“Diversity is our strength” makes sense only if expectations of — and demands for — agreement and unity are low.

This more than implies limited government. Indeed, the more diverse a population, the steeper will be the diminishing returns to government growth. Political hormesis becomes quite pronounced when cultures differentiate in close proximity.

Droll, it is, then, that the people who make the most public fuss about “diversity” today seem most united in insisting upon increases in the size and scope of government.

Precisely the wrong lesson to draw.

Indeed, any society increasing in both cultural diversity and government scope sets itself up for a major disintegration, either in a war of all against all, financial crack-up and civil unrest, or, most likely of all, tyranny.

Though this thesis is very old — it was a major conjecture (amounting to a central theory) of classical liberal social science in the 19th century — modern social sciences (social psychology, sociology and anthropology) have revived the notion pretty strongly in recent times, though I know of no consensus or unified approach as was present 150 years ago. (The dominance of cultural Marxist ideology prevents that.)

So, my progressive friends, you have a choice: extensive state controls and cultural homogeneity or diversity and limited government. One or the other . . . or accept a spectacular crisis — which your policies are now inducing.

It seems to me that the prime reason for the increasing political tension of our time is indeed the flowering of this basic entelechy — that is, the wedding of diversity to government growth.

What progressives do not realize is that their shotgun marriage of social looseness and strong, centralized government, is setting up today’s “conservatives” for the role of tomorrow’s big government “progressivism” . . . and libertarians to play the naturally antagonistic role of cosmopolitan universalists.

The coming realignment will shock the world. And it may happen fast, as legitimation crises are wont to prove: await the dissolution cascade.

For my part, one of the reasons I became enamored of classical liberal policy and libertarian principle, oh so many years ago, was my preference for diversity.