Japanese guy puts it well
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (61)
sorted by:
The basic problem is not ideology. It is race.
Japan is 99% racially homogenous.
"Japan never had a civil war because it's racially homogeneous, so there wouldn't be any division in the country"
That's what you basically just said with that idiotic statement.
Since Europe is filed with white people, and Africa is filled with black people, and Central America prior to 1492 was filled with Mezo Americans, I'm sure there wasn't any division there either!
TIL the Sengoku Jidai is not real. Or the Genpei War. Or the Onin War. Or the Boshin War. No, Japan totally hasnt fought almost as many civil wars as it has external ones.
But then again, that probably applies to most nations. Maybe Europe had more external than internal wars, but that would be because they are so packed in that they are going to be beating on each other over issues instead of themselves.
Maybe this weird racialism is an American disease of the mind. I genuinely think it comes from Anglo Supremacism where the English smugness mixed with misunderstanding the value of Capitalism, created a pseudo-science of innate superiority in the minds of English decedents; while the American continent itself was heavily ethnically diverse. Perhaps living in an ethnically mixed society has given some Americans a disease of the mind where they think everything would work out if everyone kind of generally looked the same.
You know, like Liberia.
That was basically the whole thought process.
So the Irish have never fully integrated? What about the Scandanavians? How about the Germans? Maybe the Japanese?
While immigrant populations take some aspects of their homeland into their new country, they tend to integrate (as can be seen by the fact that 3rd generation immigrants do not speak their grandparent's language). Even if some of those groups live in isolated communities (as the Germans once did) they do not see their new country as a place for exploitation for their own tribal benefit, but a place where they can live their own lives better.
Or, perhaps you are going to tell me as a 7th generation Lithuanian immigrant, I'm actually just working to dominate America for the inevitable Lithuanian take over.
GamersLithuanians Rise UP!Or at least, I think it might be Lithuania, because no one fucking remembers and we consider ourselves American.
You literally just made the point we were saying, diversity just creates division that people can exploit. Also India is not homogenous. Their caste system made it so they practically created entire new races after thousands of years of only marrying within their own caste and having their own culture and identity within that caste and heritage is passed from generation to generation . And you can see physical differences between them too. Also the politically incorrect thing to say is that not all races are equal.
Also do you think values is enough to make someone so loyal to their country they would die for it like the Japanese did before with their kamikaze attacks?
India pre-divide was NOT racially homogenous.
India is made up of dozens of racial groups, divided by race and by caste.
They are constantly at each other's throats and the country is absolutely destroyed by the divisions that creates.
Clearly, you have never been to india nor ever opened a book on the subject.
India is the classic diversity basketcase.
You're missing the fact India still has a social caste system and Northern Indians look down on the Southern Indians and consider them akin to niggers in same sense people called the Irish niggers.
60 million people in America don't speak English as their primary language at home.
Truth.
That's why I've called it: Diversity vs Dissimilarity
Literally: "A house divided against itself cannot stand".
Diversity is necessary in most systems to a small degree because total homogeneity is typically disastrous long term. Any system that is varied is capable of adapting from a decentralized method.
A homogeneous system can only adapt through a coordinated command structure; and normally it takes a significant amount of information before a decision is made to adapt the system as a whole. This is why centralized systems are inherently less efficient than decentralized ones.
Dissimilarity, however, is not workable in any system. It is the destruction of that system. A system where parts are wholly unconnected or not in communication only segregates that system into smaller parts. The best case scenario is that a diverse system responds to dissimilarity by breaking off the dissimilar portion and continuing on as two parallel and incompatible systems. The worst case scenario is that the homogeneous system has an internal dissimilarity that it can't compensate against, and it shatters into dozens of smaller and totally dissimilar parallel systems.
A dissimilar system is inherently logically inconsistent and incommunicable.
Although what I'm saying is vague, it's true in general to basically any system. You can apply it to economies, immune systems, species, sexual reproduction, politics, or even a team workflow.
Homogeneity is inefficient. Diversity is uncontrollable. Dissimilarity is destructive.