The American Spectator : Multiculturalism, R.I.P.

Text Size

Multiculturalism, R.I.P.

By Roger Scruton from the December 2010 - January 2011 issue

Our political class has at last recognized that multiculturalism is a recipe for disaster.

Throughout my adult life governments around the Western world have been propagating the gospel of multiculturalism, which tells us that immigrants, from whatever part of the world and whatever way of life, are a welcome part of our “multicultural” society. Differences of language, religion, custom, and attachment don’t matter, they have reassured us, since all can form part of the colorful tapestry of the modern state. Anybody who publicly disagreed with that claim invited the attentions of the thought police, always ready with the charge of racism, and never so scrupulous as to think it a sin to destroy the career of someone, provided he was white, indigenous, and male. To be quite honest, living through this period of organized mendacity has been one of the least agreeable ordeals that we conservatives have had to undergo. Keeping your head down is bad enough; but filling your head with official lies means sacrificing thought as well as freedom.

But now, quite suddenly, the oppression has ceased. Even Angelika Merkel, chancellor of a country whose reputation for political correctness is more carefully nurtured than any other cultural asset, has just told us that multiculturalism is dead — quite dead. President Sarkozy has for some time been saying the same, while Prospect, Britain’s leading left-wing intellectual monthly, currently carries the caption “re-thinking race: has multiculturalism had its day?” This caption is in many ways the most revealing of the current attempts to put multiculti at a distance. For it manages simultaneously to deny and to affirm the original message, which is that to discriminate among cultures is to discriminate on grounds of race — in other words, to be a racist. This is perhaps the most pernicious of the lies that we have been required to swallow during these years of oppression, since it is one that compares all defense of the majority culture, and all attempts to integrate minorities, with some of the greatest crimes of recent history.

So let’s be clear from the outset: culture and race have nothing to do with each other. There is no contradiction in the idea that Felix Mendelssohn was Jewish by race and German by culture — or indeed that he was the most public-spirited representative of German culture in his day. Nor is there any contradiction in saying that a single person belongs to two cultures. Felix’s grandfather Moses was a great Rabbi, upstanding representative of the Jewish cultural inheritance, and also founding father of the German Enlightenment. Many of the German philologists to which the Enlightenment gave rise were as multicultural as Moses Mendelssohn — Max Müller, for example, German by race, English by adoption, and more steeped in the culture of India than virtually anyone alive today. Wagner had to twist and turn his thoughts into every kind of absurd contortion in order to discover “Jewishness” in the music of Felix Mendelssohn, from whom he took so much. (How could he have got to the music ofLohengrin without the help of Mendelssohn’s music for A Midsummer Night’s Dream?) And Wagner’s repugnant essay on Judaism in music is one of the first instances of the lie that we have had to live through — the lie that sees race and culture as the same idea, and which tells us that in demanding a measure of cultural uniformity, we are also affirming the dominance of a single race.

Once we distinguish race and culture, the way is open to acknowledge that not all cultures are equally admirable, and that not all cultures can exist comfortably side-by-side. To deny this is to forgo the very possibility of moral judgment, and therefore to deny the fundamental experience of community. It is precisely this that has caused the multiculturalists to hesitate. Rightly enjoying the polytheistic festivals of the Hindus, the Carnivals of Caribbean blacks, and the celebrations of the Chinese New Year, they have led us to believe that cultural difference is always an addition to social life, and never a threat to it. Anyone who discriminates between cultures, therefore, really must have something more dangerous at the back of his mind — a desire to exclude on grounds of strangeness, which is the first step towards the racist mindset.

But experience has finally prevailed over wishful thinking. It is culture, not nature, that tells a family that their daughter who has fallen in love outside the permitted circle must be killed, that girls must undergo genital mutilation if they are to be respectable, that the infidel must be destroyed when Allah commands it. You can read about those things and think that they belong to the pre-history of our world. But when suddenly they are happening in your midst, you are apt to wake up to the truth about the culture that advocates them. You are apt to say, that is not our culture, and it has no businesshere. That is what Europeans are now saying — not just a few crazies, but everyone. And the multiculturalists are reluctantly compelled to agree with them.

FOR WHAT IS BEING brought home to us, through painful experiences that we might have avoided had it been permitted before now to say the truth, is that we, like everyone else, depend upon a shared culture for our security, our prosperity and our freedom to be. We don’t require everyone to have the same faith, to lead the same kind of family life, or to participate in the same festivals. But we have a shared moral and legal inheritance, a shared language, and a shared public sphere. Our societies are built upon the Judeo-Christian ideal of neighbor-love, according to which strangers and intimates deserve equal concern. They require each of us to respect the freedom and sovereignty of every other, and to acknowledge the threshold of privacy beyond which it is a trespass to go unless invited. Our societies depend upon a culture of law-abidingness and open contracts, and they reinforce these things through the educational traditions that have shaped our common curriculum. It is not an arbitrary cultural imperialism that leads us to value Greek philosophy and literature, the Hebrew Bible, Roman law, and the medieval epics and romances, and to teach these things in our schools. They are ours, in just the way that the legal order and the political institutions are ours: they form part of what made us, and convey the message that it is right to be what we are.

