“Assimilate This!”

“Assimilate This!”

In the Star Trek movie, First Contact, Worf uttered this memorable line as he fired a phaser rifle at the Borg Collective, a species that forcibly merges humans with technology and assimilates nearly everyone it encounters. However, no one wants to be assimilated. No one wants to believe “resistance is futile.” Least of all, the intrepid Worf.

Much has been said recently about “diversity” vs “cohesion.” Programs that advocated for diversity and inclusion have been cancelled because these goals have become suspect. “Merit” is now the watchword. “Unity” is now more important than diversity. At least in some circles. And some believe providing equal opportunities means enforcing equal results.

We have made efforts to encourage cultural identity, to preserve various cultures and resist assimilation. Civil rights laws. Safe spaces. Exclusive schools. Educational vouchers. Religious instruction. The idea of a “melting pot” may soon be replaced with “America is for Americans” or “separate but equal,” depending on who’s in charge. Yet it seems neither of these approaches is productive. Catering to ideology tends to fragment society rather than unify it.

In the 50’s and 60’s, many people were struggling to be integrated, or rather, included in a larger society that disrespected or disenfranchised whole groups of people. Now, we have people arguing that they need their own spaces and programs to feel valued. The polarity of ideology has a habit of switching from time to time.

On the other hand, private schools here and elsewhere have provided ways to preserve anti-societal attitudes, teaching children that the “other” is the source of their problems. The other can be anyone – immigrants, minorities, the poor, the homeless, the deep state, the elites, the colonizers, the infidels – as long as the separatist culture can be preserved. A common enemy can unite a faction. But making everyone an enemy can destroy society.

Enter the internet. Social media and resulting algorithms have encouraged us to divide – “us vs them.” And these divisions have been amplified and driven into incoherency. Some groups in the US support belief systems that would probably torture or execute them if they lived in other countries. One group that otherwise supports “classical” education prohibited teaching Plato because of his references to gender and the nature of love.

In the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, several of us taught a course called, “Justice and the Good Society.” The text for the course was a compilation with the same title. It included writings by Plato, Aristotle, John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, John Stuart Mill, James Madison, Dr. Martin Luther King, and others. We also discussed the fifth chapter of Matthew, the famous “Sermon on the Mount.” The idea was to introduce first-year students to some of the thinking behind the formation of modern societies. We were even mentioned as a college that “made a difference” for offering such a course.

My class often discussed “merit.” Should everyone get a participation trophy, or should trophies only be awarded to high achievers? Was Aristotle right about merit? How does Jesus’ guidance to take care of “the least of these” fit with our notions of merit? Could John Stuart Mill’s idea of the greatest good for the greatest number lead to a 1984 scenario?  Can “merit” lead to a “do or die” society? How can diversity contribute to society? How do we define “merit” in the first place?

Speaking of merit and diversity, we don’t know where the next world-changing innovation might come from or who might think of it. We should all take a moment to look up the contributions of women and non-white persons to the standard of living most of us have come to enjoy. Bigotry and arrogance tempt people to judge “merit” by skin color or gender. Rationality and humility say otherwise. We shouldn’t care if the inventor of cold fusion is “a real American” or was born overseas.

Perhaps the answer is not assimilation into or expulsion from a country, but adoption of its laws and customs. In the adoption process, parents and children accept each other, acknowledging their differences, and agreeing to work together. Maintaining one’s language and culture should not be an obstacle if one agrees to adopt the country’s ways as well. The Good Society does not demand assimilation as much as it expects adoption of common aspirations.

Just as the fictional Star Fleet espouses certain ideals and principles, a good society must find ways to include diverse people without erasing their differences. We are stronger when we accept people for who they are and allow them to contribute. I believe there is inestimable value in diversity. We can’t improve ourselves or society if we crush or reject those who are not like us.