Every time I read one of your essays, I walk away a little bit smarter. So thank you for that, Alice!
As everything does, this once again reminds me of the Caribbean, where also people of many different ethnicities were thrown together, usually not because they chose to live on a particular island, but because that's where they were shipped (as political prisoners, indentured servants, or enslaved people). Similarly here, smaller islands that house more ethnicities seem (at least by my observation) to be more trusting and welcoming of outsiders, and less corrupt.
Very interesting. As I was reading it, I was thinking of the forced relocation programs they're implementing in Denmark, where they basically force immigrants to live in less immigrant-concentrated neighborhoods, in many cases tearing down and rebuilding whole areas.
Oscar, you have a track record of understanding my subtext.
I’m not endorsing the Danish programme, it’s clearly extremely controversial, and contradicts human rights treatise. I am yet to see an empirical analysis of its effects on earnings, trust and social solidarity.
This is about a national integration program for Nigerian college students. Tldr - after the program participants identified more with being Nigerian but also identified more with their ethnicity.
Counter-argument: people with different social norms living together will inevitably lead to more rules and thus less freedom. These social norms are usually unspoken.
Imagine a culturally homogenous community where everybody understands that you do not leave thrash on your porch overnight. But 1 in 200 times, life happens and you do. And people are okay with that. The norm is to don't do it but also don't be anal about enforcing it.
So new people arrive whose culture is so that they do leave thrash on the porch every night.
Then the HOA has no choice but to make a rule against it and enforce all the time - no 1 in 200 exception. Blam, you are suddenly less free.
I have seen this happen. 10 years the Vienna subway had a sign forbidding "immoderate" alcohol drinking. There was a tacit understanding that in this culture everybody agrees what is immoderate, one after-work beer fine, but don't do a binge drinking party on the subway. Then we got more diverse, some people argued about what is "immoderate", and now it categorically forbids all alcohol.
What happens if 20% of my neighbours find it normal to cook curry with open windows every day? We will not like the smell and it will inevitably lead to Smell Police AND then locals will also get into trouble with their traditional apple tart smells when baking with open windows even though locals usually like that smell and would never complain.
Then we have the immigrants whose cultural norms are in some way stricter than ours. Who complain about the smell of pork, of people having a beer in public, might even want the pub close to the mosque closed down. This again makes one feel less free.
Recently a Danish friend of mine told me their kindergarten took pork off the menu. Why, why not let them choose from different menus? Apparently it was cheaper this way and they had to find a menu that offends no one. But the Danish were kind of offended - some very traditional dishes were offed.
I am not saying no immigration, but the classic Chinatown stuff was a good idea for these reasons. Separating people with different cultural norms leads to not needing many strict rules because people just know how to behave in their own neighborhood.
Another thing is that a patchwork of communities is more beautiful than everybody turning into uniform Globish.
And when a community has their own cultural identity, they also own the public space instead of buttoning up at home. Chinatowns were like that - street festivals and all. Suppose the street festival involves alcohol. Suppose there is a mosque on the street. See the problem?
I also note that all that intermarriage is going to lead to superior resistance to infectious diseases among the intermixed populations, too. Viva la HLA diversity!
Every time I read one of your essays, I walk away a little bit smarter. So thank you for that, Alice!
As everything does, this once again reminds me of the Caribbean, where also people of many different ethnicities were thrown together, usually not because they chose to live on a particular island, but because that's where they were shipped (as political prisoners, indentured servants, or enslaved people). Similarly here, smaller islands that house more ethnicities seem (at least by my observation) to be more trusting and welcoming of outsiders, and less corrupt.
Very interesting. As I was reading it, I was thinking of the forced relocation programs they're implementing in Denmark, where they basically force immigrants to live in less immigrant-concentrated neighborhoods, in many cases tearing down and rebuilding whole areas.
Oscar, you have a track record of understanding my subtext.
I’m not endorsing the Danish programme, it’s clearly extremely controversial, and contradicts human rights treatise. I am yet to see an empirical analysis of its effects on earnings, trust and social solidarity.
https://voxdev.org/topic/institutions-political-economy/promoting-national-integration-nigeria
This is about a national integration program for Nigerian college students. Tldr - after the program participants identified more with being Nigerian but also identified more with their ethnicity.
Counter-argument: people with different social norms living together will inevitably lead to more rules and thus less freedom. These social norms are usually unspoken.
Imagine a culturally homogenous community where everybody understands that you do not leave thrash on your porch overnight. But 1 in 200 times, life happens and you do. And people are okay with that. The norm is to don't do it but also don't be anal about enforcing it.
So new people arrive whose culture is so that they do leave thrash on the porch every night.
Then the HOA has no choice but to make a rule against it and enforce all the time - no 1 in 200 exception. Blam, you are suddenly less free.
I have seen this happen. 10 years the Vienna subway had a sign forbidding "immoderate" alcohol drinking. There was a tacit understanding that in this culture everybody agrees what is immoderate, one after-work beer fine, but don't do a binge drinking party on the subway. Then we got more diverse, some people argued about what is "immoderate", and now it categorically forbids all alcohol.
What happens if 20% of my neighbours find it normal to cook curry with open windows every day? We will not like the smell and it will inevitably lead to Smell Police AND then locals will also get into trouble with their traditional apple tart smells when baking with open windows even though locals usually like that smell and would never complain.
Then we have the immigrants whose cultural norms are in some way stricter than ours. Who complain about the smell of pork, of people having a beer in public, might even want the pub close to the mosque closed down. This again makes one feel less free.
Recently a Danish friend of mine told me their kindergarten took pork off the menu. Why, why not let them choose from different menus? Apparently it was cheaper this way and they had to find a menu that offends no one. But the Danish were kind of offended - some very traditional dishes were offed.
I am not saying no immigration, but the classic Chinatown stuff was a good idea for these reasons. Separating people with different cultural norms leads to not needing many strict rules because people just know how to behave in their own neighborhood.
Another thing is that a patchwork of communities is more beautiful than everybody turning into uniform Globish.
And when a community has their own cultural identity, they also own the public space instead of buttoning up at home. Chinatowns were like that - street festivals and all. Suppose the street festival involves alcohol. Suppose there is a mosque on the street. See the problem?
I also note that all that intermarriage is going to lead to superior resistance to infectious diseases among the intermixed populations, too. Viva la HLA diversity!
Does the type of farming in village influence how well villagers assimilate to the new multi-ethnic Indonesia culture? For example, rice vs wheat.