Genetic Diversity and Liberal Positivisim

A recent study by Harvard professor Robert Putnam is gaining attention from the press. His study addressed the effect of genetic diversity on society as a whole. The study surveyed about 30,000 individuals asking them about such things as their level of trust in neighbors, police, and government officials; how they spent their own leisure time; how often they voted in public elections; their level of participation in civic organizations and other such indicators.

The finding indicated that genetic diversity is inversely related to civic health. As the Boston Globe put it "The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings...the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings."

After decades of propaganda and positive-think touting the virtues and benefits (especially the academic benefits) of genetic diversity the liberal mind is being challenged by actual data. This study strikes at one of the central questions of human life, the question of "how can we live in harmony (as united people) in the face of so much difference (genetic and ethnic diversity)?" With almost our entire attention focused on an increase of diversity simply for diversities sake, we overlook the far more fundamental issue of what will hold us together? An increase in difference cannot possible lead to a healthy society without a clearly defined and universally embraced unifying ideology.

The unification sought be the liberal mind seems to be found in the political and intellectual spheres. They seek a political system that will institutionalize the "unifying" ideal of increasing genetic diversity while forcing academics to walk in lock-step with propagandistic opinions that support this ideal. Even Professor Putnam, a liberal-minded supporter of diversity, concludes his study with a profound example of anti-scientific positive-think when he says that "[these social trends] have been socially constructed, and can be socially reconstructed". Apparently, despite the evidence, Professor Putnam clings to the notion that there must be a way to bow down to the god of genetic diversity without consequence.

The Christian church has held the answer to this dillema for millenia. The church is united by the Spirit of God, is uniform (united and non-diverse) in what it believes intellectually; how it behaves morally; and even genetically since we are all made in the image of God. It is diverse (non-uniform) in irrelevant genetic ways and in terms of function for God has given his gifts to men as he has choosen. Putnams study just recently discovered this to be true. In his study he found that the Evangelical Mega-Churches had the most healthy of civic lives and sees them as something of a model for political change. Good luck Professor Putnam - you'll need it to grow a church without Christ.