The Pox of Multiculturalism

By Bruce Walker, AMERICAN THINKER

What the left calls “multiculturalism” is actually the systematic destruction of cultures and the replacement of these cultures by a synthetic, artificial, and meaningless global culture.  When the left talks about “diversity,” it really means the crushing of differences in thought, values, and art into a sort of baby food which neither nourishes the soul or elevates the mind.

This is because cultural differences are based on geography and exist in nations and regions rather than in the nonsensical “global” community.  Indeed, there are cultural differences within most nations of any size that reflect the differences within parts of a nation.

Canada is a good example.  Quebec decades ago insisted upon the preservation of the French language and with it French culture in that quarter of Canada.  Scotland is likewise a nation within the United Kingdom that the English allowed to retain Scottish state religion; Scottish money; Scottish judicial systems; and, over the last few decades, an independent Scottish Parliament.

America includes the cultures of the South, the Midwest, the Rocky Mountains, and so on.  People who live in those parts of America view “Washington” with about as much contempt as the Irish viewed London and the Ukrainians viewed Moscow.  The centralization of power within large nations almost always means the imposition of an imperial culture upon regions that are closer to colonies than coequal polities.

France includes the cultures of Provence and Brittany as well as the urbanized areas like Paris, and Spain includes a Basque region, whose language and culture are very different from the rest of Spain.  The Basques have proven an open and festering boil upon the Spanish nation, rather as Ireland was before it was made independent of the United Kingdom.

Preserving this sort of national culture and regional cultures requires a rejection of any sort of overriding pseudo-culture like the moronic “We Are the World” trope.  Instead, cultures grow up in nations and regions within nations to reflect the localized qualities essential to any true culture.

This is tied directly to geography.  So early Zionists, after toying with different homelands for the Jewish people, grasped that the area known as Palestine is historically the homeland of the Jewish people and that a new nation created out of that territory could protect and preserve not only Jews from persecution, but also Jewish culture.

When people hostile to that culture move into those nations and regions with an eye to diluting the indigenous culture or replacing that culture with a foreign culture, as is happening today with the Muslim invasion of Europe and, to a lesser extent, the invasion of America by Mexican and Central American peoples, then the inevitable result is both social warfare and the fueling of mutual intolerance.

Indeed, the very idea that a nation and its culture ought to be compelled to absorb alien peoples with different values, religions, and customs would once have been considered absurd.  What used to be accepted when immigrants came into America was that, as a condition of citizenship, these immigrants learn and accept the values of their new homeland and leave behind, by and large, the ways of the lands from which they came.

The geography of independent and indigenous cultures retains the virtues claimed by “multiculturalism” without its myriad flaws.  Those who wish to move to a new land with a different culture are generally free to do so, provided that they accept and adopt the culture and values of their new home.

If enough people do that, then the internal pressure within the land from which natives are emigrating to modify the culture of the land into which people are moving will become stronger and stronger, but the change will not be imposed from without, but adopted from within, and it will be based upon a competition of cultures.

This is to say that the marketplace of geographically distinct cultures provides a mechanism for naturally advancing superior cultures and for naturally constraining inferior cultures – and that this also decentralizes decisions relating to a native culture to those actually affected by changes in that culture.  This process operates without coercion or propagandizing.

Multiculturalism is an effort to destroy culture in the name of harmonizing cultures.  It is, at best, gross globalist imperialism.  It is, at worst, the Orwellian deconstruction of all societal values and beliefs.

What the left calls “multiculturalism” is actually the systematic destruction of cultures and the replacement of these cultures by a synthetic, artificial, and meaningless global culture.  When the left talks about “diversity,” it really means the crushing of differences in thought, values, and art into a sort of baby food which neither nourishes the soul or elevates the mind.

This is because cultural differences are based on geography and exist in nations and regions rather than in the nonsensical “global” community.  Indeed, there are cultural differences within most nations of any size that reflect the differences within parts of a nation.

Canada is a good example.  Quebec decades ago insisted upon the preservation of the French language and with it French culture in that quarter of Canada.  Scotland is likewise a nation within the United Kingdom that the English allowed to retain Scottish state religion; Scottish money; Scottish judicial systems; and, over the last few decades, an independent Scottish Parliament.

America includes the cultures of the South, the Midwest, the Rocky Mountains, and so on.  People who live in those parts of America view “Washington” with about as much contempt as the Irish viewed London and the Ukrainians viewed Moscow.  The centralization of power within large nations almost always means the imposition of an imperial culture upon regions that are closer to colonies than coequal polities.

France includes the cultures of Provence and Brittany as well as the urbanized areas like Paris, and Spain includes a Basque region, whose language and culture are very different from the rest of Spain.  The Basques have proven an open and festering boil upon the Spanish nation, rather as Ireland was before it was made independent of the United Kingdom.

Preserving this sort of national culture and regional cultures requires a rejection of any sort of overriding pseudo-culture like the moronic “We Are the World” trope.  Instead, cultures grow up in nations and regions within nations to reflect the localized qualities essential to any true culture.

This is tied directly to geography.  So early Zionists, after toying with different homelands for the Jewish people, grasped that the area known as Palestine is historically the homeland of the Jewish people and that a new nation created out of that territory could protect and preserve not only Jews from persecution, but also Jewish culture.

When people hostile to that culture move into those nations and regions with an eye to diluting the indigenous culture or replacing that culture with a foreign culture, as is happening today with the Muslim invasion of Europe and, to a lesser extent, the invasion of America by Mexican and Central American peoples, then the inevitable result is both social warfare and the fueling of mutual intolerance.

Indeed, the very idea that a nation and its culture ought to be compelled to absorb alien peoples with different values, religions, and customs would once have been considered absurd.  What used to be accepted when immigrants came into America was that, as a condition of citizenship, these immigrants learn and accept the values of their new homeland and leave behind, by and large, the ways of the lands from which they came.

The geography of independent and indigenous cultures retains the virtues claimed by “multiculturalism” without its myriad flaws.  Those who wish to move to a new land with a different culture are generally free to do so, provided that they accept and adopt the culture and values of their new home.

If enough people do that, then the internal pressure within the land from which natives are emigrating to modify the culture of the land into which people are moving will become stronger and stronger, but the change will not be imposed from without, but adopted from within, and it will be based upon a competition of cultures.

This is to say that the marketplace of geographically distinct cultures provides a mechanism for naturally advancing superior cultures and for naturally constraining inferior cultures – and that this also decentralizes decisions relating to a native culture to those actually affected by changes in that culture.  This process operates without coercion or propagandizing.

Multiculturalism is an effort to destroy culture in the name of harmonizing cultures.  It is, at best, gross globalist imperialism.  It is, at worst, the Orwellian deconstruction of all societal values and beliefs.