Thanks for the reply. Hm.

Some will cite high minded ideals of freedom of movement, world citizenry or the like. Some people think diversity is always a 'good'

re freedom of movement, the wikipedia page talks about the ability to move within one's own country and to enter and leave one's own country. that sounds more reasonable. they say it sometimes goes further than that, i guess that's where the borderless stuff comes from.

I guess it seems good to me for ethnic groups to be able to have a home. People can bring their different perspectives to collaboratively work towards global wellbeing without intruding in places that are someone else's home. It seems like that's part of wellbeing for each group, to be able to have a home they are secure in, where they can exist among themselves and live and develop according to their culture etc.

It also seems like people understand and support this a lot for groups considered "indigenous" but not for some other groups. I know it's more questionable with the united states canada australia etc, but the saami are not the only group in europe that needs a home. All technology is part of nature the same way hooves and woven baskets are part of nature, it doesn't make a group less indigenous because they have a different technological style.

Well I suppose this got a bit long. Some of my thoughts right now I guess. People wanting to protect their home and continuing to have a home is normal and healthy and not only compatible with but part of global friendship, prosperity, health, etc. imo. as is each having a healthy love and appreciation for their own ethnic group (pride, as in dignity and self-respect, not vanity).