The Downside of Diversity


by Ronald J. Gardner

Copyright 2009, All Rights Reserved

(See also, Race & Crime in Iowa, with this same Title, for the PDF format) 

Introductory comments

“Diversity” is destructive of anything, even destructive of a human organization. There are some, and rarely occasionally, good results in a diverse circumstance, but there is also rarely discussed the “downside,” or the evils, the detriments, of that mixture of ideas, peoples, or cultures. For a people to be happy, Diversity must be avoided at all costs, and here is one way to help resolve the necessary conflict of Your Existing And Productive Harmony with Their Induced And Destructive Dis-Harmony.

First presented here is the initiating problem of Diversity in a small town unaccustomed to such multiplicity; then the text of a little sheet of paper distributed by “persons unknown,” regarding “The Downside of Diversity” and its effects upon the local population; and last is a lightly edited local newspaper article about the problem and this flier’s supposed (un)welcome. This description of the negative side of Diversity may not set well with the Reader, but then, this same inter-racial crime and public health problem did not set will with the citizens of this town, either. It all had much to do with “the fabric of society,” and what better way to convey this than to compare it to a literal threads and fabric of clothing.


A people’s society, regardless of their racial, political, or economic content, is like a woven fabric. Individuals can be compared to a “thread” of material, and when enough threads can be woven together, out of which the “clothing” of a society could be fashioned and then woven together; these combined and co-ordinated materials can then become the “social fabric,” represented by their “social and/or religious body,” as well as a “body politic.” Use the right kind of material for thread, and it obtains a good weave; apply a correct assembly of fabric-shapes, and it will result in an attractive garment, capable of withstanding the ordinary stresses and rigors of wearing, and laundry washing, etc. Some fabrics are more compatible with other fabrics, some colors go well with other colors; and that is plainly known to the women who make their own dresses.

However, using improper material, whether as the wrong content, wrong color, wrong shape, etc., results in a woven fabric that will not be desirable. No one who makes cloth would mix up threads such as cotton, rayon, nylon, polyester, silk, wool, denim, and multitudes of these varied materials and colors into a common fabric, nor would they assemble together these mis-matched fabrics for clothing, and then expect to wear it proudly in public. The many different fabrics would shrink and pull at different ways, and the clothing would look awful.

The same is with that same “fabric of society.” Imagine then, if some of these “threads,” or individuals, were to be of an odd or incompatible color, and then introduced among the other woven fabric threads. What would be the result, especially if enough of these odd colors, odd threads, were in the fabric? Or worse, if a “thread” were dipped into an acid and woven in, what hurtful results could be expected? Easy it is to see, how individuals, and peoples, are very similar to those threads and fabrics.

Certain racial or cultural diversities are like a mis-match of threads and fabrics; and as often, acidic. Such a mixed societal clothing will almost always not look good, nor function as desired. Diversity, therefore, is usually destructive of all society, and those who promote “diversity” either know what evils it brings, or they soon will know it to their everlasting lament.

If diversity arrives at the Reader’s societal neighborhood doorstep, something should be done about it, and quickly, to avoid that “diversity” ruining the happiness and contentment of that Reader’s or that peoples’ life and lifestyle. Below is an example of how racial and cultural diversity caused one small town an immense amount of trouble; and, how anyone can help others recognize a specific problem plaguing their city or town, whether it be crime, race, or whatever, and then encourage others to do something about it. It also is an example of how “telling the truth is to tell a lie” - or so the local and national “Media” would have it understood by their ignorant readers and viewers.


After a sudden and shocking increase in violent crime in a little Mid-West town of a mere 50K people, in a State and a town both made up of 90% White people, most of that crime was attributed directly or indirectly to a generically labeled “Black people from (the south side of) Chicago,” many of whom were on “welfare” and/or members of large negro gangs from the Big Shoulders City and other large cities. The local, long-established blacks were not the problem; it was the “newly arriving black people,” who continued in their violent and criminal Big City lifestyle in this Small Town where such conduct and crime was previously rare. These new negroes were tearing at the “fabric of society,” in many ways, and many people decided something had to be done about it.

(More details describing these events about the increase of crime in Ames, Iowa, are found on this Website’s “Race and Crime in Iowa” webpage, and opening the PDF Book titled “You be good - or, You be gone: The “Content of their Character,” More readily revealed,” and then scrolling down to the Introductory comments from pages 17 to 30. Eventually, someone will see how “the government” and its “agencies” could be liable for “damages” caused by an improper introduction and compelled weaving into the social fabric a violent, evil-minded people among the peaceful, good-minded people, and how one or the other will bring either or both criminal or litigious havoc upon those “Public & Private Officials”).

These negroes were brought here, if not also in great part induced, by the US Government’s Housing and Urban Development Department with their “HUD” housing welfare program, and assisted by the local City’s Housing Department (essentially a HUD extension), to both distribute big city gang members farther apart from their “homies,” and also help occupy the over-abundance of local rental apartments and other housing, caused by an unfortunate Planning error which allowed these rental units to be excessively constructed when no realistic expectation of occupants existed. While “diversity” was the vaguely hidden and underlying Good-Intention of this “program,” it succeeded in raising the percentages of “people of color” into this small town, only to have at the same time, and immediately, the crime rate increase far more in percentages than the quantity of newly arriving negroes who then accomplish those crimes.

