslim community. (I used to live two blocks from a mosque.) Those people are a miniscule minority here, but they seem rich in social support because they make a point of living near and associating with other Muslims. Many minorities with strong religious ties have done well in places where they were far from the majority. Then there are the Finns (-from Finland). Many of them live in Lake Worth, a small town near me, and they are a minority but they have a strong cultural presence.

But I think the study raises a fair question: in our pursuit of diversity have we lost sight of the value of solidarity? Perhaps so.

 

[Elizabeth502]

How do you figure that? It’s not as if those who live in neighborhoods that are not “ethnically dense” are necessarily isolated.

No, but they can feel somewhat isolated – or even a lot isolated – if there are no people of their own background (origin, experiences, language) with whom to communicate.

 

[sedonaman]

…Read more: dailycaller.com/2012/10/27/diversity-may-be-fatal-says-new-government-health-study/#ixzz2AVX4ctl6

From the reference link:

Diane Johnson, the New Jersey director of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, told an interviewer with NJToday that “different people are living in different communities and people have to understand and learn to live with the other people.” Her agency, she said in April 2012, “is the enforcer.”

If “diversity is our strength”, as we were told ad nauseum in indoctrination classes where I work, why don’t people know it already? It should be as obvious as money is power and nuclear weapons are a strength. Why does it have to be “enforced”? If diversity is a country’s strength, China and Japan would be among the weakest on the planet. Diversity is just another jobs program and a vehicle for those who want to force their beliefs on society through big government, thus the need for an “enforcer”. :sad_yes:

 

[markeverett49]

No, but they can feel somewhat isolated – or even a lot isolated – if there are no people of their own background (origin, experiences, language) with whom to communicate.

This is true, of course, but look at it the other way. If a neighborhood is 55% African-American, then 45 % of the people in that neighborhood are NOT living in living in an environment dense with their particular ethnicity (-or set of ethnicities) But if you argue they are by-definition isolated, then you would have to argue that diversity must be kept to a minimum or else EVERYONE will be isolated. (That is, if NO ethnic group is over 50 %, then ALL the people in that area are isolated!)

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

This is true, of course, but look at it the other way. If a neighborhood is 55% African-American, then 45 % of the people in that neighborhood are NOT living in living in an environment dense with their particular ethnicity (-or set of ethnicities) But if you argue they are by-definition isolated, then you would have to argue that diversity must be kept to a minimum or else EVERYONE will be isolated. (That is, if NO ethnic group is over 50 %, then ALL the people in that area are isolated!)

I live in the most diverse metropolitan area in the US, people aren’t isolated because the city is split four ways in demographics.

 

[markeverett49]

I live in the most diverse metropolitan area in the US, people aren’t isolated because the city is split four ways in demographics.

This goes to my earlier point—members of a group who are not in the majority are not necessarily isolated.

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

This goes to my earlier point—members of a group who are not in the majority are not necessarily isolated.

There is no majority, no one is near a majority and there is so much culture blending.

 

[sedonaman]

A very close friend and colleague was a Hungarian refugee from the Revolt against Russian rule in 1956. He and a lot of his fellow refugees were given asylum in the U.S. His complaint was that they were spread all over the country by diversiphiles, thus denying them mutual support they needed in a new and strange culture.