Over time immigrants can come to share these things with us: the experience of America bears ample witness to this. And they the more easily do so when they recognize that, in any meaningful sense of the word, our culture is also a multiculture, incorporating elements absorbed in ancient times from all around the Mediterranean basin and in modern times from the adventures of European traders and explorers across the world. But this kaleidoscopic culture is still one thing, with a set of inviolable principles at its core; and it is the source of social cohesion across Europe and America. Our culture allows for a great range of ways of life; it enables people to privatize their religion and their family customs, while still belonging to the public realm of open dealings and shared allegiance. For it defines that public realm in legal and territorial terms, and not in terms of creed or kinship.

So what happens when people whose identity is fixed by creed or kinship immigrate into places settled by Western culture? The multiculturalists say that we must make room for them, and that we do this by relinquishing the space in which their culture can flourish. Our political class has at last recognized that this is a recipe for disaster, and that we can welcome immigrants only if we welcome them intoour culture, and not beside and against it. But that means telling them to accept rules, customs, and procedures that may be alien to their old way of life. Is this an injustice? Surely not. If immigrants come it is because they gain by doing so. It is therefore reasonable to remind them that there is also a cost. Only now, however, is our political class prepared to say so, and to insist that the cost be paid. And it may be that this change of heart comes too late.

About the Author

Roger Scruton is a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. His latest book, How to Think Seriously About the Planet: The Case for an Environmental Conservatism, has just been published by Oxford University Press.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (156) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.7.10 @ 7:57AM

Mr. Scruton,
Splendid article, but I fear your conclusion is premature.
I immediately think of the slaughter at Fort Hood and the Army Chief talking "diversity".

I think of Obama shouting out an American Indian's "merits" right after he got the news of Fort Hood.
I am a bestselling author. I just published an E-book under a new pen name. It is a present day "fictional" treatment of the possibilities...right now, of our conflict with Sharia Law.

I titled it "Texas Said No!" www.texassaidno.com

I could have titled it "Oklahoma Said No!" But the proposition outlawing Sharia Law had not passed there yet.
You can go to the web-site above and read the foreword and Chapter One.
Sir, we still have a problem that most of our leaders have not been willing to face or deal with.

Sharia Law is simply antithetical to our culture and Law. In fact it is diametrically opposed to our "Law of The Land" in the Constitution.

Every single day, Many Sharia adherents right here in America advocate the forceful overthrow of our government.... They truly do.

We must identify them, and send them home or put them in jail, just like we would any other American...or guest.

PS Stevens| 12.7.10 @ 9:15AM

I assert that the notion of diversity as used in today's society is predjudicial, and perhaps racist. "Diversity", as it is used in the workplace, does not mean having a workforce comprised of people from various backgrounds, schools of thought, or any other factor. It is about race. Therefore, to say that a job candidate brings a positive effect to a workplace based on his racial background makes certain assumptions. What exactly does a Latino, Pacific Islander, black person, or any any other race offer that others do not? Musical ability? Cooking skills? Sense of humor? The whole thing is absurd. There must be something inherently different about people of different races, correct? That is the assumption that I find bothersome. What exactly is the value of "diversity"? Have a liberal answer this question and they will reveal their predjudicial nature.

Booger | 12.7.10 @ 12:30PM

There is only one "race"- human. There may be different ethnic groups, but as a race we are one. If it seems like a quibble, let me explain. When we refer to people of different skin colors as other "races" we fall into the trap of using the language of the enemy; those who use "race" as a divider to conquer free people. Language is our most powerful weapon for freedom, use it wisely. My race is human, and anyone who wants to shoehorn me into something else is serving the enemy, whether he knows it or not. My ethnic background is irrelevant, our common Creator gave each member of our race his inalienable rights.

Cordially,

Booger

ncatty| 12.7.10 @ 2:07PM

I agree and take it one more step. We are all Cro-Magnons.

Loshooligan| 12.7.10 @ 4:18PM

I answered "other" on the US census race question, then wrote in American. They sent two separate census workers to my house to double check my answer.

RAC-vt| 12.8.10 @ 9:34AM

I filled in "Human-American" and so far, nobody has come to my house to check! Maybe it's because i chose to be hyphenated... a tongue-in-cheek sop to multiculturalism.

NothingAm| 12.15.10 @ 1:06PM

I filled in "Nothing-American". When the Census worker showed up, I explained that I referred to myself that way because "I put Nothing ahead of my country!"
She laughed and said that she would start using that designation for herself!

Old Soldier| 12.16.10 @ 7:57AM

I wish we were all Cor-Magnon men. They were taller, stronger, and had larger brains than us. We have de-evolved from them.