And the City Gov’t and other local Liberal Sucklings, who sought (and were still seeking) to continue to forcibly introduce similar negroes into this overwhelmingly White city, did not help to solve the problem they created; rather, they helped make it worse by establishing an “inclusiveness task force” comprised of similarly-minded liberal citizens, assigned the task of searching for ways to have such racial interlopers both increase in number, and to have them feel “more inclusive” in the community which in the overwhelming majority did not want them in the first place, and chaffed at being told the Whites must tolerate, and do more for the blacks.

It was plainly a “Black & White issue,” with Hispanics, Asians, etc., having little to nothing to do with it. It was also obvious this was a big problem facing the honest citizens.


Someone in this small town decided to more precisely inform the local citizenry of this peril (as seen in the sample text below, “The Downside of Diversity”), which was fast approaching them and their wives, daughters, sisters, homes and businesses, et al.  It involved the fairly anonymous activity of composing and printing small 8”x5”, half-sheets of printed paper, a “flier,” describing the Problem, suggesting a Solution, and then distributing these about town.

So this Someone did some research in to public statistics, and found, among so much detail, enough to put out a little flier, describing these problems in crime, public health, and such, and this flier was somehow(!) placed onto many automobile windshields, about 200 fliers distributed at a time, which was not many, really, compared to the need. Anonymously, at least for a while, many of these little fliers appeared at different places all around town, for many months, in many different style and content formats. Hundreds and hundreds of them, here, there, everywhere.

And it got a response. Big Time. These were condemned in unfounded if not also ignorant utterances of the City Council and local, as-always liberal-biased newspapers; but rarely was heard any individuals outside of that `small circle of friends’ complaining about the content or intent, except for the usual “fellow travelers” among the social-engineering Liberals. Many people liked the content and approved of it, even if not publicly.

If the Reader discovers this same inter-racial, inter-cultural “diversity” problem being pushed in their own town, and if that Reader wanted to “do something about it,” they should research their own city or town’s “crime records” and “public health records,” which could be assembled and printed as a similar flier, and then quietly and quickly distributed about in various ways, to enlighten the public, who would otherwise usually obtain only the Liberal mass-media’s impulse and explanation of “the truth of the matter.”

But expect the usual response will always be: “You” say something about This, and “They” will think and then say you said something about That, and then attack you for That. Typical foolishness.

Notice, if the Reader will, in the below text example, how carefully the topic of “diversity” in general is almost given a backhanded slap of supposed “support,”  while in fact condemning the conduct, not the race, of the troublemakers. This text could easily be fitted into one of those 5”x8” fliers, with two of this text on a sheet. That may require some practice, but it can be done. Try it sometime.



“The Downside of Diversity”

    The talk-of-the-town lately is about “diversity”; the happy combination of inter-racial, multi-cultural and ethnic circumstances whereby everyone benefits. But rarely, almost never, is the “downside” of diversity ever mentioned. Forsaking the happy-talk, consider a silent “dark side” of that Diversity reality.

    Blacks represent about 2-3% of all Iowa, 2-3% of Ames, and 3% at Iowa State University; about 1% to 1.5% are black men. Yet when the “public safety” is considered, verifiable crime statistics show most of the reported crimes, murder, rape, robbery, burglary, etc., have black men as offenders. 25% of all Iowa prison inmates are black, and 50% nationwide. Nationally, 90% of all violent inter-racial crimes are blacks on whites. Recent serious crimes in Ames generally were by blacks, all of which does nothing to provide any reason to be “inclusive” of blacks in this overly white city and campus. It makes the Diversity agenda look bad. They need some help.

    The Ames & ISU Police Department stats will reveal that 50% of the reported rapes in Ames, and 90% at ISU, were black men on white women, even though only a fraction of that 1.5% of all black men in Ames or at ISU rape white women. (Police will admit, if you asked them, that only 1 in 4 or 5 rape victims report their attack, for fear of retaliation, public embarrassment, etc.).

    These true yet very imbalanced percentages do not help the diversity issue of introducing more blacks into Ames or ISU. With this, all statistical and unhappy personal experience shows that it is not safe for a white woman to be alone with or near black men. All this does not help Diversity or race relations.

    Nor is the downside of “public health” risks mentioned as part of “diversity,” either. Nationwide, Public Health Dept. stats show that 25% of AIDS, 22% of HIV, 42% of gonorrhea, 17% of chlamydia, and 50% of syphilis cases, are among Blacks; 50% of Black  women have one or more STD. At 3% of our population, this is not good. And yet whites seek to bring more blacks into Ames & ISU to “diversify.” Why? Have they lost their sense of public health & safety? Apparently.

    These disproportionate though true health statistics do nothing to help the diversity issue, either, and further provide more reasons for an ex-clusion of blacks, not inclusion. One must wonder if the proponents of diversity thought this through.

