If everyone is on board with universalism, it can be pretty nice--everyone will pursue the common good.
-
-
-
But once you have groups who aren't cooperating (ie identity politics, defection), everything decays.
-
I see ethnic homogeneity within nations as the only effective way to minimize this problem. Otherwise, inevitable conflict and defection.
-
In other words, in the words of the illustrious Heartiste, diversity + proximity = war
-
If you look out for the good of everyone equally while some others look out for their own good first, who will eventually come out on top?
-
This is the state of white-nonwhite relations today, including refugees, blm, etc. Meanwhile SJWs get it backwards and assume whites are
-
the ones looking out for themselves first.
-
(Great example of victim-blaming.) Of course, they'd be right if their assumption of biological equality were true.
-
The answer is to create communities where people aren't dividing themselves by identity (to some reasonable level of size and homogeneity).
-
At its core, I think
#NRx is a pretty fundamental result of game theory + HBD. -
Basically it's a bad idea to have competing identity groups in the same geographic space. In nature, competition leads to 1 species in niche
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
@HbdNrx@MatthewRenauld But they have their own universalist group. Groups are defined by shared enemies.Their shared enemy is the "fascist" -
@DividualsTweet@MatthewRenauld yes, in practice they're hypocrites like everyone else
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@KarlRadl's account is temporarily unavailable because it violates the Twitter Media Policy. Learn moreThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.