Comments on: Maywood, 96.4% Diverse /2010/06/23/maywood-96-4-diverse/ Politics + Technology = Nonsense at the Speed of Light Tue, 01 Sep 2026 03:05:10 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.0.22 By: teacher.paris /2010/06/23/maywood-96-4-diverse/#comment-3939 Mon, 05 Jul 2010 18:03:31 +0000 /2010/06/23/maywood-96-4-diverse/#comment-3939 Is Mangan’s blocked again?

]]> By: ic1male /2010/06/23/maywood-96-4-diverse/#comment-3938 Sun, 04 Jul 2010 22:25:44 +0000 /2010/06/23/maywood-96-4-diverse/#comment-3938 2.8% white, thats scary! When will the majority awake?

]]> By: Anonymous /2010/06/23/maywood-96-4-diverse/#comment-3931 Wed, 30 Jun 2010 02:28:16 +0000 /2010/06/23/maywood-96-4-diverse/#comment-3931 Great stuff Daybreaker.

I forgot to mention ‘enrichment’ in my unified theory.

How does enrichment of a locale equate to its being colourful?

Whats a true believer multicultist to do?

]]> By: Anonymous /2010/06/23/maywood-96-4-diverse/#comment-3930 Tue, 29 Jun 2010 09:46:52 +0000 /2010/06/23/maywood-96-4-diverse/#comment-3930 The source of “diverse” is definite: it’s from the United States Supreme Court. When the Court made “diversity” a useful legal weapon, it was suddenly of wide interest. Before that, nobody cared.

These words are weapons. Their history and use should always be seen in that light.

– Daybreaker

]]> By: Anonymous /2010/06/23/maywood-96-4-diverse/#comment-3929 Tue, 29 Jun 2010 04:04:31 +0000 /2010/06/23/maywood-96-4-diverse/#comment-3929 Test yourself: if the future is sold as brilliantly diverse, vibrant, full of colorful urban culture and against hate…

* Specifically, who wins and who loses?

* Who is being euphemized, magnified and flattered, and who is implicitly being rendered obscene (literally: “off-scene”)?

* Who made up this glowing, deceptive vocabulary and repeated it endlessly in the mass media? (Mega-bonus points for having the scholarship to back up your contention. I can’t, I’m just wondering.)

– Daybreaker

]]>