[MD] Multiculturalism scam

[Ham Priday]

Marsha and all --



> Does multiculturalism exist?  Where?  If it exists within this little 
> postal battleground, isn't there a variation for each participant?   And 
> won't they dissipate when the thread ends?   Then, where will these 
> patterns exist?  Maybe this thread is
> interesting after all.   Since I do not have an opinion about the
> rightness or wrongness of "multiculturalism", what is my part?
>
> Anybody like a cup of Milk Thistle tea?

Multiculturalism is a topic for social polemics rather than philosophy, but 
it is clear that Americans over the last half-century have resigned 
themselves to an egalitarian value system that recognizes all 
culturally-induced behaviors as acceptable if not superior to our own 
cultural heritage.  Having written on this aspect of cultural values, I 
thought a few pertinent quotes might be useful in explaining how Platt and 
others view this issue.

As a retired Supreme Court justice, Robert Bork was particularly concerned 
with the teaching of this ideology in the public schools.  Here is how he 
summed up the phenonemon in his book "Slouching Towards Gomorrah":

"A curriculum designed to foster understanding of other cultures would study 
those cultures. Multiculturalism does not.  Courses are not offered on the 
cultures of China or India or Brazil or Nigeria, nor does the curriculum 
require the study of languages without which foreign cultures cannot be 
fully understood.  Instead the focus is on groups that, allegedly, have been 
subjected to oppression by American and Western civilization - homosexuals, 
American Indians, blacks, Hispanics, women, and so on.  The message is not 
that all cultures are to be respected, but that European culture, which 
created the dominance of white males, is uniquely evil. Multiculturalism 
follows the agenda of modern liberalism, and it comes straight from the 
Sixties counterculture.  But now, in American education, it is the dominant 
culture."

As to how the U.S. fell into this moral lethargy, Judge Bork quoted Carol 
Iannone, NYU literature professor:

"Quite simply, it happened because America lost its grasp of its own 
historic character, and embraced 'diversity' as a national goal.  In the 
name of equality and nondiscrimination we invited mass immigration from 
every part of the globe, and made no demands on the newcomers to become 
Americans.  In fact, we gave up our American core, adopted multiculturalism 
and declared all cultures equal.  We invited the new groups to celebrate 
themselves while we cravenly permitted libelous denigration of our own past. 
Like fools we prated that diversity is our strength, when common sense and 
all of history tell us that strength comes from unity.

"Absolute nondiscrimination meant we no longer enforced standards, made 
judgments, distinguished between good and evil, friend and foe.  We grew 
lazy, stupid and careless - about our borders, about national security, even 
about previous terrorist attacks against us.  We worried over our 'hate 
crimes' and our 'racial profiling,' while men resided in our midst who 
seethed with murderous fury even against our children and plotted our 
destruction.  Now we have a fifth column, fear further assaults and labor 
under a draconian security regime that is changing the nature of our lives."

Bork goes on to say ...
"Since the 1960s, America - from her government to her schools and even to 
her churches - has steadily fallen away from the Judeo-Christian values that 
previously illuminated and gave life and strength to the nation's 
institutions.  This is equivalent to turning out the country's lights: And 
when you turn out the lights, everything looks the same color in the dark - 
that's multiculturalism.

"Moreover, no longer guided by universal standards of right and wrong, 
Americans have had nothing more reliable than their own feelings to guide 
them in the moral realm.  And as modern marketing well knows, when people 
are operating primarily on the basis of feelings and emotions, they're wide 
open to every sort of manipulation imaginable."

The desire to retain the values and traditions of one's sovereign nation is 
not racial bigotry or xenophobia.  It is in fact the moral rockbed of 
civilized society, as I tried to show in my archived essay "Empires Also 
Die" which is based on the fall of the Roman Empire:

"History has shown that among all powerful peoples, when the creation of 
real wealth and true economic power is neglected, when the belief that the 
status quo is pre-ordained and will last forever, when what happens today 
becomes more important than what will be the situation tomorrow and next 
year, when enjoying life becomes more important than preserving values such 
as individual freedom, honesty, fairness and integrity, when the electors 
cast their votes for celebrity and charisma rather than envisioned 
leadership, when those in power find that they have to deceive and defraud 
the man on the street in order to protect their own personal wealth and 
power -- when all that happens, the peak has been passed and the end is not 
far off.

"In his book, Why Civilizations Self-Destruct, Elmer Pendell surveyed 
historians' theories and concluded that a civilization arises when natural 
selection produces a people of above-average intelligence.  As the founders 
conquer natural culling forces, those who would have been removed from the 
population due to their lesser abilities survive and produce more children 
than the more intelligent founders.  Francis Galton, Charles Darwin's cousin 
and author of Hereditary Genius, first noted that 'men of eminence' have 
fewer children than the average.  Eventually the average intelligence level 
falls below that of the original population.

"Dr. Pendell suggests another factor in the collapse of civilizations -- the 
gradual adulteration of ethnically homogeneous founding populations through 
losses in wars and, in ancient times, the taking of slaves.  Tenny Frank, in 
his book History of Rome, wrote: 'The original peoples were wasted in wars 
and scattered in migrations and colonization and their places were filled 
chiefly with Eastern Slaves.'  The modern analogue of slavery is 
immigration.  When an empire nation opens its borders to immigrants of 
diverse cultures and backgrounds, it stands to lose or gain, depending on 
the talents and working skills of its new citizens and their willingness to 
assimilate.  Lacking these attributes, the 'melting pot' simile falters, 
allowing a disenfranchised class to emerge that not only must be sustained 
by the state but that represents a potential source of dissent within its 
ranks."

I hope these statements help to clarify the meaning and significance of 
multiculturalism as it affects Western Society.

Thanks for the opportunity.

Regards,
Ham