diversity-affirming Manhattan : diversity-denying Auschwitz

Adolf Hitler sought an antidote to a world seeming moving to the model of 'impure' Manhattan by 'hedging Germany's best assets', as he saw them.

So he devoted ever more of Germany's and Europe's scarce wartime resources to its homogenous and fit (pure Aryan) population by denying those resources to members of its population that he considered heterogeneous, impure and unfit.

Essentially, in a time of crisis, he decided to 'hedge his assets' by draining the gene pool nearly bone dry --- a move to greater conformity and homogeneity that was very common in every nation during wartime.

Hitler's murderous methods were unique, even among the fascists, but his underlying aims were widely popular worldwide in the early 1940s.

In response, Dr Henry Dawson back in wartime Manhattan, offered up an antidote to the views held by Hitler and most other middle class people worldwide.

In essence, he wanted to see that the Allies 'hedge their risks' by protecting every single person in their existing gene pool and by bringing all peoples and all ideas, no matter how out of left field, inside the Allies' war-winning Big Tent.

Hitler, thinking we could know in advance all the solutions to any future problems, slimmed down the existing gene pool to just the 'right' answers and discarded all the rest, the 'incorrect' answers.

Dawson wasn't sure we could ever know any correct solutions to future problems and so decided it was best if we kept all the answers in the existing gene pool, because one never knew when an answer long thought to be hopelessly incorrect, in fact turned out to be an absolute humanity-saver.

Today, as we face an even bigger global crisis than even WWII, we must ponder whose approach is best for us now -- Hitler's or Dawson's .....