Multiculturalism — Farewell, Auf Wiedersehen, Adieu

Multiculturalism — Farewell, Auf Wiedersehen, Adieu

February 9, 2011 4:00 A.M.

Multiculturalism has gone from universal piety to subversive nonsense in the blink of a European eye. Last year, Thilo Sazzarin was maneuvered into resigning from the Bundesbank because he had written a book questioning the pieties of multiculturalism and diversity. One of his fiercest critics was the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, who a few months later declared that “multi-culti” had “failed utterly.” That was, however, a mere aside, even if a popular one. Now British prime minister David Cameron, a self-declared “liberal conservative,” has delivered an analytical demolition of “state multiculturalism” and made a serious start on rooting it out from official British policy.

Cameron delivered this analysis at what initially seemed an odd venue: the annual conference on international security in Munich. It was, in fact, a shrewd choice. The venue removed multiculturalism from the nexus of welfare and anti-discrimination policies to that of national security and anti-terrorism, where conservatives have an advantage over their opponents. It was an advantage he pressed home.

Cameron’s argument was that the terrorism threatening the West, both in Afghanistan and at home, had its origins in the underlying “extremist ideology” of Islamism. Young Muslim men in Britain often begin their journey to violent jihad by picking up this ideology from institutions, organizations, and leaders in receipt of government money and official favors. This ideology is further promoted by multiculturalism, which “encouraged different cultures to live separate lives” and so delivered impressionable young people into the hands of state-funded extremists. It would have to be confronted both ideologically — insisting on support for human rights as a condition for entry into public debate — and organizationally — denying funds to bodies that preach hatred and separatism.

All this was argued vigorously and well, if sometimes tendentiously. For instance, the number of British “Christian fundamentalists” who regard Muslims as “the enemy” must be in single figures; they were a mere rhetorical prop counterbalancing his criticism of Islamists. Also, the absolute distinction he tried to draw between the extremist ideology of Islamism and the religion of Islam is in reality slightly fuzzy. It’s not just Islamic radicals who interpret their religion as demanding the execution of apostates and the stoning of adulteresses. But many ordinary Muslims, especially in the West, disregard such injunctions as blithely as many Catholics ignore Church teaching on artificial birth control. And whatever its truth value, Cameron’s distinction is necessary to help win the majority of Muslims over to the liberal values of British and other Western societies.

Cameron also introduced one idea that until now has been largely absent from the public debate on multiculturalism (though in National Review, Mark Steyn and John O’Sullivan have both insisted on its importance): namely, that one reason for the apparent success of extremist Islamism is the vacuum where British patriotism should be. Cameron argued sensibly that the British failure — or, under multiculturalism, the outright British refusal — to offer its new citizens any pride in their country’s national identity allowed the Islamists to fill this gap with their own myths and symbols. Yet when he came to propose ways of restoring that sense of nationhood, they turned out to be perfectly nice but essentially liberal nostrums detached from any specific British context — freedom of speech, etc. — that an American, Frenchman, or Italian could subscribe to with equal fidelity.

By a nice coincidence, this idea was given such a British context on the day Cameron spoke in an article in the Mail on Sunday by the distinguished sports and financial journalist Mihir Bose. Bose described himself as coming from an English-educated Indian elite that didn’t really believe an event had happened until it was broadcast by the BBC World Service. “It says much for a country,” Bose went on, “that it can generate such a belief.” But he concluded:

The tragedy with modern Britain is that it seems not to care any longer for the qualities that make it so special and that drew me and many others to this country. Not just tolerance and kindness — India has that as well — but a sense of fair play and justice, giving everyone a chance. These qualities are unequalled anywhere else in the world . . . Unless Britain rediscovers its pride in its values this wretched multiculturalism will never die.

Churchill understood this. When he was asked by a liberal colleague how young people could be given pride in their country, he did not recommend some platitudes from the League of Women Voters. He replied: “Tell them how Wolfe took Quebec!”

That is the next lesson for Cameron to learn. Still, a good start. A-minus.

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...ralism-farewell-auf-wiedersehen-adieu-editors

 

The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic... There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.

Teddy Rooosevelt 1915

 

One school district in Texas is going to make learning Arabic MANDATORY!

That should fix everything.

 

They are backing off on that after it made headlines. It is a program being funded by the feds.

 

Let's hope so. What an affront.. a PC atrocity. Our kids don't even learn English well.

Was this notion yet another clue that Odumbo is really a Muslim? Maybe we don't really care that he's a Muslim... but we surely would appreciate it if he STOPPED LYING ABOUT EVERY FRICKIN' THING!!

 

+1

Hyphenated "Americans" should move if they think wherever is so great.

 

"The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions,"

 

Of course they will do that

Because some people in govt knows that we all will be muslim one day

watch the documentary below and learn

danger is approaching

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6-3X5hIFXYU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Notice how it's only white, western nations which are called upon to practice this "multiculturalism". Why do you suppose that is? It's only white nations which are attacked with accusations of "racism" if they are not "multicultural" and "diverse" enough. No one ever decries Sudan, India, Mexico, or China for not being "diverse" or "multicultural" enough. Even with in Western European or European derived nations, it's acceptable for any group (black, latino, muslim) to be ethnocentric and be proud and assertive about their culture, except for whites (the very group who largely built those civilizations). Further the whites are punished with federally mandated hiring policies which favor nonwhites. Whites suffer less funding for school, and higher university admissions criteria. Social services and aid are also disproportionately doled out to nonwhites, despite the fact that the largest single group of impoverished people are whites.

I think these diversity pimps should practice what they preach. Everyone who believes in "multiculturalism" ought to move to Yemen or Rwanda, to help those nations be more "multicultural". They should go tell them how "racist" they are being because there is mostly only Africans in Africa, or Arabs on the Arabian peninsula.