MikeBee| 12.7.10 @ 3:56PM

Booger,

BraVO! Thank you for your very clear and concise assessment and clarification of this thorny issue. Like most issues, if you simply identify the issue clearly, you can deal with it. You have very clearly identified the issues in this situation, and have spelled out the correct viewpoint folks should have when they are dealing with multiculturalism.

Pelligrino| 12.7.10 @ 11:50PM

Booger, thanks once more. In simple, clear words you said it right. We all owe you one -- once more. (Thanks for posting here. Truth be told, I often appreciate your comments more than the article that launches the commentaries.)

May I take it a step further? We're all related. We all go back to this shipbuilder named Noah.

Rocky911| 12.8.10 @ 1:39PM

Your comments are just that. If I put you in the middle of China and told you to go live your life as you say you do, it wouldn't happen. Your ethnic back ground made you who you are. Bits and pieces of it are running through your blood. To deny yourself is already a lie. Your are someone who acts a certain why and I would guess many times you are wondering why and especially in uncomfortable surroundings. God made barriers of mountains and oceans for a reason. Today they are coming down. Most anyone can be anywhere in the world if they have the resources they need. As most people where would they be if they had a choice and I will guarantee most would go where there is more freedom of choice, but when they get there they will want what made them feel whole. That part will be what they liked about where they were. Thats culture. Muslim culture does not work with Christian culture. The Muslims know that and don't allow it to happen. Christians have been taught to be tolerant, and loving of it's neighbor. Muslims aren't taught to be tolerant. They are taught to kill those who do not except their way, or they are taught to act as if you do, so you can some day take advantage of them in the name of your faith. Then some day kill them if they have not change to your way of thinking. That my friend is a difference that will never be able to live side by side. Because one is a religion of love and the other is a culture of hate and control. Not a religion. What country or culture has been taken over by Muslims and the people of that culture prospered and lived in peace? I can answer that for you NONE!!!

SuthnXPosR| 12.8.10 @ 9:05PM

Rocky911----Your comment is as sure and true as the sun and moon. This bone piercing truth could never be said better. I hope others will rethink their position and see this truth. Keep it coming!!!!!!!!!

Bill| 12.15.10 @ 10:38AM

Booger, I imagine you pat yourself on the back as you pen those noble words. But what does that have to do with the fact that Scruton points out, that most people define themselves by kinship and creed and your noble words have no effect on that at all.
Let's say you are an atheist. You cannot go to an Islamic nation and start preaching that people should abandon their religion. It would not be permitted.
All your nobility cannot obscure the fact that people are different and that they insist on those differences. The only people saying we are all the same are westerners. No one else in the world is looking at the "other" and saying we are just the same.

Warpsmith| 12.15.10 @ 10:59AM

Bill, exactly so. Many "noble/wise" words are simply naive, self-congratulatory affectation, and tribalism is the norm throughout human history.

Thanks for injecting some mature realism into the discussion!

Raving Rabbi| 12.13.10 @ 9:28AM

Sorry, I asked a Wise Latina, and she said you're wrong!

RCV| 12.7.10 @ 11:48AM

Every week, on this site, so called "patriots" advocate the forceful overthrow of our own government ... they truly do. I do recall hearing some folks talk about, "If the ballot box doesn't work for us in November, we may have to resort to other means..." Sound familiar?

Of course, Sharia Law is antithetical to American Law and could never be implemented consistent with the First Amendment. The problems with the Oklahoma law were many, but here are two the court properly identified in enjoining its operation:

1. The law prohibits Oklahoma courts from relying on any foreign law in rendering its decisions. But neutral choice of law principles in the common law regularly require courts to do so. Moreover, international commercial contracts often specify, for purposes of commercial certainty, the law to be applied to contract interpretation or breach or damages. Multinationals may choose, for example, to have Swiss law apply to a contract. Not permitting Oklahoma courts to do so impairs their rights of contract. Similarly, private parties could and sometimes do choose to have other legal principles apply to their contracts. The Oklahoma law would allow them to choose Jewish law or anything else but Sharia Law. To do so would clearly violate First Amendment principles.

The Oklahoma bill was political grandstanding, nothing else.

RCV| 12.7.10 @ 11:50AM

The second point should have been numbered at "Similarly..."

Mel Torme| 12.7.10 @ 12:51PM

What kind of lawyer do you fancy yourself, RCV? Your nonsense spouted off here is missing logic - as much as I don't like lawyers, I will admit they are very logical in their arguments.

There is something called "contract law", RCV. Yeah, you can put what you want in the contract, and it could be based on Sharia law,the Book of Mormon, the Machinist's Handbook, anything. So, what? The contract terms aren't the same thing as the laws that govern enforcement of contracts. Let me give you an example:

Say, your contract is for payment of $50,000 to some Somali to perform clitorectomies on 250 young goats ($200 per goat) so that they may be violated by your family members with no fear of pleasuring the animal. (Look, this is just the first thing that came off the top of my head, I'm not making fun of your family, RCV - nothing wrong with goat sex - no, not at all.) So, you may have some specific Moslem law items in said contract.

