Multiculturalism is a good reminder that when standards are relative, there are no standards at all.
Victor Davis Hanson
The double standard is untenable.
Once we deify multiculturalism, all else becomes subordinate.
There is no reason why feminists should object that Muslim immigrants arrange marriages or practice female circumcision inside the west.
In summary, multiculturalism will eventually discredit liberal feminism and the entire idea of universal racial and religious tolerance.
Back in 2012, numerous heads of state including Nicolas Sarkozy (France), Angela Merkel (Germany), and David Cameron (UK) proclaimed that multiculturalism has been an utter failure. Many people were and are still baffled by such a position as they confuse multiculturalism as a political normative philosophy with the colloquial use of the term meant to represent cultural, religious, and ethnic heterogeneity (or pluralism).
The latter meaning is a very laudable objective to pursue as such diversity creates a richer social tapestry. On the other hand, Multiculturalism (hereafter capitalised) in the first sense of the term is more than merely a failed political philosophy. It is a central cause of the slow erosion of Western civilization.
One of the defining features of Multiculturalism is the tenet that all cultures are equally valuable, good, and worthy of respect, if not outright celebration. This in part stems from a hodgepodge of postmodernism (“There are no objective truths”) and moral/cultural relativism (“Who are we to judge the moral and/or cultural precepts of another people?”).
A consequence of Multiculturalism is the notion that host nations/cultures should not expect that new immigrants internalise the defining ethos of the host nation. Rather, it is assumed that each cultural group will maintain its distinct identity irrespective of whether its foundational cultural values are contrary to those of the host nation.
Lack of integration and assimilation are not necessarily poor outcomes according to Multiculturalism, as such isolationism is viewed as an instantiation of cultural pride.
Let me first address the supposed equality of cultures. Nothing could be further from the truth. Cultures that ensure the legal equality of the sexes, that protect the rights of religious minorities and homosexuals, that provide legal protection for freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of association, that institutionalise a separation of state and church, are infinitely superior to those that do not.
There is nothing shameful, arrogant, or jingoistic in stating so. Millions of people seek to enter countries such as Australia, England and the United States from around the world but few people line up to emigrate to Cuba, North Korea, and Saudi Arabia.
The yearly patterns of global immigration for the past 100 years speak to that trivially obvious fact.
In the same manner that a psychologically healthy person is one who is not riddled with suicidal self-loathing, a healthy civilization cannot be shackled with endless self-hatred (a too frequent reality amongst Western intelligentsia).
Of all ways by which societies might be organised, Western liberal democracies constitute the optimal one.
This does not mean that the West has created perfect societies bereft of social ills. Rather, it implies that the flourishing of individuals in all of its forms is best guaranteed by societies that are rooted in individual freedoms, as enshrined in the American Bill of Rights and American Constitution.
This begs the question why doesn’t Australia have an ‘Australian Bill of Rights’?
Western nations are perfectly within their sovereign rights to dictate the civilizational conditions to which new immigrants must adhere. This is the minimal price to pay for being granted the privilege of starting a new life in a welcoming society.
This means that new immigrants must accept and assimilate within the defining ethos of liberal democracies. Not a single inch of our foundational liberal traditions should ever be conceded under the guise of Multiculturalism (and all of its nonsensical and misguided tenets such as moral and cultural relativism).
Multiculturalism in Australia means your child has to learn a song from a different culture at the government school ‘Happy Holiday’ concert. Instead of learning ‘Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer’ at the Christmas concert.
Nigel Brookson
This does not mean that people should not take great pride in their cultural, religious, and ethnic heritages. To the contrary, most culture-specific elements (e.g., language, music, culinary traditions) should be celebrated in creating a multicultural (not capitalised) society, as long as these do not clash with the tenets of liberal democracies.
We are all enriched by our respective and unique cultural backgrounds.
However, if your culture contains elements that seek to overthrow and/or irrevocably alter our existing social order then you do not have the right to promote if not live by such values.
Leave a Reply