On June 2, 2006, seventeen Muslims, including five juveniles, were arrested in Canada for planning major terrorist attacks on Canadian soil against innocent people. Because these were “homegrown” Islamic terrorists, blame was rightly directed towards Canada’s decades-old multiculturalism policies, which effectively encourages immigrants to stay frozen in the culture they came from instead of assimilating into Canadian society and Western values. This allowed preachers of militant Islamism–typically imams funded by Saudi oil money–to brainwash Muslims to hate the West and embrace terrorism.
Canada’s National Post (NP), an alleged right-wing newspaper, ran several opinion pieces intended to explain multiculturalism and its connection to Islamic terrorism. NP columnist George Jonas gave the typical reaction of conservatives to the destructive ideas of the left–“good intentions, bad idea”–but failed to debunk multiculturalism in terms of essentials. NP’s premier columnist, Andrew Coyne, also a conservative, conveyed colossal confusion concerning the meaning of “multiculturalism” and its offshoot: “diversity.” He didn’t think multiculturalism had much to do with Canada’s homegrown Islamic terrorists and tried to redefine “diversity” as compatible with individualism.
Multiculturalism is an evil ideology driven by evil intentions, and it’s imperative that defenders of individualism understand its essential nature. [1]
Multiculturalism–a creation of leftist, Western, nihilistic, post-modern philosophy professors–begins by promoting “cultural relativism,” which holds that all cultures are of equal value; no culture is better or worse than any other. Logically, this serves to de-value Western values, such as reason, science, productiveness, and each individual’s right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, by equating them with the most irrational and destructive practices of primitive, mystical cultures such as voodoo medicine, the subjugation of women by men, genital mutilation, and even cannibalism. As essentialized by Peter Schwartz, “Multiculturalism is the debased attempt to obliterate values by claiming that they are indistinguishable from non-values.” [2]
Defenders of multiculturalism argue that deeming one culture superior to another leads to racism, which they allege to be trying to prevent. But racism involves judging a person’s character according to race, not chosen ideas and values. Racism is essentially different from the evaluation of a cultural practice according to the objective standard of survival and the enjoyment of life. In fact, as will soon become clear, multiculturalism is a racist doctrine.
The next step in constructing multiculturalism involved shrinking the concept of culture from chosen, conceptual, significant values, such as wisdom, individual liberty, prosperity, romantic art, etc., to non-chosen or insignificant characteristics, such as skin color, gender, ethnic/religious/linguistic heritage, birth defect, etc. This served to promote a tribal mentality whereby individuals are encouraged to think of themselves as inescapable members of a tribe (or sub-tribe) defined by unchosen, perceptual-level characteristics–not chosen, conceptual values.
The next step consisted of promoting “diversity” as a value, which involves diluting rational, practical values with irrational, destructive ones, such as forcing companies to hire people on the basis of race–not ability, which is racism. Another example is the dilution of school curricula with useless cultural trivia, such as hair styles of different cultures, or with ridiculous courses such as “black science” and “feminist algebra.” Andrew Coyne tried to redefine “diversity” to mean the different ideas that flow from free and thinking individuals, but then “diversity” is not the defining characteristic. There is no value for such individuals to diversify rational ideas with Nazism or Wahhabism.
The final step in constructing multiculturalism involved blending cultural relativism with “egalitarianism,” which holds that no one (or no tribe) should benefit from a value, such as wealth, success, pride, etc., unless all do equally. Hence, if one culture appears to be ahead in terms of wealth creation, technology and the enjoyment of life, then this would imply “oppression” because all cultures have equal value and thus deserve equal results. This helps explain why militant Muslims in the East are murdering innocent people while claiming to be victims of Western oppression.
The logical result of multiculturalism is to create a world of primitive, tribalistic mentalities that form countless sub-tribes based on unchosen identities and battle each other for power and unearned wealth until all values (and lives) are destroyed–which is the ultimate goal of nihilism. Ayn Rand, in her seminal essay entitled “Global Balkanization,” wrote, “There is no surer way to infect mankind with hatred–brute, blind, virulent hatred–than by splitting it into ethnic groups or tribes. If a man believes that his own character in some unknown, ineffable way, and that the characters of all strangers are determined in the same way–then no communication, no understanding, no persuasion is possible among them, only mutual fear, suspicion, and hatred.” [3]
Canada’s current problems with its natives, French separatists and “home grown” terrorists are all manifestations of multiculturalism. Although Islamic terrorists cite Islam–a multi-racial religion–as their prime motivation, multiculturalism qua tribalism is a major force within Islam’s militant sects.
Multiculturalism is an evil doctrine that must be thoroughly debunked and destroyed. The Western intellectuals who champion multiculturalism deserve to be publicly condemned and shunned. And conservatives such as Coyne and Jonas should wake up to the evil motives of leftist intellectuals and stop whitewashing their destructive policies.
References
[1] For a brilliant analysis of multiculturalism, see “Multicultural Nihilism,” an essay by Peter Schwartz, published in The Return of the Primitive: The Anti-Industrial Revolution.
[2] Ibid, p. 248
[3] Ibid, p. 201
