Monday, October 12, 2009

The Nature of Diversity

In the modern age we receive all sorts of blessings from diversity. While jews teach us to be objective in stories like Atlas Shrugged and Firefly, the Japanese supply us stories that teach us of values and heart, such as Code Geass and Nanoha. With the power supplied by jewish ideas and the purpose ascribed from Japanese ideas, we take the concepts learned from white games such as Heroes 5 or Magic and use them to transform power into results. Diversity isn't just derived from genetics though: just watch Harry Potter in a room air-conditioned by German science, with French made food to observe the power of Culture. Diversity is a valuable resource, and this is to be expected. After all, evolution itself is powered through diversity. Multi-cellular life, and sexual reproduction, the most important milestones in evolution's history, were both designed only to increase diversity.

So, knowing that diversity is a valuable resource, we must next ask just what is diversity and where does it come from. Diversity is not some mineral one can pull up from the earth, nor is it data which can be transmitted freely. It is a enumeration of modes of operation. IE, a diverse AI is one that can change tactics fluidly and come at a player from a multitude of directions. Similarly, if we as humans seek to be a diverse species we must be able to approach a given issue from a multitude of directions. The concept is not difficult- In a game of Megaman, each boss is weak against one weapon and will almost certainly lose if that weapon is used against him. As such sticking to your most powerful weapon will almost certainly lead to defeat, whilst randomly pounding him with a variety of weapons, then letting the one weapon that actually works handle the rest, (even if that weapon is by all standard measurements pathetic) is a far superior tactic. So, as to where it comes from- Genotypes and/or Phenotypes. By definition. It can be expected that it will be impossible to predict all important events over the next 100 years. As such, the only way to have a ideal society built around handling whatever event chain does occur, is to have a ideal society pre-built for each possible time-line. So we back off again, toward the question of just what makes a society.

The answer here is that a society is built upon people living their way of life based on their philosophy. It is to be expected, a computer program that never runs may as well not exist. As such, in order to have the program, one must supply it with the necessary CPU cycles. In the case of societies, it means that the people in it must have control over where they spend their money, how they do their work, how they treat their criminals- IE their government. Diversity is only born from distributing power to multiple groups, not by holding power over multiple different groups. If a white, a black and a jew are forced to work together, they will each have their own interpretation of how the work should get done. As a result, they must come up with a new methodology. Note- A new methodology. Where once the same work would've been achieved in 3 different manners, it will now be completed in one particular manner, IE in a manner that is a compromise between the white, jew and black. This principle extends to national issues- IE if you start with a white, asian, jew, and a criminal X you will find the asian wants criminal punished, that the victim may enjoy having final justice over the perpetrator, the white simply wants to make sure he isn't the next victim, and the jew will want to overlook the crime, and pay the price of having criminals rather than hurting mr. X. Each of these approaches has their merits, and within their own nations would've been implemented into multiple competing systems. However, together the asian will insist that the criminal be punished and the jew will insist he get let off. In the end the criminal will be tortured (for instance, put into a jail cell where his "fellow" inmates will then rape and beat him) (thus making him less viable for civilian activity and more reliant on crime as a way of life) and then released back into the public (with maybe a short delay in order to placate the white.) The asian will not have his justice, the white will not have his safety, nor will the jew get his warmth and love. NO-ONE wins.

It is not unexpected, that if you place two groups in one sphere, there will be one group after a period of time. Genotypes will be weeded out through interbreeding, or by one group out competing the other. Phenotypes will be similarly conglomerated through the natural human processes of tribalism and conformism. (Humans are naturally opposed on an emotional level to anyone who disagrees with them. For similar reasons we naturally fear going against societal norms or holding beliefs that no-one else is willing to recognize.) So one must ask, how we obtained the diversity we enjoy today in the first place. The answer turns out to be physical barriers. Blacks exist because of the Sahara. Asians exist because of the Himalayas . British and Germans have a separate existence because of the English Channel, and other environmental factors. For every genotype or phenotype their is some physical barrier that separates them. Of course with modern technology, these barriers are virtually moot. Those that aren't (such as African disease barriers that whites cannot go through.) will be overturned as technology improves. As such we are steadily moving into 1 shared sphere of influence.

In order to hold onto our cherished diversity, it is thus necessary to create new virtual barriers in lieu of the old ones. It is to be expected that we do not want to overturn the very benefits that we receive from diversity, by cutting off trade, or taking other economic action or by cutting off information flow between groups. That would be like trying to stop global warming by reducing carbon emissions. As such it is better to preserve the barriers we can preserve- IE the governmental ones. Controlling immigration and not giving votes to foreigners is the most obvious application thereof. However, a less obvious one is this- That once two cultures come into conflict, there are only two options: Eliminate one culture or end the conflict. Understand this, that conflict is not only carried out through war. People constantly try to destroy each-other through economics, politics or even sheer reproduction. To end the conflict, each of these issues must also be addressed. Splitting the two groups into two governments, is the most viable answer that addresses these issues- Economics is pacified, since services must be accomplished by the group within its own nation, and since the nation gets a monopoly on its own land and resources. Politics is handled since the voters of one nation cannot effect the citizens of the other nation. Reproduction is settled, since the nations are mono-genetic and mono-phenotic. That said, it is to be expected that between a random X and Y either X will be significantly larger than Y or the reverse. As such, when two nations are split, this almost always means that one small nation is succeeding from the larger whole.

It is to be expected that even with careful border control and political rules, foreign influences will penetrate any group. Since these existences are all geometric (or, another way to put it, is that any non-geometric process will quickly be swamped by exterior forces, only geometric existences can be seen on a four dimensional stage. Anything else, no matter how large in the third dimension, is too small for the naked mind.) the rate of expansion will determine group size in the end. What this means is that the only way to sustain a perpetually diverse environment, the people within the environment must be periodically sorted into their respective groups. The only viable way to achieve this is a right to succession. Larger groups must not be allowed to use force to overpower smaller groups that wish only to be left alone- Even if the smaller group resides within the territory of the larger group. So long as the physical difficulties of supplying the smaller group their required land, resources and military defense can be addressed, nations should slide to their smallest available size.

No comments:

Post a Comment