However, if this contract is breached by one of the parties (say, you change your mind and think $200/goat is excessive, or the other party works on the wrong type of goats) then you must go to the courts, which will use US Contract Law and the laws of Oklahoma, to get justice. Sharia Law CANNOT be used in the court to, for example, allow you to rape one of the other party's sister's grandmother's hairdresser's pet water moccasin as the punishment. Fines and/or punishment must be set by US and Oklahoma codes.

Also, your post didn't even mention criminal law, which I would guess, is most of the reason for the OK ruling. They do not want any other country's laws to be used as precedent in any criminal case. This has a lot to do with the fact that the people writing the laws for the other countries, or Moslem law in general, were not elected by the people of the US or Oklahoma.

(Now, you could say the same for the bureaucrats at the EPA, DHS, FAA, FCC, etc, but that's another can of worms, and another long post)

Negro X| 12.7.10 @ 6:08PM

RCV was an ambulance chaser but found out that race hustling at the SPLC was more lucrative.

Mel Torme| 12.7.10 @ 6:19PM

That's not what I heard. I heard he was booted out of the ambulance chasers' union due to ethical violations*. "The SPLC could really use a guy like you, RCV".

* well, also a couple of non-ethical "violations", but, lucky for RCV, goats don't sue.

Inconvenient Realist| 12.15.10 @ 9:57AM

INFIDEL!!! I am commanded by our lord and master to rape the snake as I see fit! If you do not permit and advocate this just punishment I shall declare jihad!

For pete's sake...come on now. Shakespeare was correct about the lawyers.

Dioctor Right| 12.7.10 @ 1:05PM

Grandstanding with a very significant point...Like your head.

Mike Johnston| 12.7.10 @ 1:07PM

In that they case, they should re-write the Ok law to reflect only Sharia Law be banned from consideration. I was a Special Forces Soldier for 28 years and have been facing the evils of Islam for the past decade. Make no mistake, we are under "peaceful" assault from organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR, etc in a drive to subvert us from inside using the very freedoms they wish to curtail by allowing the BARBARIC Sharia Law in the US. Any other belief denies the facts of Islam and its system of repression, and shows the believer to be either a fool, a Muslim, or a liberal. (or any combination of the three)

wethersby| 12.7.10 @ 4:43PM

Those who advocate overthrow of governments here are generally quoting Thomas Jefferson, and they are advocating the overthrow of UNJUST government, as any citizen should.

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.7.10 @ 5:25PM

RCV stated:
""Every week, on this site, so called "patriots" advocate the forceful overthrow of our own government ... they truly do. I do recall hearing some folks talk about, "If the ballot box doesn't work for us in November, we may have to resort to other means..." Sound familiar?""

NO SIR!
No one here that I know of wants to "overthrow" the government. We merely stand ready to "restore the government" to its rightful place under constitutional restraints.

If you lawyerly types cannot get that difference through your minds, then your licenses to lie in a courtroom ought to be revoked.

Conversely, Sharia Law adherents have NO interest in our "Law of the Land" and would replace it with their slavery to Allah, (under some bearded whack-job's guidance of course).

You sir are obviously a total statist. Our founders were not, and we are not. In our minds, the "Declaration of Independence" still stands, and we stand with it.
Any government, Sharia or communist, (pardon the shorthand), will not be allowed to stand here except over our dead bodies.

You know, growing up in Texas, I used to get in trouble a lot when I brought up the words "all men are created equal....."
You lawyerly types get all wrapped up in the minutiae of lawS, but often forget THE LAW.

(Our Constitution as an attempt to put wheels on our Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation for a "more" perfect union).

Most folks here do not have your trained arguing/lying ability. Neither do most of our soldiers and Marines. We do understand tyranny however, and will not stand for it.

We don't WANT to be a nation of lawyer/liers. We want to build stuff and take care of each other.
We will fight and die if necessary to maintain that freedom.
Believe it.

Occam's Tool| 12.7.10 @ 6:06PM

The problem, RCV, is that Sharia Law, strictly enforced, contains many injustices---the testimony of women is degraded, for example, or child marriages are allowed.

I think the OK law would have done much better by explicitly outlawing certain types of contract, i.e., marriage contracts shall not be legal for 9 year olds. No man will have the right beat his children and wife by contract, etc. First off, this would have put Islamists on the defensive by defending those clauses, and secondly, it would have made for much bad publicity for the Federal judges if they overruled.

For example, I couldn't care less about Halal law for food in Islamic culture. I do care very much for treatment of women. We pussyfoot around too much with these evil clowns.

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.7.10 @ 6:37PM

Occam's Tool,

Man, you are sleazy to cut to the chase like that.
Heh!
I love it!

Occam's Tool| 12.7.10 @ 6:39PM

I humbly attempt to learn from the Master, Ken.

