The Mendacity of Multiculturalism
by Jim Josephsen
In the article, Multiculturalism Is a Failure, Walter E. Williams writes: “German Chancellor Angela Merkel declared that in Germany, multiculturalism has “utterly failed.”” This quote was taken from a speech Merkel gave back in October 2010.
Continuing in his article, Williams writes, “Both Australia’s ex-prime minister John Howard and Spain’s ex-prime minister Jose Maria Aznar reached the same conclusions about multiculturalism in their countries. British Prime Minister David Cameron has warned that multiculturalism is fostering extremist ideology and directly contributing to homegrown Islamic terrorism. UK Independent Party leader Nigel Farage said the United Kingdom’s push for multiculturalism has not united Britons but pushed them further apart. It has allowed for Islam to emerge despite Britain’s Judeo-Christian culture. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair said the roots of violent Islamism are not “superficial but deep” and can be found “in the extremist minority that now, in every European city, preach hatred of the West and our way of life.”
In 2011, then French President Nicolas Sarkozy also called multiculturalism a failure and British Prime Minster Cameron attacked his country’s multicultural policies, stating they failed to promote common identity, while encouraging Muslim segregation and radicalism.
Multiculturalism cultivates in Democratic nations – obviously! Multiculturalism is reflected in pluralism and can be divided into two types. Soft multiculturalism is recognized as the various foods, dance, music, body art, symbols, languages, philosophical ideologies of other cultures, along with equal rights, gender and wage rights, fair treatment for the poor, the mentally and physically challenged and the recognition of one’s choice of sexual orientation. Hard multicultural elements relate to the religious, political and ethnic identities, the absolute and distinct identifiers, which foreigners bring to a host nation.
Nations such as Australia, Canada, Sweden, and Finland, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Belgium rank highest on multiculturalism scales – promoting laws and public policies along with societal, community, educational, religious, corporate and institutional practices that highly favor and promote multicultural practices. Other nations such as the United Kingdom, the United States along with the likes of Singapore and Kuwait share the stage in high acceptance, affirmation and promotion of multicultural practices.
Non-democratic nations will favor little or no multicultural policies – obviously. Notice today in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Arabic is the official language. Yet English, Malayalam, Hindi, Urdu, Persian are among the many other languages spoken and understood, particularly in Dubai and Abu Dhabi. The UAE hosts immigrant workers from some 200 counties with the majority coming from the Indian subcontinent. Despite being an Islamic state, the UAE has widely accepted other religions, granting them permission to practice their faith. Foreigners make up about 85% of the population. However, the UAE does not have an open immigration policy and the citizens of the UAE form a predominately-homogeneous Arab society as all foreigners reside in the country as temporary workers. In the UAE, multiculturalism has a rather limited scope and non-citizens are kept in check.
Multiculturalism in theory and practice promotes the idea that differing cultures can co-exist together, in harmony, constructively without fragmentation or conflict. Multicultural nations provide policy, legislating programs, which encourages and protects individuals and groups to pursue and promote their cultural distinctiveness in a pluralistic society. Rather than educating its populace to practice and pursue assimilation and homogeneity, countries that allow multiculturalism foster a separate but equal mindset. We can all get along, in spite of our differences, and we had better accept the differences – so goes the mantra.
Proponents, educators, politicians and the likes, who advance multiculturalism, do so to promote and encourage greater respect and acceptance of what other cultures have to offer. The aim of multicultural efforts is to cultivate a generation of people who accept the values, norms, beliefs and behaviors along with religions and philosophies of others without judgment, criticism or retribution. Multiculturalism aims to weaken if not outright efface previously established time honored traditions.
Multicultural policies by principle establishes no core-central values or cultures as definitive and singular. Rather all variety, all cultures are accepted and valued – each by his own for his own. As those who embrace multiculturalism postulate, all cultures are valuable and all are morally equivalent.
Over the past 35 years and perhaps going back to the mid-1960s, as the debate over multicultural acceptance accelerated, hundreds of papers, theses and public symposiums have resulted, however with no definite conclusions. In the final analysis, there is no consensus. The debate rages on.
Is there anything good about multiculturalism? Are there positive aspects brought about to a society or nation? Are there negative aspects? Is a nation or society better off having a mixture of varied and differing cultures, religions and ethnic groups, all allowed to practice and protect their differences? On the other hand, is a country or society that practices multiculturalism destined for collapse? If central core values and common goals, appreciated by all citizens, shared and protected by all, are not secured, can that nation or society endure?
Will multiculturalism, if left unchecked, result in a nation or society ultimately losing its own distinctive cultural identity, as some predict? Is multiculturalism actually encouraged by elitist new world order advocates who are out to destroy capitalism and democratic rule, as some sociologists posit?
