and, no - the abolition of cultural or religious or racial identity would not make us all the same, but would rather give us the freedom to define ourselves as individuals, against the conforming forces of identity politics.

i've been over this before: this idea that having a bunch of different representatives from a bunch of different religious groups is reflective of a diversity of opinion is laughable. there are few institutions that stamp out independent thought as effectively as christianity and islam do; you walk into a mosque, and everybody thinks the same way, dresses the same way, acts the same way and says the same things, in response to a wide variety of questions - this is the opposite of a diversity of thought, and if you want to increase a diversity of thought, you don't increase their numbers, but break up their system. this panel of religious representatives is reflective of a conformity of thought, rather than a diversity of it.

if we want actual diversity, and actual independence of thought, and actual critical thinking, then we must fight against the conforming and dulling intellectual effects of religion at every turn.

so, it would follow that a world free of cultural and ethnic identity would be an algorithm to maximize diversity, not one to stifle it - and that this insistence on maintaining cultural and ethnic identity is the actual retarding force in normalizing critical thinking.