Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No, total immigration matters. Human progress is always subject to the law large numbers. Human change can be subject to the law of large numbers, but nothing necessitates any particular change being towards progress. > Skilled polish engineers don't want to be the only polish person in the entire country. They want food, culture, community that reminds them of home. Even as they assimilate. That's why the American…
> Human change can be subject to the law of large numbers, but nothing necessitates any particular change being towards progress. The same can be said of the "Great Man Theory" (or its adaptation by selecting immigrants based on some selected set of skills). You don't know that you're making society better, you're just selecting for a certain set of skills. > The American melting pot works well (or worked well) becau…
You got it backwards. This is BASED on the "cultural differences amongst all of the original colonists (religious, language, political, and country of origin)". That was what made the place have no "prior historically established dominant ethnicity or culture the kind other nations have had going for millenia".
>That's before you even consider the stark differences in culture between the Native Americans and the European colonist.
Those would be relevant for explaining the "American melting pot", if the latter wasn't established after erasing both their culture and, to a large degree, them.