Diversity paradox: Difference between revisions

Diversity paradox (view source)

39 bytes added , 16 February 2023

no edit summary

82,891

edits

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 Neoliberalism sanctifies diversity, but counsels ''homogeneity''. It is, ultimately, [[entropy|entropic]]: once a diverse perspective is identified, it can be absorbed and assimilated (''appropriated''?) into a global cultural corpus in which everyone is included. There is no longer any diversity.
-To encourage ongoing, ''new''  diversity — a forward-looking, open-minded evolution of cultural perspectives, (''is'' that what we want? Historicists might say no?) Then we have to somehow allow people to form and protect in-groups. We have to permit ''exclusivity''. (In fact we do this a lot in other contexts: families, businesses, football teams etc)
+Encouraging ongoing, ''new''  diversity — a forward-looking, open-minded evolution of cultural perspectives, (''is'' that what we want? Historicists might say no?) implies somehow letting people tform and protect their own in-groups. ''Exclusivity'' cannot be immoral. (In fact this happens a lot in other contexts: families, businesses, nations, football teams etc. Humans do this naturally.)
 Are “Inclusivity” and “cultural appropriation” different ways of saying the same thing?