Consider the United States of America as an example. As the nascent nation developed, immigrants populated its shores and learned to blend in, to assimilate. Differences remained in the home or local community. When a culture or ethnic tradition was exposed or exhibited, it was only to highlight what the group, be they Germans or Italians, or Irish, or Chinese, etc. had to offer and were excited to share with others, who thought it polite to observe and appreciate. At the end of the day however, these varying, divergent groups were all Americans who understood the core, central values, traditions, philosophies and politics common to the nation. Immigrants came to the United States to become better, to prosper and assimilate into the ways of a prosperous and morally sound nation. For the thousands of immigrants, it was better to be in America than to struggle back home. Such was the case with most democracies, as they allowed foreigners in. Common core singular values and culture were to be accepted as the norm, into which all assimilated.
Assimilation and shared values were (and are) at the heart of any successful nation or institution. Immigrants and foreigners are welcome to assimilate and excel, bringing their talents and skills in order to contribute to the host nation. But not so much anymore.
Today, multiculturalism has made it feasible that all peoples of all colors, race, creed, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age, personality, education, cognitive ability, ethnic origin, economic status and immigration status be accepted, respected and appreciated for what they are and what they bring. Laws are created to promote and protect the differences. No longer are traditional core values, morals, ideologies and philosophies of host nations promoted. Multiculturalism requires promotion of equality and acceptance of all cultures, without criticism or retribution.
No doubt, differences of foods, dance, music, festivities, holidays and traditions can be shared for educational value. However, for many, that’s not good enough. Today’s multicultural demands have obstructed once valued and cherished holidays and religious celebrations observed by host nations. Multicultural efforts have placed demands on educational systems, as they are now required to emphasize other cultures and ethnic groups, indigenous peoples and subjugated races, while stepping away from traditional historical (often called WASP) texts. Once respected singular, core values (and in many nations, core Judeo-Christian morals, values, traditions and practices) are being replaced by varied and opposing cultural beliefs, religions, traditions, laws and practices. Multiculturalism has undermined the importance of a common language, while adding unnecessary expenses to many corporations.
Most ominous, multiculturalism has anesthetized a gullible public, allowing Islamic extremists to navigate the streets of host nations. Now obvious in Europe, the failure of multiculturalism is evident in the fact multiculturalism has opened the door for the Muslim world to enter Christian Democratic societies. Today Europe is exploding with the consequences of that reality. Both Australia and the United States have felt the burdens of this fact as well.
A noted Harvard professor of political science, Robert D. Putman, conducted a nearly 10-year study on multiculturalism’s effects on trust. In surveying some 26,000 individuals in some 40 communities across the United States of America, his findings revealed the more racially diverse a community, the greater the loss of trust within that community. Putman concluded, in the presence of ethnic diversity, people act like turtles. In diverse communities (extrapolate that to a society or nation, comment mine), people don’t trust those who don’t “look like us.”
In November 2014, while at the Copernicus Center on the northwest side of Chicago, Illinois, President Obama addressed the crowd expounding on his then newly released Executive Order dealing with immigration. In his speech President Obama stated, “If you go to Japan, they don’t have a problem with certain folks being discriminated against because mostly everybody is Japanese. But here, part of what’s wonderful about America is also what makes our democracy hard sometimes, because sometimes we get attached to our particular tribe, our particular race, our particular religion and then start treating other folks differently. And that sometimes, has been a bottleneck to how we think about immigration. If you look at the history of immigration in this country, each success wave, there have been periods where folks who were already here suddenly say; ‘well I don’t want those folks.’”
Multiculturalism will at best, flounder in any nation or society in which it is practiced, simply because central, singular, common core values, traditions and culture are thrown away. In the end, multiculturalism will generate distrust, suspicion, and ethnocentric survival. In reality, multiculturalism promotes separatism, not integration. It promotes differences, not commonality or harmony. It engenders dissension and not core, communal, central-values.
In the Christian Bible, is recorded a curious scripture. He created from one stock (of one blood – genetics and biology prove this fact) every nation of men to inhabit the whole earth’s surface. He determined their eras in history and the limits of their territory (the boundaries of the places they should live) (Acts17:26).
Although it is getting harder for this world to believe, God set the limits, the national territories and boundaries (the borders) of all nations and has done so for a reason. As a nation, any nation, develops, ages and expands over time, a natural progression takes place. National heritage develops over time revealing a religion, philosophy, a social structure, a political ideology, education, values, and morals, the traditions and festivities that are specific and unique to that nation. All these characteristics put together and specific to that particular nation define its culture.
