[MD] Multiculturalism scam

[david buchanan]

Ham says that a nation can survive and prosper only if its "founding values, language, social mores, and cultural heritage" are "preserved" but he also advocates individualism, which is "opposed to any tradition, religion, or other form of external moral standard being used to limit an individual's choice of actions". Based on Ham's descriptions the most obvious conclusion is that individualism destroys nations precisely because it undermines tradition and moral standards. It's disturbing that Ham does not see how these positions contradict each other. I mean, this sort of logical blunder is not exactly a subtle one. There also seemed to be some confusion and conflation of multiculturalism and collectivism, which are more or less logically incompatible too. The main problem, however, is that he did not answer the question as to WHY multiculturalism is a threat. Ham simply asserted that national survival depends on preserving its heritage and values. But specific what values are threatened? How are they threatened? Or isn't it true that the only thing threatened would be some kind of cultural monopoly, a monolithic society where dissent is treated like a crime and "freedom" is a meaningless word. Historically speaking, the quest for that kind of purity always leads to tyranny and bloodshed.If America's traditional values and cultural heritage are so essential to its survival and prosperity then why are the most diverse cities also the most prosperous, creative, dynamic places in the country? Big coastal cities like San Francisco and New York have more immigrants and more traffic with other cultures and this has only enhanced their survival and prosperity. What's threatened by even the most intense versions of multicultural situations? They could do some serious damage to the belief that there is something inherently wrong with foreigners and foreign values, but that's a belief that ought to be wrecked. I mean, purity is good if you're mixing chemicals or making dinner but cultural purity? That's not possible, but why would we want it even if it were? Why is it assumed that the alternative cultural values are all some kind of poison, some kind of pollution? Or is it more like the fear of diluting the dominance and supremacy of "white" culture? I mean, it seems to be emotionally motivated because I just don't see any kind of rational case against multiculturalism here. 
_________________________________________________________________
It’s the same Hotmail®. If by “same” you mean up to 70% faster.
http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_hotmail_acq_broad1_122008