MikeD| 12.7.10 @ 9:57PM

Occam; you are WAAAYYY too self depricating! You have lots of really excellent things to say, and you say them well. But...we're all learning from Ken!

Impeach Don't Wait| 12.7.10 @ 11:39PM

"First off, this would have put Islamists on the defensive by defending those clauses, and secondly, it would have made for much bad publicity for the Federal judges if they overruled."

Good point. Hope there are other states paying attention....

rock911| 12.8.10 @ 1:55PM

Amen! Sir! Amen! God Bless you and the good words you have chosen. They aren't fancy they just state the obvious, which the lawyer types only really get when they can smell your breath and feel heat of your words.

AmericanOnly| 12.20.10 @ 9:57AM

Hello Ken,

Well put my fellow American! You are my hero!
You have spoken plainly in truth and justice.
This is the American way.

Occam's Tool| 12.7.10 @ 6:50PM

Hey, let's be nice to RCV. He may be a Liberal, but he doesn't come on the forum and talk about how Conservatives suck---he advances an argument. True, it is an argument that we can cut to pieces, but I think we should encourage polite discussion, no?

For example, on another post, I totally screwed up why Michael Corleone had to whack Fredo. John II politely told me where to get off, but he did so politely.

RCV is the type of Liberal we want commenting here, so that we can slice and dice his points for intellectual (and emotional) fun. But I know lots of Liberals who aren't Obamaclones and are nice personally. We are Conservatives, and value logic and reason. Unless you have people, like, say, Tim* or, Chris, I think we can be nice.

All this being said, I don't think the OK bill was grandstanding. I think it went about things the wrong way (see my post below for how to do it the right way), but our culture in the US respects freedom of expression and the right to be an irritant or an eccentric. It is to the protection of that right that the OK bill was proposed, and the underlying arguments are good. Sharia law, in part, presupposes different rules for different folks based on religion. It also provides for second class citizenship and first class citizenship. I've got problems with that.

RCV| 12.8.10 @ 6:25PM

It appears a Senate screw-up has killed the food control bill, also known as S510: the Food Safety Modernization Act, for now.

It seems a “sticky” provision in the United States Constitution — Article 1, Section 7 — got in the way. That little Constitutional provision that says, “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives…”

darcy| 12.8.10 @ 10:14PM

Truly, those are sweet words you write, RCV; best ever, from you, in my recollection.

RCV| 12.10.10 @ 2:43AM

I am very very sorry.I am very very sorry.I am very very sorry.I am very very sorry.I am very very sorry.I am very very sorry.I am very very sorry.

Paul D| 12.7.10 @ 12:32PM

Multiculturalism is still the official policy of the Federal Government and will get Federal workers who violate it in just as much trouble as it always has.

Nothing has changed yet.

Tim the Enchanter| 12.7.10 @ 12:55PM

Ken- that's better. You had me worried there for a moment.

Alan Brooks| 12.7.10 @ 8:20PM

"Our political class has at last recognized that multiculturalism is a recipe for disaster."

Someday they will realize the GOP is a recipe for mediocrity.

MikeD| 12.7.10 @ 9:59PM

Of course! We can all clearly see just how much positive change the Dems and their liberal idiocy have brought to our Country. You may suffer from "Bush Derangement Syndrome", but unemployment was 4.7% when nancyscum and her commie friends slithered into town. Whatcha think 'bout THAT big guy?

Alan Brooks| 12.7.10 @ 10:25PM

Hey! I didn't fart that shit above! Someone stole my cyber ID again!

Alan Brooks| 12.7.10 @ 11:17PM

Tim*,
don't blame me, it was your father who beat you.

Occam's Tool| 12.12.10 @ 12:48AM

Dear Alan:

Personally, Alan, I think Tim*/Clint gets these tendencies from his grandparents, who I have alluded to in another thread. In addition to placing an emphasis on excessive straining while defecating and onanism, Tim*/Clint's grandparents met while chasing a carriage in the snow, running on all fours. Clint/Tim* himself has been observed chasing Wallabies through Central Park Zoo, as he can't deal with the ferocity of the male duck-billed platypus when defending itself. His other compulsion is, of course, his Annoying tendency to put, in placeS moSt inappropriate, a HAranguing series of capiTals.

Merry Christmas, Alan. I enjoy reading you even when you're wrong.

GavInTucson| 12.8.10 @ 12:59AM

Alas, this is all the more reason why an account verification process needs to be installed on this board. Sometimes I just can't tell who got hijacked and who's legit. Actually, most times I can't.

Sigh.

Alan Brooks| 12.8.10 @ 4:21AM

Margie says Tim* is doing quite a bit of ID theft;
undoubtedly, there are others as well.

