Science says Multiculturalism is a Failure!

Science says Multiculturalism is a Failure!
By Tom Rhodes, 1/8/16

Liberals are so proud and arrogant about "science" be it global warming, or whatever. You probably haven't read or seen in the news the studies that look at the social aspects multiculturalism (diversity) have on societies. The science is clear, MULTICULTURALISM is bad for society. The reality is as mentioned in many non-PC sources is that not only is the observation by people who see large number of immigrants from dissimilar cultures lead to violence and social unrest, but the SCIENTIFIC CONCENSIS is that:
Diversity + Proximity = WAR

---

Social trust is negatively affected by ethnic diversity, case study in Denmark from 1979 to the present. Read Here.

Ethnic homogeneity and Protestant traditions positively impact individual and societal levels of social trust. Read Here.

"In longitudinal perspective, [across European regions], an increase in immigration is related to a decrease in social trust." Read Here.

Immigration undermines the moral imperative of those who most favor welfare benefits for the neediest. Read Here.

The negative effect of community diversity on social cohesion is likely causal. Read Here.

In Switzerland, social peace between diverse factions isn't maintained by integrated coexistence, but rather by strong topographic and political borders that separate groups and allow them autonomy. Read Here.

"Our analysis supports the hypothesis that violence between groups can be inhibited by both physical and political boundaries." Read Here.

Diversity hinders between-group cooperation at both the one-on-one and group levels. Read Here.

The best chance for peace in Syria is better borders (intrastate or through the creation of new states) "suited to current geocultural regions", and tribal autonomy. Read Here.

Using data from US states, study finds a negative relationship between ethnic polarization and trust. Read Here.

Diversity is associated with more White support for nationalist parties, except at the local level where large immigrant populations cut into vote totals for nationalist parties. Read Here.

In Australia, ethnic diversity lowers social cohesion and increases "hunkering", providing support for Putnam's thesis finding the same results in the US. Read Here.

After controlling for a self-selection bias, study finds that ethnic diversity in English schools reduces trust in same-age people and does not make White British students more inclusive in their attitudes towards immigrants. Read Here.

In Germany, residential diversity reduces natives' trust in neighbors, while it also reduces immigrants' trust but through a different pathway. Read Here.

Increasing social pluralism (diversity) is correlated with increased chance of collective violence. Read Here.

"[E]thnic heterogeneity [diversity] explains 55% of the variation in the scale of ethnic conflicts, and the results of regression analysis disclose that the same relationship more or less applies to all 187 countries.. . . [E]thnic nepotism is the common cross-cultural background factor which supports the persistence of ethnic conflicts in the world as long as there are ethnically divided societies." Read Here.

Genetic Similarity Theory (GST) could help explain why diverse groups in close proximity increases ethnic conflict and ethnic nepotism. Read Here.

Genetic diversity has contributed significantly to frequency of ethnic civil conflict, intensity of social unrest, growth of unshared policy preferences, and economic inequality over the last half-century. Read Here.

Using social science data and computer modeling, researchers found that policies that attempt to create neighborhoods that are both integrated and socially cohesive are "a lost cause". Read Here.

The numbers and the genetic distance matter. Minority groups that get above a certain critical mass, and that are culturally distant from the majority culture, begin to self-segregate from the majority, moving society toward division and away from cooperation. Read Here.

Using data from Copenhagen school registers, researchers found that native Danes opt out of public schools when the immigrant population concentration hits 35% or more. Read Here.

In the most liberal region in the US, San Francisco and surrounding suburbs, White parents are pulling their kids out of public schools that are becoming increasingly asian. Read Here.

list stolen from CH's Diversity + Proximity = War: The Reference List and will be updated as new science is reported

---

The science that says multiculturalism is a failure, Scientific studies illustrate the way the world is, not how leftist elites think it should be.

The massive sexual assault happening to women in Europe (which the MSM is trying to ignore) is at the fault of those European leaders who have allowed massive migration from places with drastically dissimilar cultures.

Much of the strife and violence in the USA (which the MSM is trying to ignore), is at the hands of those leaders who refuse to enforce our immigration laws, and insist that we must let large numbers of third world people invade our country.

To the leftists that denounce Trump, Coulter, Savage, Voxday, etc. because they are stating how the world is, not how they think it should be, the question is: Where is the scientific studies supporting multiculturalism?

Finland like Germany has experienced massive sexual assault on New Years Eve. The MSM are doing their best to cover it up. Just like they are doing their best to cover up rape and sexual assault by third world criminal aliens in the USA. Both Islamic culture, and the Machismo culture of Latin America use rape to subjugate and force their culture on others. The evidence is that massive third world immigration results in rape culture, there will be no peace as long as Western Civilization continues to allow massive numbers of third world migration.

I'd like one example where massive migration of people didn't result in the destruction of the native culture. Japan recognizes this, look at their immigration laws and rules. Ask the American Indians how allowing the British to invade America worked out. Oh that's right, Europeans raped, slaughtered, and crushed that culture. What makes us think that other cultures won't do the same to ours?