    The Ames public schools have about 8% black students, and yet white students and teachers suffer terribly in the presence of black students, who cannot or will not “get along” with white students. Blacks are 35-45% of “behavior incidents.” More very lop-sided yet true percentages. This does not help either.

    The blacks seem to exclude themselves while the whites seek to include them. Why? And one may also wonder about hate-crime re-interpretation. Why?

    So what is to be done about this “downside to diversity”? Shall we ignore it? At what risk, at what cost? Shall it be discussed? At risk of being accused of “racism”? Let the reader decide, and expect the improved or disproved statistics be the result. Would it be better to be more “selective” in who we bring in?

    Do not listen to people who say: “This is not so.”



An Historical Review of the Ensuing Events  

The town’s one and only local newspaper, The Ames Tribune, Online edition, very much inclined to promote liberalist views, inter-racial relationships, and cultural diversity, published a “report” of a flier discussing this same topic, as found Saturday evening, February 28th, 2009, at <>. (It might yet be found in the “Archive” portion of their Internet site; search for a Start Date of January, 2008).

No one really knows who distributed the flier, even though the reporter, with no facts in support, alleges one person’s name as "taking responsibility," which proves nothing: he saw nothing and knows nothing, merely assuming. When the named person complained to the Editor, the article was for some reason quickly removed from the webpage, but not from the Archives, oddly enough. The [edited] article reads thusly, lightly edited here in [bracketed] text:

“Author of racially charged fliers speaks out”

By Luke Jennett, Staff Writer

Published: Saturday, February 28, 2009 8:45 PM CST

An Ames man has [allegedly] taken responsibility for circulating racially charged printed fliers titled “The Downside of Diversity” around the city this week.

 Ronald J. Gardner [supposedly] said he’d distributed the fliers because The Tribune refused to print a letter to the editor encouraging Ames residents to “be more selective” about who is allowed to move into the community.

 “You want to invite more of those same kind of people here and do more of the same kind of damage to our people?” he said. “There’s nothing wrong with asking to be more selective about who we bring in.”

 Ames police received a call about the fliers between 4 and 5 p.m. Wednesday from the 100 block of Fifth Street. No report was taken. [Later, such reports indicated such act was not a crime.]

 In the flier, Gardner argues that the city’s small population of blacks (2.9 percent of Ames’ population) constitutes a threat to the health and well-being of white residents, particularly women.

 Gardner has been a presence at city meetings and was vocal about the city’s Inclusive Community Task Force. On July 9, 2008, he authored [no, he assembled] a media kit that included a video of blacks attacking whites over [i.e., during an audio recording of] Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech and a copy of the e-book “The Color of Crime,” a white nationalist[?] publication distributed by the New Century Foundation.

 Gardner expressed worry Thursday about his name being printed publicly (he did not sign his name to the fliers) for fear of recriminations [or so it was supposed], but maintained his stance against “bringing in” black residents to the city, a view he said he believes most of the city [populace] shares.

 “It’s conduct, not race,” he said. “But when the conduct of a particular race is so consistent, then it represents a cultural expression of that race, and you begin to think that maybe we’ll have to be a little bit more selective about who we bring in from that race.”

 Gardner said The Tribune has “covered up” the truth about the city’s racial problems in the past, and also expressed distaste for a photo of two women kissing carried in The Tribune on Valentine’s Day [regarding which several other Letters To The Editor also objected].

 “The purpose of the newspaper is to bend the will of the people to think things they ought not think, and accept things they ought not accept,” he said.

 Ames Mayor Ann Campbell has remarked on outbursts of racial anger[?] before, noting previous leafleting campaigns in her 2009 State of the City Address and calling them “anonymous and cowardly acts” that “represent but a small faction of our community.”[*]

[* It should be noted that for over a decade or more, a mere 3% to 5% of all registered voters in this city voted in the Council elections; meaning, the Council represents, and speaks for, only about 3% of everyone there, while the “silent majority” overwhelmingly rejects Council views.]

 “Well, needless to say, it’s a concern to have any such attitudes being disbursed,” Campbell said. “We recognize that it is free speech, but one gets concerned when free speech goes to this extreme.” [Lawful Extremism in the defense of the citizenry’s virtue is no vice.]

 Gardner’s leafleting may be a violation of city code, Campbell said, but she noted that this wasn’t, for her, the greatest concern.

 “My biggest concern is the fact that in Ames, Iowa, this is being done,” she said.

 Ames has had issues with racially charged incidents before. In November 2007, fliers using racial and gender epithets to promote candidate John Edwards over Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were left on the Iowa State University campus. [Unrelated to the named person above, but in this typically subtle manner, attaching to him by aggressive suggestion.]

 In December, printouts of a campaign button bearing the date of President Obama’s inauguration and the words “the days of the white man are numbered” were found at Hy-Vee [grocery store] in Ames, apparently lifted from a blog run by white supremacist[?] Hal Turner of New Jersey [, removed, c.2009]. Following Obama’s [presidential] win in November, someone reportedly wrote “the (racial epithet) won” in chalk on several cars along Phoenix Circle. [Yet not by the named person above; but again, in this typically subtle manner, attaching to him by that same aggressive suggestion.]