Advocates of multiculturalism like to pretend they are the
vanguard of liberalism. In fact, in both ideology and effect, they are the
enablers of fascism.
They put forward the doctrine that all cultures are equal and that to criticize
another culture is racist. That the aforementioned doctrine is in fact racist
is something they are seemingly blind to.
Multiculturalism racist? Why yes. The idea that all cultures are equal and your
culture is good for you and my culture is good for me and that no one can say
one is better than the other is based on a racial deterministic view of
culture. That is to say that multiculturalists believe that people have a
culture in the same way that people have blue eyes or black skin or red hair.
Thus from the multiculturalist point of view, to judge one culture superior to
another, is to judge one group of people superior to another.
This was the same view held by the Nazis. They believed that national socialism
was true for Germans. They were willing to admit it might not be true for all
people. But it was true for them and that was all that was important to them.
They differed from the multiculturalists in believing that the German “volk”
was superior to all other races.
All the multiculturalists have done with the Nazi theory is to declare that no
one culture is better than another. This is so, they say, because no one can
move outside of one’s own culture to evaluate other cultures objectively because
culture is not a chosen form of behavior, but deterministic.
However it is unclear why if one is unable to judge other cultures one should
care for them or consider them of any value what so ever, never mind of equal
value. This is exactly what the Nazis did, they held that critiques of their
ideas using logic were invalid because it was Jewish-British-Middle Class logic
and all they were interested in was “German logic.”
The problem is that if, like the multiculturalists, one rejects the use of
reason as a means of relations between people of different cultures, there is
nothing left to regulate the relations between cultures, but brute force. It is
exactly this that the Nazis argued. Since, according to the Nazis, there was
nothing but German logic and French logic, there is nothing to do about
conflicts of interest but fight. Of course that is what the Nazis did do. They
fought and killed without mercy or reason.
In essence the multiculturalists follow the Nazis up to these last two steps
and then flinch from the logical conclusion of their own ideas. That they do
draw back from murder and genocide is of course to their credit, but the
problem is that they spread one of the basic ideas of fascism.
Now let’s turn to the logical effects of multiculturalism even setting aside
for a moment its logical extreme.
Since according to multiculturalism, all cultures are of equal value, it
follows that if one culture embraces individual rights, democracy and
capitalism, and another perpetual jihad, honor killings, female genital
mutilation, and wife beating, one culture is not to be preferred over the
other.
In other words the primary effect of multiculturalism is to morally disarm the
good and morally arm the evil.
Now let us turn to the effects of multiculturalism as it effects the situation
in Europe today with regards to the struggle between Western Civilization and
Islamic Civilization.
First of all it should be noted that the idea that this must be an all or
nothing struggle with no learning on either side is itself an artifact of
multiculturalism. There may in fact be good points that Western Civilization
could gain from Islamic Civilization, its high value on hospitality for
example. Likewise, Islamic civilization could gain an increased respect for the
value of reason, individual rights, and democracy.
However, as long as the multicultural idea is predominant no such mutual
learning is likely to take place. If French rudeness is of equal value with
Islamic ideas of hospitality then why should the French change their ways.
Likewise if Islamic female genital mutilation is of equal value with Western
equal rights for women, why should Muslims change theirs?
Of course Western Civilization and Islamic Civilization are not of equal value.
By comparison Islamic Civilization is barbaric. However this is the one
conclusion that multiculturalists feel they must deny. They are in fact frantic
to deny it, because they believe, due to the internal logic of
multiculturalism, that the only alternative to declaring blind equality is a
race war.
Thus anyone who points out that Western Civilization is superior to Islamic
Civilization as it now exists, is labeled a racist by the multiculturalists. It
is important to understand that this is both a tactic in that having rejected
reason the multiculturalists can only resort to name calling or force and it is
a reflection of the interior state of the multiculturalists.
By accepting the racial determination of ideas the multiculturalists has put
himself in a trap where the only two alternatives are supine surrender to
inferior cultures and fascist genocide. The liberal alternative of education
and assimilation of the people from the more backward culture is blanked out of
their minds by the false alternatives of their racial determinism.
Since most cultures, to be even marginally successful, must consider themselves
to be of value and most consider themselves of superior value to other
cultures, the multiculturalists declaration that for example Islam is of equal
value with Western Civilization is not meet with joy by those the
multiculturalists are pandering to.
The pandering is in fact seen as both an insult and an invitation to
aggression. Consider that the militant Islamic believes wrongly that his
culture is superior. He is met with the insult that his culture is no better
than Western Civilization and then observes that this supposedly equal
civilization believes that it is of no more value than any civilization however
backward. The Islamist both feels insulted and believes that any action he
takes to revenge the insult will be meet with passivity.