Alan Brooks| 12.8.10 @ 6:27PM

As I mentioned in a previous article, The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) claims that American Vision believes that the “U.S. was founded as a ‘Christian nation’ and that its democracy should be replaced with a theocratic government based on Old Testament law.” This is hardly accurate. American Vision believes that America was founded on fundamental Christian (biblical) principles, a view easily supported by a look at the historical record. Those values come from both the Old and New Testaments. Again, the historical record supports this view. There are lots of laws in the OT that no longer apply, either in the Church or the civil sphere, and many more that still do, many of which are still on our statute books. There are also circumstantial considerations to take into account when considering the application of biblical law, as the NT points out on a regular basis. The people at the SPLC imply that Christians who believe in God’s law don’t believe in the democratic process.

Alan Brooks| 12.8.10 @ 8:22PM

... or is it the other way around? Don't ask me, I voted for the Teleprompter Messiah, the one who betrays Israel, whereas I also claim to be pro Israel.
I just can't make any sense. I should kill myself.

Occam's Tool| 12.12.10 @ 12:50AM

This was Clint's hijacking, I think.

Alan Brooks| 12.10.10 @ 2:44AM

I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?

Alan Brooks| 12.11.10 @ 2:19AM

"I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?I'm a lozel, you know?"

So in this case it's Jeremiah doing the ID theft.

MikeD| 12.7.10 @ 11:08PM

Ken;

Time for THE BRICKER AMENDMENT. The fight has just begun, no matter how many hopeful people feel unjustified optimism.

E. E. Sparkman| 12.8.10 @ 7:23PM

I look fwd. 2 reading Your book,& PLEASE keep-up the good work & "Keep the Faith",Best

Melvin| 12.7.10 @ 8:05AM

These multicultural imbeciles fail to realize, that a culture such as we have in the United States was going to allow itself to be turned into something other that what it is.
I have heard this more than once that Multiculturalism is dead and gone. Au contraire but someone needs to tell that to our bureaucrats in the government run education centers and college academia. Because they're still prying open the mouths of young babes and force feeding they're vile crap in whether the student or his parents want it or not.
We have rabid educators that think that if we get enough young minds to think, the way we do on a societal level that all we be right in the morning, the sea levels will lower, and the temperature will go down.
Diversity, diversity, diversity, diversity is the mantra that beats inside the Liberal mind like the throb of a heartbeat. These multicultural morons fail to realize that here we are a unified Country with unified goals that every man and every woman has equal opportunity to achieve if they desire to put in enough effort and responsibility.
So by default if we have unity as a Nation of Americans we will have diversity because this Nation is made up from many peoples all over the globe that have sworn allegiance to this Country, but still retain they're individual cultural identify.
This is what has made the United States so unique and exceptional is that we receive people from all over the world and through our history of this American experiment have achieved in a short time what many nations have yet to achieve or are still trying to achieve.
You can't force Americans to be something that they're not, and that was forced multiculturalism does, it forces the individual to change the whole dynamic of what an American is.

Maura| 12.7.10 @ 8:19AM

Mr. Scruton -- I hope you are right. I'm not seeing much movement to counter multiculti political correctness here in my neck of the woods. I believe it's coming. But I don't know when.

WilliamInWien| 12.7.10 @ 8:26AM

What about "multiculturalism" at the UN? Every day tens of thousands on UN employees from all over the globe sit down next to each other and undertake the work of the UN. At lunch time, for the most part, they share tables with fellow countrymen. After hours, they socialize with natives of their mother country. From time to time there are "problems" between two distinct groups, but keeping their jobs is more important. When dining at a Thai restaurant, I ran into UN natives of Thailand, the same with Indian restaurants and when we went to US style restaurant, guess what? Fellow Americans. People are most comfortable amongst their own culture and values, period. One "uniting" theme at the UN continues to be a level of anti-Americanism that rarely surfaces but is cleverly hinted at. The US Congress, in a joint session, should invite Ms. Merkel to address them on the perils and pitfalls of multiculturalism!

Ray| 12.7.10 @ 2:19PM

"What about "multiculturalism" at the UN?"

Well, since just about every scheme, plan, project, ect that the UN produces (you can't please all of the people all of the time, although the UN doesn't seem to know this) is rife with inherent corruption (thanks to the "necessity" to "cater" to the "cultures" of the "diverse" people who are the target of those scheme, plans, and projects) and ultimately fails, and, subsequently, cause more harm than good, this is yet another example of the failures of multiculturalism.

Once you treat everyone as equal and remove this false "multiculturalism" idea from the conception and planning stage the inherent corruption is greatly reduced and the project has a much better chance as being successful.

Occam's Tool| 12.7.10 @ 8:20PM

Don't forget that the UN is evil everywhere---for example, UNICEF opposes international adoptions. Since both my kids are Guatemalan Mayans, this cheesed me off much. I think the UN would best be served by being in Brussels. It is a disgrace in New York.

