By today's standards? Yeah, it probably is. I don't even care anymore though. Homogenous societies have fewer problems of inequality, less crime, more social cohesion. We've known this since Aristotle in Greece, since Marcus Aurelias in Rome, and probably with some other writers I can't think of in between then and now.
It's not a statement of any one group being better than another.
It's not a statement that I don't enjoy many aspects of our diverse society.
Any divide you wish to draw, I'm not drawing them. SF is more diverse than Krakow when you account for race, place of birth, religion, sexuality/gender identity.
>And what attribute are you declaring causes a 'lack of homogeny'?
You should have the balls to stand up for your beliefs, and you admit you hide behind dog whistles, so why keep hiding. You hide your reasons behind the cloak. Again, its doesn't matter, I have a good idea on your defining characteristic, its been the whispered excuse for 50-60 years as to why the scores low on education or health. I've been around plenty of people who don't have any qualms about removing the cloak, and your arguments are exactly the same.
I hide nothing. I believe what I say, I say what I mean, and I mean what I say. I stated that diversity does have a price, but made no statements as to education scores or public health. These problems with diversity do not stem from any one group, they stem from people not understanding the cultural differences that make up society. You're looking for a bogeyman, but I'm not it.
This continued assault of trying to find bigotry behind any minor statements that don't completely align with the progressive globalism agenda only undermines your collective stances.
"My defining characteristic" is something you can't justifiably claim, something I never said or alluded to. Y'all are too much sometimes.