The natural result is what we have seen over the past two decades in Europe,
increasing sectarian violence by Muslims. The first victims of this violence
are those from their own culture. Women primarily are increasing abused as it
becomes clear that the host culture will not protect them. Next the people who
were once part of that culture but have rejected it become the victims of the
totalitarian impulses of the Islamists. Then groups that have been
traditionally the enemies of Muslims and whose toleration by Western
Civilization is recent or incomplete, such as Jews and Gays come under attack.
Finally, as the supine surrender of the multiculturalists becomes obvious, the
majority population itself comes under attack. The multiculturalists of course
try and ignore this escalating cycle of violence.
Because the idea of fascist genocide is so terrible, the multiculturalists
understandably, given their premise, cling violently to their wrongheaded
ideology, even as events make the need for action plain. They tend to deny that
any problem exists. If they control the media they will tend to down play the
aggression of the violent group. They will even lie and suppress evidence that
contradicts their fervent hope that all is well. If they control the state they
will tend to use its power to keep the question of civilizational conflict from
coming to the fore. They may even pass laws making cultural criticisms illegal.
Though they thought themselves the vanguard of liberalism, they find themselves
suppressing free speech in the name of fighting racism, real and imagined.
Thus the multicultural European elite demonize relatively moderate parties that
want to take steps to limit the conflict between the native population and the
Muslim immigrants. Absurd slippery slope arguments are made that equate
reasonable restrictions on immigration with the first step of genocide.
It is important again to realize that as with the hysterical charges of racism,
these slippery slope arguments are both tactical and a reflection of the inter
beliefs of the multiculturalists.
However the hysterical charges of racism and the absurd slippery slope
arguments will have the opposite of their intended effect. They will weaken the
forces of liberalism instead of strengthening them.
In fact the multiculturalists will start to find that, just as social democrats
were unable in many cases to fight off the contending forces of communism and
fascism in the thirties that the center will not hold.
The center will tend not to hold because of three factors. The first is that
the multiculturalists have demonized the only force, liberalism that could have
saved them. The second factor is that multiculturalists are in fact ideologically
abetting fascism. The more wide spread is the belief in multiculturalism, the
more wide spread is one of the tenants of fascism. The last reason the center
will tend not to hold is that the same moral emptiness that keeps the
multiculturalists from fighting the Islamists effectively, will keep them from
fighting the fascists in the majority population effectively.
In fact the multiculturalists’ dirty secret, which they hide even from
themselves, is that they, to the extent that they do want to stave off Islamic
domination, think that the fascists have the right, indeed the only idea, of
how to win.
Thus while at present the multiculturalists will tend to demonize the forces of
liberal moderation such as the List Pim Fortuyn, the United Kingdom
Independence Party, and the Danish Peoples Party, equating them with fascism.
In the longer term however they will likely tend towards fascism themselves.
In fact there are as far as I can see only five possible courses forward for
Europe.
The best outcome that can be hoped for is that the forces of liberalism will
make a massive recovery of their moral strength in the next few years and begin
a massive program of education, assimilation, and the enforcement of western
values as embodied in the criminal law of their countries to protect the women,
children and non violent portions of their immigrant Muslim communities.
The second best scenario is that such a recovery of liberal moral strength, but
not until a civil war is inevitable. Then they will have to fight the
reactionary forces of radical Islam while simultaneously restraining the
fascists among the native population. This will to put it mildly be difficult,
especially since both groups of fascists will be trying to provoke atrocities.
Depressingly the third best out come that can be projected is that a liberal
revival halts total Islamic victory and Europe ends up like Lebanon as a
patchwork of hostile ethnic enclaves.
The fourth and fifth outcomes are frankly unspeakable, either fascist or Islamic
victory.
Now since Europe, the EU’s propaganda to the contrary notwithstanding, is not
unified, different outcomes could occur in different countries.
However it is important to realize that Europe has several strikes against it
in resisting both fascism and Islamism. First the European Union has no
unifying history or ideology that could be used to acculturate the Muslim
population and immigrants. Second the closest thing it does have to such an
ideology is transnational democratic socialism which has become heavily
impregnated with or is identical with multiculturalism, which is the problem.
Third, while the European idea is insufficient to be an acculturating force, it
maybe powerful enough to constrain the real nationalism of Europe’s actual
nations thus weakening one of the potential forces of moderation.
Given the riots in Paris, it maybe to late to avoid civil war, however it may
not be. It is certainly not to late to avoid balkanization or fascist or
islamist victory. However Liberals, Conservatives, Libertarians and all others
who reject the poison of multiculturalism must rally to enforce the protection
of individual rights for every citizen and deny special privileges for the
forces of Islamic reaction.
I believe that Europe is still strong enough to save itself from the forces of
multiculturalism, Islamism and fascism, but time is running out.