Deborah D | 12.7.10 @ 8:27AM

I hope you're right too, Mr. Scruton. Just as the US is following Europe off the cliff as far as socialism is concerned just when it's absolutely obvious that socialism is an economic and societal nightmare, so are our "culture leaders" following Europe off the multiculti cliff. Normal Americans haven't made the leap, but our children have been force-fed this crapola for years. Political correctness and multiculturalism are Marxist creations, made specifically to tear the culture apart. Look up the Frankfort School -- since they couldn't marry Marxism/Communism to economics in the USA, they decided to marry it to the culture instead. Let's hope we've awakened soon enough.

Louis Jenkins| 12.7.10 @ 8:42AM

May multi-culturism rest in peace. But it ain't happening around here. Let's be honest Mr. Scruton, Islam is the fastest growing culture/society in the world. Naturally it is going to spill over into other countries, and by default and birthrate, take over. For our government to say "accept our way" is beyond their facilities. Even if a Republican had taken the White House in '08 we'd still be hush hush on bathing rooms, the urinals, the prayer rooms. Christmas would still be an "un-mentionable" in the polite circles.

Europe may have seen the light, but Englandstan, Amsterdstan, or Paristan are too far past the point of return. When 54% of the welfare recipients in Norway are Muslim the change has been affected.

Occam's Tool| 12.12.10 @ 12:52AM

The experts I have read say about 20% is all that is necessary, especially as the number of young people is higher.

Derek Leaberry| 12.7.10 @ 8:53AM

Most conservatives throughout the world may have finally coalesced around the idea that multiculturalism is an unstable brew but our fellows on the left still think multiculturalism is not only viable but is a preferred national synthesis. Every time you pass a Volvo, Prius or Versa on the road with a Diversity bumper sticker, remember that tens of millions of Americans belong to the cult of multiculturalism. What better way can a liberal show their hate of America than by supporting overthrow with multiculturalism. Vive Che!

WTF| 12.7.10 @ 9:01AM

Canada is more multicultural than America, and happier about it. Perhaps new Canadians succeed more than counterparts in other countries; perhaps the problems arise not so much from origin as from destitution and frustration.

Rust Belt Ronnie| 12.7.10 @ 9:44AM

Canada has a great deal for immigrants! Come in with $1,000,000.00, deposit it in a bank and one month later you are a citizen. Send back to China
for your relatives and then move to the USA! That is how it works in Vancouver.

rac-VT| 12.8.10 @ 9:46AM

Ummm, the US has something like this also.
Visas are expedited if you can demonstrate that you have a million dollars (I think that's the amount), are building a company, and will hire x-amount of people within a year or so.

Melvin| 12.7.10 @ 10:21AM

The good citizens of Quebec will adamantly disagree with you, for they do not consider themselves part of Canada, but of France.

Pelligrino| 12.7.10 @ 11:24AM

WTF, Canada is no more (perhaps even a bit less) multicultural than the US. A lot of the big cities in the US had a signficant head-start on all this well over 100 years ago. Multiple people groups all living within proximity of one another is not a new world phenomena.

And in the western parts of Canada there is still ample elbow room. That tends to delay the issues of immigrants who do not -- in full harmony -- integrate with their new land.

Occam's Tool| 12.7.10 @ 6:08PM

WTF, Canada has the ability to NOT ACCEPT immigrants, something we are having problems with. They are also having terrorist attacks.

rac-VT| 12.8.10 @ 9:42AM

With respect, I think WTF missed the point of Roger Scruton's article.
Canada is very multi-racial, but pretty much enjoys a single culture.
Yes, the province of Quebec does enjoy some cultural unity, but that reinforces Mr. Scruton's point... that history, geography etc. determines the culture.

Anthony| 12.7.10 @ 9:02AM

I could not agree more with my fellow posters, me thinks you are a bit premature in declaring victory.
Multiculturalism, like AGW, is a virulent disease of the leftist mind that is not easily cured. Frankly, it is part of the left's DNA.

Neighborhood Marxist| 12.7.10 @ 9:03AM

100 years of failure proves NOTHING!

Neighborhood Marxist| 12.10.10 @ 2:47AM

In the "Lord of the Rings" books, hobbits were rescued by giant eagles, but real-life hobbits might have been hunted by giant storks, scientists find.

The fossil remains of what may have been a hobbit-like species of human were discovered in 2003 at the Liang Bua cave on the Indonesian island of Flores. In that cave, scientists also unearthed a large number of bird fossils -- including 20,000- to 50,000-year-old wing and leg bones from what appears to have been a stork nearly 6 feet tall

Can't We All Just Get Along?| 12.7.10 @ 9:13AM

In a word............... NO!

Best regards
Old Texican

Don| 12.7.10 @ 9:35AM

Ludwig Von Mises exposes the lie of "racism" in "Human Action" in the Chapter heading "Revolt against Reason." He fled Austria and then Switzerland to escape the Nazi Regime. He explains that according to Marx, the Ruling Class, Bourgeois and Proletariat are assigned different truths, logic and acceptable bahaviour. This is the same flawed concept on which "Multiculturism" is based. You can find the information at the Mises Institute website.

