If you want to see the result of excess diversity, you have to look no further than the Roman empire.

An homogeneous Rome was incredibly strong.

The addition of diverse peoples at a small rate, slow enough for "Rome" to digest caused no problem. Sure, the original "Romans" may not have recognised the new Rome as what they had once built, but it was still strong, & united.

Further diversity led to a growing weakness, until the empire split into 2 totally separate parts, neither of them as physically strong, or as homogeneous as the first. Ideologically they had nothing much left, compared to the original, other than self interest.

More diversity led to the total failure of everything "Rome" had once stood for.

I'm getting sick of chewing. I have been digesting diverse peoples, & trying to turn them into Ozzies for over 60 years. I'm even a believer in "coffee coloured people of the world", & thought we were succeeding. But when I can find no one who speaks my language, in a suburb of my own country, I know that the plan was wrong, the rate far too high, & the result, disastrous.

I guess it boils down to this.

What is the difference between a nation and groups of mutually hostile tribes, sects, factions and individuals who happen to occupy the same territory?

The people of Czechoslovakia decided they were not a nation. They had the good sense to arrange an amicable divorce into the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Is Iraq a nation?

No, we should not have invaded it. But most of the post-invasion deaths were the result of different sects fighting and killing each other. It wasn’t even a simple case of Sunni versus Shia. Different Shia sects killed each other.

So in what sense is Iraq a nation?

In what sense is Lebanon a nation? The only people Sunni Lebanese fear and hate more than the Israelis are their fellow Lebanese who are members of Hizbullah.

The moment they had the chance the component parts of Yugoslavia split up. Yugoslavia, it turns out, was not so much a nation as the Serbian Empire.

Is Indonesia actually the Javanese Empire? Ask the people of West Papua.

http://www.eco-action.org/opm/

Is it likely that the Turkish and Greek parts of Cyprus will re-unite anytime soon?

Is Sudan a nation?

Fiji is interesting. Indian migrants have, in effect, colonized the Islands.

We seem to have a limited ability to co-exist with people too different from ourselves. We seem to need time to become “accustomed to their faces”.

This may be appalling.

This may be indicative of bigotry.

But it is what it is.

In the end we have to deal with the world as it is, not as we would wish it to be or as our ideology says it ought to be. If we don’t we may share the fate of Yugoslavia or Lebanon.

Perhaps there really is a limit to the amount of diversity we can tolerate before the fabric of our society crumbles and we become like Sudan.

We can't handle the diversity with our own indig; people. We are very lucky they are peaceful people, even amongst their own tribal clans.

I had too much colesterol, not caused by weight, family history.
A stent fixed that 7 years ago and counting

Interesting theory, Hasbeen.

>>If you want to see the result of excess diversity, you have to look no further than the Roman empire.<<

It isn't immediately clear whether you are talking about Rome itself, or its Empire.

It wouldn't be a surprise, of course, to find a great deal of diversity in a region of 55 million people, that stretched from the north of England down through Europe to bits of Africa, Egypt and Turkey.

What is surprising is that in all seven volumes of Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, he fails to mention "excess diversity" even once.

He does point the finger in a couple of other interesting directions, though.

"...we may hear without surprise or scandal that the introduction, or at least the abuse of Christianity, had some influence on the decline and fall of the Roman empire. The clergy successfully preached the doctrines of patience and pusillanimity; the active virtues of society were discouraged; and the last remains of military spirit were buried in the cloister"

Is that the sort of diversity you had in mind, Hasbeen? I guess it qualifies, in an odd sort of way.

Gibbon was more concerned that all the good life had gone to their heads. Or other parts.

"The refinements of life corrupt while they polish the intercourse of the sexes. The gross appetite of love becomes most dangerous when it is elevated, or rather, indeed, disguised by sentimental passion. The elegance of dress, of motion, and of manners gives a lustre to beauty, and inflames the senses through the imagination. Luxurious entertainments, midnight dances, and licentious spectacles, present at once temptation and opportunity to female frailty"

He contrasts this with the life of the Hausfrau:

"From such dangers the unpolished wives of the barbarians were secured by poverty, solitude, and the painful cares of a domestic life. The German huts, open on every side to the eye of indiscretion or jealousy, were a better safeguard of conjugal fidelity than the walls, the bolts, and the eunuchs of a persian harem."

Perhaps they didn't diversify enough, those Romans?

You touched on two topics that are close to my heart: diversity and Cholestrol (i have high LDL as well:)).

My 2 cents: its really about how we manage diversity. I travelled long enough to different parts of the world and observed how different countries managed diversity. I think a good diveristy is a by product of making all groups of different backgrounds, beliefs, income, etc,... come together under one umbrella and contribute to what makes a good citizen (in our case: what makes a good Australian). Its a science of culture transformation on a large scale.

The label 'bad diversity' should be a temporary phase of realising that we have a problem that needs to be managed. Continuing to label Australian diversity as a 'bad diversity' is another way of saying : we can't manage it or we don't want to manage it. Just like the Cholestrol analysis by Steven and pericles.

Boaz, I watched you turn almost every thread (including weather and global warming topics) into a 'wack a mossie' discussion.

Peace,

Pericles, I can't help it if those blokes were a bit slow, & could not see the wood for the trees. I suppose I should have shared my amazing analytical ability with them.

Still I'm sure of my "facts". Lets face it, if the general yells charge, & half the army don't speak the language, & retreat, you're sure not going to win many battles, now are you?