We were like that too, until the western elite believed in a concept known as the End of History, a philosophical concept suggesting that humanity's sociocultural evolution has reached its final form of government and social organization.
It does not mean events stop happening, but rather that the era of fundamental ideological struggle has concluded.
This occurred after the end of the Cold War, and is linked to the work of Francis Fukuyama, who argued the fall of the Berlin Wall marked the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.
This is fundamentally why they believe humans are an interchangeable commodity, that regardless of where they come from, or who they are, if they live here they are like us, magic soil and all that.
However, this philosophy is older than Fukuyama, and can be linked back to Hegelian philosophy, Hegel held a view that history was a linear progression of reason, and that eventually humanity would achieve a state of universal freedom and self-consciousness, effectively achieving his End of History.
Other proponents of this philosophy do not adhere to Hegel, or Fukuyama, they instead adhere to the philosophy of Alexandre Kojève.
Kojève reinterpreted Hegel, and argued that history effectively ended with the French Revolution, which established the principles that modern states simply maintain, and that they will maintain them forever.
There is a more radical version of this, that Leftists adhere to also, that can be linked back to Karl Marx.
Marx envisioned the end of history not as Fukuyama, Hegel and Kojève did, but as global communism.
For him, history was a series of class struggles that would terminate in a classless, stateless society.
Where was I going with this?
Oh yes, the push for diversity happens within a very specific, Western, liberal framework.
By incorporating all identities into the market and the democratic process, we are effectively "neutralizing" them as revolutionary threats.
However, this only works with assimilation, something the elite never push, because they believe in the End of History, and that Humans will, in the end, adhere to the ideals the elites wish to instill upon them, which denies human nature.
In this view, diversity is the final frontier of individual recognition, once the state recognizes every possible identity, the "struggle for recognition," the engine of history, is technically satisfied.
This can't work however, because the "End of History" relies on universal values, by focusing on diversity it emphasizes our differences.
This fragments the demos, making a unified state that is much harder to maintain.
And because of this, we are seeing the rise of Identity Politics as a new form of meta-ideology.
History is driven by conflict, tensions between different groups is history, however, class based and nationalist struggles, are being replaced with ethnic ones.
We are progressing toward an ancient expression of identity, one that we as humans can never shed, and the more the elites push for their End of History, the closer we come to conflict.
tangentwithtanner
yousharknotpass
snowghoul
origamiaround
areudirty
janainaart
prguitarman