A society, a nation, a race, a social-system, a religion all develop to form its unique common cultural identity. Today there are many and varied cultures across the globe.
God set the limits and national boundaries for the good of His creation, for the good and protection of the many and varied distinctive cultures. However, collectively, mankind in its ever-defiant, self-promoting posture against God has broken beyond those boundaries. Today, we see the reality of nations living beyond their cultural limits and the effects of that action. Moreover, today we see the tragic consequences of nations who have not considered the wisdom God provided when it comes to immigration policy and practice.
Multiculturalism is a concept created by mankind, in its humanistic attempts to solve its problems. However, there is a deceptiveness inherent in multiculturalism. Multiculturalism can never coalesce, unify or strengthen a nation or society. By its very nature, multiculturalism can only maintain separation, emphasizing and promoting the distinctiveness of differences as established in other cultures, religions, beliefs, traditions and practices. Multiculturalism will never allow for homogeneity or unity, singular core values and unanimity of existence. It cannot. Any nation practicing multiculturalism is a nation set on a course of ruin. Any such nation is a nation in opposition to prosperity, peace, success and national fulfillment, which God has to offer.
If a nation appreciated and accepted the laws of God to guide it legislative and governmental actions, that nation would not allow multicultural policies and practices to exist within its borders. And guess what? That nation would be better off for it. That nation would have peace, prosperity and inherent security. God has very simple and logical laws, which will always and only benefit those who abide by them. God’s laws are practical, valuable and advantageous for the individual and for a nation or society.
For any nation or society to exist in unity, cohesively and efficiently, this very simple and logical law, or in modern terms, legislative action needs to be enacted and maintained. For any nation or society to preserve its existence and not crumble from within, notice what the Creator of humanity declares has to be. The community is to have the same rules for you and for the alien living among you; this is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come. You and the alien shall be the same before the Eternal. The same laws and regulations will apply both to you and the alien living among you (Numbers 15:16-16 NIV).
This principle, this law of God, as given to the children of Israel, is logical, relevant, enduring and transcends all time.
Additionally, all the Laws of God, which are in effect and in force still today, which deal with the policies and practices of governing a nation, if acknowledged and obeyed, would only produce prosperity, security, safety and all the elements that make up a salubrious life. National resources would not have be directed, wasted on military and homeland security as just one example.
Another very simple law, known as the first commandment simply states; you shall have no other gods before (or in place of) the Eternal. If a nation were to remain exclusively faithful and loyal, having strict allegiance to the only one true God, the God of Israel, not allowing any other religions to be practiced within its borders, that nation would prosper and be extremely blessed by God.
Interestingly, those nations which are labeled in the Bible as the end time House or children of Israel, today identified as the United Kingdom, the United States of America, with Australia, Canada and the northern European Scandinavian nations (interestingly enough, those nations deeply caught up in multicultural practices today), are following in the footsteps of their forefathers and progenitors. Sadly, the consequences that occurred to their ancestors will be the same to happen to these nations.
Among the many sins that brought Ancient Israel to its demise was its acceptance and acquiescence to the foreign practices and religions of the nations surrounding them, as they allowed foreigners to dictate national behavior. Ancient Israel, in defiance of God, practiced a syncretistic form of religion and allowed those who were the aliens among them to bring in with them their culture, traditions, religions and beliefs; transforming the behaviors of the foreign, alien cultures into common every day routines, religious practices and customs, which were accepted and practiced throughout Israel. Ancient Israel practiced multiculturalism, some 3,000 years ago and the Bible is living testimony as to the consequences of allowing multi-cultures to flourish within a nation.
The very nature, philosophy and policies of multiculturalism will have to be eradicated before a nation, society or for that matter this world, can ever expect to live in harmony, peace and trust with true respect for the uniqueness of every other nation. Most important, when multiculturalism is a thing of the past, at that time there will be just one and only one religion lived by all nations across the whole earth. As we can read, the Eternal shall be King over all the earth and in that day there shall be one Lord (God) and His name the only name (Zechariah 14:9).
Moreover, in those days ten men from all languages and nations will take firm hold of one Jew by the hem of his robe and say, ‘let us go with you because we have heard that God is with you’ (Zechariah 8:23). In that day, as the prophets tell, the God of Israel, of the Jews, the God who is Jesus Christ, will reside in Jerusalem and all peoples and nations will worship Him and learn of the ways and the laws of God (cf. Isaiah 2:2-4).
When Jesus Christ returns to this earth, as its only King, ruling a “one only” global government – then multiculturalism will be eradicated and finally, no society or nation will be held captive to the mendacity of multiculturalism.