The Diversity Scam Revisited

The Democrats tell us they believe in diversity.  This is a lie.  What they value are distinct tribes that they can control.  They hope thereby to assemble these into a winning electoral coalition.  Rather than make them compatible, the idea is to keep them separate until they come together at the ballot box.

What this means for the nation—as a nation—became clear during the Joe Biden affair.  Biden was accused of inappropriate touching by several women.  None said this was sexual, but they claimed to be offended by his advances.  For many of them, this was grounds for him to withdraw his presidential bid.

Whatever else this was, it was not an example of cultural toleration. The women who alleged these infractions were not about to let Biden off the hook.  This was creepy Joe.  He was not just a man with differing ideas about interpersonal behavior, but a villain.

Yet let me switch gears.  When I used to teach introductory sociology, I cited the desired physical distance between people as an example of cultural differences.  As it happens, people from southern Europe are more comfortable being close to others than are folks from Northern Europe.

Thus, when individuals from these groups come together something interesting happens.  The southern Europeans try to get closer to the northerners, whereas the northerners back away from the southerners.  So far as the southerners are concerned the northerners are unfriendly, while the northerners find the southerners rude.  Neither understands that cultural differences are at play

To return to the women who found Biden offensive, they believed it was his duty to realize they were uncomfortable and back off.  This might sound sensible, but how would it apply to the physical distance situation?  Should south Europeans be required to realize northerners are troubled even though they do not recognize these unknown others as northerners?  Furthermore, would the reverse be required?

Now let’s consider the fact that in the United States there are dozens of groups that have conflicting cultures.  Some believe in closeness; while others believe in distance.  Some are loud, whereas others are quiet.  Some are huggers, whereas others are hand-shakers.

Is there any way to discern consistently which is which?  Given the large numbers involved, predictions are bound to go astray. Quite against our desires significant mistakes are apt to be made.

Nancy Pelosi’s recommendation for solving this problem is to keep strangers at arms length.  According to her, we should act as if everyone involved has a cold.  In this case, our interactions will be bloodless.

This, it seems to me, is not the best prescription for binding a nation of diverse immigrants together.  If we must always be suspicious of one another, is it likely that we will function as compatible teammates?

Nor is the opposite idea of treating all others as family members liable to succeed.  We do not constitute a single seamless family and hence what feels comfortable to us is liable to clash.

Therefore let me offer a suggestion.  When we encounter others we do not know, we should start off being ourselves.  If we subsequently notice that this other is uncomfortable, we can make what appear to be suitable adjustments.  Then, if further modifications have to be made, we should make them.

Looking at this from the other side, if we are the one’s made uncomfortable, we should signal the person who is making us feel so that this is occurring.  We ought also give this other guy or gal an opportunity to make a course correction.

This is not difficult.  In the case of Biden, all a woman need do is put a hand up to signal that she wants space. Or she might simply shake her head and say No.  In a world filled with strangers, we must sometimes be explicit in communicating what we desire.

This is the same difficulty that young children often experience. Only after they learn language are they effective of conveying their desires.  Shouldn’t we, as adults, be able to do what these minors manage? Can’t we operate as grown ups rather than shrieking babies?

I submit that if we are to remain a diverse society, that is, one which does not splinter under the weight of political opportunism, it is time to be more tolerant of one another.  Instead of accusing folks who differ from us of being immoral, perhaps more effort at interpersonal understanding is in order.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor Emeritus

Kennesaw State University