Q: Curt: “So, if we want good government, diversity (without assimilation) is no

—Q: Curt: “So, if we want good government, diversity (without assimilation) is not our strength. It sounds like it weakens our country. Is that your view?”— Brian Erlich (@DailyRoaster)

Just so I’m not misunderstood or misquoted: 😉

1) Homogeneity of genetics, culture, religion in small states is the optimum because of limited divergence of interests and convergence of interests, limited power distance, clarity of legal commonality and concurrency, and preservation of incentives for redistribution that reinforces commonality of interests. Adding a monarchy as judge of last resort reduces the consequences of political failure in participatory governments.

2) Relative homogeneity of neighboring polities provides beneficial social, economic, and political competition as well as identifying both opportunities and failures in both policy and trade.

3) Relative diversity of polities in a civilization increases possibility of adaptation of each polity to the needs of the geography and demographic constitution and distribution, while further expanding the opportunity to discover beneficial opportunities and harmful failures in both policy and trade.

4) Broad diversity of polities across mankind, at least, diversity in the preference of commons produced by government, if not diversity in the rule of law, constitution, and government, increases the volume, and rate of political, economic, technological, medical, and scientific opportunity.

5) Measuring Capital vs Income to Promote Diversity that Empowers Authority: We do not ‘account’ for or genetic capital or informal capital such as knowledge, traditions, manners, ethics, morals, norms, and informal institutions of the civil society. Instead, we (modern states) only measure the balance sheet not the change in informal and capital (balance sheet) that are the cause of the possibilities for formal physical, informational, and political capital.
This is why the left prohibits accounting of individuals, families, and groups, particularly ethnic and racial groups, nor do we measure both formal and informal capital, because this information would expose with clarity the argument I’m making here.

Conclusion
All innovation that affects human lives consists of an increase the the ability to capture, transform, apply, and consume energy of every kind per capita, producing returns on time, by increasing the ratio of time to energy per capita – hence why nighttime light pollution is an accurate measure of comparative civilizational prosperity. 😉

Opportunities for discovery of innovations across the spectrum from the scientific to the economic to the social to the political do exist. Yet, all discovery of innovations in the capture, transformation, application, and consumption of energy per capita require resources and risk. And each polity favors or disfavors the opportunity costs to choose one experiment in pursuit of discovery versus another. And the more ‘coverage’ of those opportunities with the least risk, where risks by polity vary, producing a vast computation of opportunities, is the best solution for both polities, federations, civilizations, and for mankind.

So that 1,2,3,4 function as a ‘scientific’ or at least empirical, means of evolutionary computation of the optimum for all by the experimentation among all, and observed effects both positive and negative. The resulting competition between governments and peoples produeces a virtous cycle – a market for the production of good ideas and the suppression of bad ideas.

As such any variation from the above by diversity WITHIN a polity simply impedes or reverses evolutionary computation, the resulting condition of the people, the resulting political demands of the people, and the resulting conflict between the people, and the resulting generation of demand for authority given the irreconcilable differences between those peoples.

Diverisity, say, in international-trade hubs (the traditional use of ‘quarters’) may facilitate information transfer between cultures, peoples, and states. However, if and only if they are limited to those quarters, and prohibited from political participation, and even possibly prohibited from public speech. (Though that’s the extreme)

I hope this answers your question.

Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation

Reply addressees: @DailyRoaster