Nation-building in the Mideast vs Nation-maintaining in America
Afghanistan is an example of American "nation-building" abroad. Are American leaders better at "nation-maintaining" at home?
Over several decades — with no debate — American leaders engineered dramatic changes in the population. 2020 Census data show "The share of the white population fell from 63.7% in 2010 to 57.8% in 2020." (Associated Press, Aug. 12.) That's down six percentage points in one decade.
The next decade portends a faster shrinking of the white share of the population. President Joe Biden has the flow of illegal aliens over the southern border at a 21-year high. In July alone 210,000 people entered illegally; 18% tested positive for COVID-19. Check the numbers at "18 percent of migrant families leaving Border Patrol custody tested positive for Covid, document says," (NBC News, July 7).
That's just illegal immigration.
The population shift has profound effects. One is on higher education. In Newsweek two professors candidly describe what accelerating diversity is doing to higher education. Professors Ivan Marinovic of Stanford and Dorian S. Abott from the University of Chicago write:
"American universities are undergoing a profound transformation that threatens to derail their primary mission: the production and dissemination of knowledge. The new regime is titled "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion" or DEI and is enforced by a large bureaucracy of administrators."
"Nearly every decision taken on campus, from admissions, to faculty hiring, to course content, to teaching methods," Marinovic and Abbot say, "is made through the lens of DEI. This regime was imposed from the top and has never been adequately debated. In the current climate it cannot be openly debated: the emotions around DEI are so strong that self-censorship among dissenting faculty is nearly universal" ("The Diversity Problem on Campus," Newsweek, Aug. 12.)
Summarizing: Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is "enforced by a large bureaucracy of administrators." It "cannot be debated." "Self-censorship among dissenting faculty is nearly universal." "Nearly every decision" is made "hrough the lens of DEI."
In comes DEI. Out goes merit. Out goes free speech.
With U.S. demographics swiftly changing, imagine the "diversity problem" by 2030, 2040.
So, the answer to the question posed in the second sentence is: No! America's rulers aren't better at nation-maintaining at home than nation-building abroad.
Their invade-the-world/invite-the-world policies are unraveling American civilization. First step to recovery: an immigration pause, a moratorium.
SOURCES:
1) CENSUS DATA: "Census shows US is diversifying, white population shrinking," (Associated Press, Mike Schieder, August 12, 2021)
KEY QUOTE: "The share of the white population fell from 63.7% in 2010 to 57.8% in 2020, the lowest on record, driven by falling birthrates among white women compared with Hispanic and Asian women. The number of non-Hispanic white people shrank from 196 million in 2010 to 191 million."
2) JULY FIGURES ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: "18 percent of migrant families leaving Border Patrol custody tested positive for Covid, document says," NBC NEWS, July 7, 2021:
3) MARINOVIC AND ABBOT QUOTES: "The Diversity Problem on Campus," NEWSWEEK, August 12, 2021:
"American universities are undergoing a profound transformation that threatens to derail their primary mission: the production and dissemination of knowledge. The new regime is titled "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion" or DEI, and is enforced by a large bureaucracy of administrators. Nearly every decision taken on campus, from admissions, to faculty hiring, to course content, to teaching methods, is made through the lens of DEI. This regime was imposed from the top and has never been adequately debated. In the current climate it cannot be openly debated: the emotions around DEI are so strong that self-censorship among dissenting faculty is nearly universal.
"The words "diversity, equity and inclusion' sound just, and are often supported by well-intentioned people, but their effects are the opposite of noble sentiments. Most importantly, "equity" does not mean fair and equal treatment. DEI seeks to increase the representation of some groups through discrimination against members of other groups. The underlying premise of DEI is that any statistical difference between group representation on campus and national averages reflects systemic injustice and discrimination by the university itself. The magnitude of the distortions is significant: for some job searches discrimination rises to the level of implicitly or explicitly excluding applicants from certain groups.
"DEI violates the ethical and legal principle of equal treatment. It entails treating people as members of a group rather than as individuals, repeating the mistake that made possible the atrocities of the 20th century. It requires being willing to tell an applicant "I will ignore your merits and qualifications and deny you admission because you belong to the wrong group, and I have defined a more important social objective that justifies doing so." It treats persons as merely means to an end, giving primacy to a statistic over the individuality of a human being.
"DEI compromises the university's mission."...
("The Diversity Problem on Campus," NEWSWEEK, August 12, 2021)