Is Obama Stupid or Is it something else?

Obama doesn't appear to be a stupid man. You don't get 1/2 the country to vote for you, shut down the Clinton political machine, and make it to President of the USA being stupid. All without releasing any school records, papers you've written for your degrees, or printed for the Law Review you edited at Harvard, or even your birth certificate. So he's obviously a smart and politically savvy man. Knowing this, for the past week I've been trying to figure out why he would not only call white police stupid, but admit he didn't have all the information, when he said it. This is probably one of his biggest "foot in mouth" moments since elected. No matter how you look at it his excuses are lame and pandering.

Granted we have a problem with police overreaching their authority in this country. Rregular people can be and often are, arrested for simply asking why and under what authority an officer is; asking for ID, searching you, asking you roll a window down, etc. They feel that if you don't immediately comply with whatever they ask, no questions asked, that they have the authority to arrest you. The can and most often do arrest people just for being rude or disrespecting them. Most Cops think and act like it is them vs. the people. The sheer volume of YouTube videos of cops violating the 4th and 14th amendmenta, clearly demonstrate that we have a problem with police disrespecting regular people and abusing their authority.

Even at that Obama is the POTUS, not a regular citizen. We should expect our president to think before he speaks, but all accounts are that he and his staff did think about this before he spoke and he said it any way. So why would Obama say such things about a man (who happens to be white) without all the evidence? The only conclusion I can come up with is Obama is a anglophobic racist. I believe he has a fear of white people, specifically white people in authority. Considering where he went to church the last 20 years, and the people he surrounded himself around in college, etc. it is understandable. I believe since it is obviously a mental disorder (anglophobia), we should cut him some slack and forgive him and not worry about it. Clearly his racist anglophobia won’t have an effect on how he acts. It’s not like he’s running the government and can exercise authority over a vast number of people and can sign into law some new law that would punish people for how they think if they are anglo, but allow similar thought by non anglos to be excused.

For those of you who might be literal thinkers, educated in the public school system; the above comments are heavily laced with sarcasm.

Thought Crime legislation scheduled to be voted in the US House.

H.R. 1913 - Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009

This is a sick piece of legislation, and more evidence that Obama and the Democratic party are pushing the USA to a fascist state. It is illegal to mug, rape, murder, assault, and liable people. This law clearly violates the Fourteenth Ammendment to the US Constitution which guarantees equal protection under the law. Based on how the victim perceives the thoughts and motivation of the perpetrator, the punishment for the crime will be enhanced.

If somebody mugs you, they should be punished for the act of mugging you. It shouldn't matter their motivation for mugging you, it is a violation of your rights, and their actions that are punished. What's worse is if your words can be conscrued to encourage others to commit crimes then you can be prosicuted for a "Hate Crime" under HR1913.

Translation, if you quote certain verses of the bible which condem homosexuality, and somebody who heard you assaults a GLBTG person then you can be convicted of a hate crime. This will shut down religous discussion and discourse and silence anybody who doesn't agree with the radical homosexual agenda. This law clearly violates not only the Fourteenth, but also the First Ammendment to the US Constitution.

How adults stimulate and pleasure one another is strictly their business, and there obviously should be no laws restricting what consensual adults do to each other. That’s part of individual liberty and regardless of the lifestyle a person chooses to live, so long as they don’t force it upon others they should be frees to live it. But just as homosexuals or any other group of people should be free to promote their lifestyle and ideas there should be NO LAW silencing viewpoints that they don't agree with. This law would make it illegal to disagree with virtually anybody. If you believe in liberty you have to not only put up with the KKK’s racist crap, but defend their right to say it, regardless of how distasteful their opinions and words are.

HR1913 as written could allow federal prosecutors to target Christians who teach that homosexual behavior is sinful and that Islam is a false religion. It is a backdoor tool from the far left and radical homosexuals to shut down legitimate free speech from people who oppose their lifestyle. This law criminalizes thought because they demand enhanced penalties due to the "perception" of the victim by the perpetrator. It appears to be on group of people forcing others to accept their beliefs. It is no different than if they passed a law making it illegal to speak out against gun ownership, or criticizing the Federal Government.

Wait a minute didn’t the Dept. of Homeland Security just put out a document claiming that people who: oppose illegal immigration, support the literal meaning of the Second Amendment, believe in constitutionally limited government, oppose the killing of unborn babies, support U.S. sovereignty and independence, to be “dangerous” and send out a memo to local and state law enforcement to be on watch for “right-wing extremism”.

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

If HR1913 passes, if you speak, or worse yet, think in a manor not approved by the government, you can be charged with a crime. 1984 is here, just a couple decades later than Orwell predicted. With this law people can be jailed for what they say.
Congress, Obama and the people he has put into power are bringing us closer and closer to a fascist state.