If this article makes you angry how
can you argue that Multiculturalism
is not designed to polarize society?
E
Pluribus Unum?
 |
| This is banned but separation is not |
Multiculturalism is
the policy of encouraging the
separate development of several
cultures within a nation state. It
is not about having Curry Houses and
Balti restaurants, these just make
for a varied national culture, it is
not about hip hop or the Chinese New
Year, multiculturalism is about
encouraging people from different
backgrounds to develop separately
from the rest of society.
Multiculturalism is not about
diversity, it is a political
movement with a clear and deliberate
policy of deconstructing national
cultures in favour of many separate
cultures. It is a sad truth that 90%
of those who say they support
multiculturalism are actually
anti-racist and pro-diversity: they
have got no idea that when they say
they support "multiculturalism" they
are supporting a subversive
political and philosophical movement
within Western countries. It is
probably the support of this
ignorant faction that has allowed
Multiculturalism, which is another
word for "separate development" (in
Afrikaans 'apartheid'), to become so
embedded in Britain.
Multiculturalism in
Britain was a policy implemented by
New Labour with the intention of
creating a revolutionary tension and
change in society. It was a Soviet
policy that was released in
instruction packs distributed to the
various, subversive, university
"socialist societies" in the
nineteen seventies, at the height of
the Cold War. The policy was
intended to destabilise the West.
(See
The Roots of
New Labour).
It failed in its primary objective
because the British are a tolerant
culture. It is amazing that British
journalists, especially in the
television media and BBC, have
supported this policy with such zeal
although this is probably due to the
fact that many of these individuals
also have roots in the British left
wing movements of the 1970s and that
multiculturalism is now seen as an
'answer' to how to accommodate
nationalities within political
unions such as the EU, Russian
Empire and Chinese Empire.
Multiculturalism was more fully
characterised in the work of the
philosopher Jacques Derrida who
proposed that the polarization of
society should be an objective of
social policy. Derrida was a
malevolent force in modern
philosophy whose ideas were largely
designed to damage social
structures. Curiously governments
have permitted the appointment of
post Marxist post modernists who
support the ideas of Derrida to
chairs in sociology and education in
western universities so that social
policy is now being guided by many
people who believe that the
objective of social policy should be
the destruction of a structured
society. Political commentators
have not realised that socialism now
relies on racial tension, not class
war, to exacerbate political
difference and create conflict (see
Postmodernism-poststructuralism-postmarxism).
Apart from the obvious ill-effects
of polarising people into ghettoes
and opposing groups Multiculturalism
also has some serious adverse
effects that result from the fact
that almost all non-western cultures
have not undergone the changes that
result from exposure to the
Enlightenment and the Age of Reason.
Examples of the adverse effects of
multiculturalism are: failure to
identify with society at large,
socialising solely with your
co-religionists so depriving others
in the neighbourhood of society,
supporting the caste system and
caste attitudes so that the poor are
kept poor, excluding people from
outside your culture from work,
girls wearing restrictive clothing
in school so that they cannot
participate in the full range of
lessons, forced marriage, setting up
schools to teach Intelligent Design
or Koranic ideas on biology so
depriving children of a truthful
education, supporting foreign powers
against your own country so
endangering our security etc. All of
these adverse effects of
multiculturalism and many, many more
are evident in British life. The
socialist elite argues that separate
cultures within the UK should be
encouraged to exercise these
"freedoms" but each freedom that is
encouraged within a separate culture
deprives the whole of British
society of other freedoms. Those who
support multiculturalism generally
just deny that these adverse effects
will occur but some, such as the
effects of restrictive clothing in
young girls and the effects of a
caste system etc. are simply
inevitable because they are in the
nature of those "freedoms".
Multicultural policies are apparent
in a variety of institutions and
exist wherever the intention is to
increase the polarization and
separation of people rather than to
reduce it. The teaching of history
in British schools has been heavily
infiltrated and oriented towards
polarization, for instance British
children are taught about slavery
and colonisation rather than about
emancipation and the explosive
development of European states in
the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries. They are taught about the
US Civil Rights movement, which has
nothing to do with the British but
upsets black people, rather than the
peaceful decolonisation of much of
the British Empire. They are taught
about the persecution of the Jews
rather than the heroic struggle of
the British and the global British
cultural zone against the Germans,
Russians and their allies that saved
the Jews. Some of the legislation
that treats groups of people as
minorities and victims also
polarizes society. The recent
extensions to Equalities legislation
in the Equalities Act that outlaw
political discussion about belief
are also designed to polarize
society.
The social tension caused by
multiculturalism must now be
repaired and wholesale immigration
into the UK, which is already
overcrowded, must be stopped (See
The benefits of immigration to the
UK economy). Multiculturalism
has already caused the outbreaks of
terrorism associated with
Londonistan (many of the 9/11
terrorists stayed in the UK and the
7/7 terrorists were British) and
will lead to worse problems as time
goes on.
The coalition government has taken a
sensible stand against
multiculturalism (see
State multiculturalism has failed,
says David Cameron). The
government should be supported in
this stand and the New Labour
appointed BBC governors and current
affairs staff should be quietly
removed to prevent the distorted
coverage of the issue. Governments
should oppose both institutional
multiculturalism and institutional
racism because apartheid is both a
cause and a symptom of racism.
Many races in one culture is
workable and may be desirable but
separating the races into cultural
ghettos will polarise society and
cause perpetual strife, though not a
full blown revolution and
totalitarian government, as the
originators of multiculturalism once
hoped. It is time to finally
cauterise the damage done to the
social fabric of Britain by the Cold
War and to move on to realist,
liberal politics.
Multiculturalism has recently been
adopted by those who are in favour
of large scale political unions such
as the EU as a desperate approach to
the problem of the free movement of
labour and how to contain multiple
nationalities within a single state.
This problem could be resolved by
simply unwinding the EU back to the
EEC without the destructive effects
of multiculturalism.
If we continue with Multiculturalism
we will end up with tribalism with
all that that entails from
corruption to nepotism to gangs,
riots and terrorism.
The whole point
of a modern nation with one culture
was to stop these evils. Nations are
the unit of cultural diversity and
this must be respected.
See also:
The
Roots of New Labour
Labour
confirms that multiculturalism is
bad
Diversity in
the UK
A ranking of
social evils
Multiculturalism and truth
Nations are
the unit of cultural diversity
The Benefits
of Immigration to the UK Economy
Against racism
The aims of
Localism
Multiculturalism
H.F.718/MULTICULTURALISM
(7-3-16)
As Gomer Pyle used to
say on that old TV show
Surprise! Surprise!