Petronius| 12.7.10 @ 9:47AM

If MC is dead, I'm a Liberal again. All it is and ever was is a weapon against normality, morality, prosperity, American hegemony, and all else the Left hates. They oppose even the concept of a culture for others. Given their heads, most liberals desire to be Bachanallian wastrels but can't afford it. That's our fault too. The root of their animus is their self image as Avant Roobs, and their claim to top rung on the social food chain as their birth right. While we've BTDT, best to refresh our memories. Reread the essay Rank Ignorance in the Spectator of London, 15 July, 2000: Prole Models, by Charles Murray in WSJ:
and The Great Roob Revolution, by Roger Price, Random House 1970. Multiculturalism will be dead when those who hate Real Americans pack up and leave.

davelnaf| 12.7.10 @ 9:55AM

It’s obvious to anyone with their eyes open that people from different cultures often do not assimilate into US culture. Examples abound. But two in particular stand out.

Even though American and Mexican cultures are different they are not very different. Yet, millions of Mexicans and others from Central America have found it hard to let go of their native lands. The relative nearness of these countries has been an opportunity for them to have it both ways. There is a widespread feeling among individual Mexicans that their time in the US is temporary, even after they have been here for decades. To maintain this myth they discourage their offspring from marrying Anglos or others, and they make frequent trips back to their countries of origin to recharge their cultural batteries. The Mexican perspective on the US is basically a social-political one. In large part it is about the historical claim of Mexico to parts of the US. What Americans believe about anything else is of little concern to them.

With Muslim immigrants, particularly Muslim-Arab ones, what Americans believe in regard to a wide range of issues is of enormous importance to them. Our beliefs and core values infringe upon the Koran’s role as an all-inclusive, one source guide for everything. Their angst is best expressed in the focus of their vigilance groups on the larger society around them. These groups are a way for Muslims to assuage their anxieties for living among unbelievers. But their primary focus is to prevent the larger society from infringing upon what they regard as their ‘rights.’ This can take the form of preventing Americans from upholding, for hardly more than cosmetic reasons, the primacy of their core beliefs. Their suit against an attempt to exclude Sharia law from becoming part of Oklahoma’s civil and criminal code at some point is an example of how they view American society. It hardly needs saying that Sharia is never likely to be implemented here. But to these groups even the language of this measure was a clear infringement upon their ‘rights,’ not as citizens of this country but as Muslims.

Pelligrino| 12.7.10 @ 11:16AM

Well commented, davelnaf.

My question to all: When did we first have activist Muslims in Oklahoma? Really? Oklahoma? And they don't even wait 48 hours after an election result to crank up their "we're aggrieved" malarkey?

We all need to beware the infiltration of Muslims in places like Lincoln, Nebraska, throughout the Great Plains, the heartland. They are not just in the big, urban cities of our Northeast.

And this is a strategy to tear us down. The man in OK City is arguing his case partly as a Muslim. He is arguing his case as an American citizen, i.e. your equal.

(And yet he is not your equal in this Land. He or his parentage came here with this very evil in mind. Just a a saboteur in a time of war.)

How do y'all see this?

YeloStalyn| 12.7.10 @ 4:16PM

Well, let's see. The bomb that went off prematurely outside OU's football stadium (wasn't covered by the news much here in OK either). The bomber? Muslim.

The guy who learned how to fly without landing so he could crash into the Trade Towers? Yeah... he was here in OK learning how to fly.

He is NOT being prohibited from exercising his religion. The OK law did NOT outlaw Islam. The law posits NOTHING on citizens. It deals ONLY with the courtroom and judge. It ONLY limits the sources of legal precedent and code the judge can look to for guidanceand law. It simply says he can not look to how England ruled in a case or what is/isn't illegal in England. Or in Canada. Or in a Muslim theocracy. Sharia law is the religion legal doctine of Muslim theocracies. Foreign entities. A Judge in OK, by this law, could only use the events and facts of a case measured against US and OK law to determine it. For example... a Muslim man kills his wife or child in an honor killing. Under Sharia law he has done nothing wrong. Under US and OK law he's a murderous crap-bag. If he were able to cite Sharia law and have it hold legal weight, he may get off. But now, the US and OK laws supercede any outside legal ideology which does what?
FORCES ALL AMERICANS, MUSLIM OR NOT, TO BE BOUND BY THE SAME, UNIFORM US AND OK LAWS.

It's that simple.

If you don't get that... you are a measurably stupid human being.

liberal| 12.8.10 @ 2:54AM

I'm not really sure why I am bothering with this, as I imagine it will do little more than generate hateful retorts like many of those above. From a non-conservative point of view, the law seems highly unnecessary, as there are, I read, an estimated 15,000 Muslims within Oklahoma's population of 3.7 million, which works out to about .4% of the population: hardly a "takeover" risk, even from a preemptive point of view. I completely respect the desire - and I share it - to have the Courts use American law and precedent, but it seems extremely unrealistic, implausible, and, dare I say, impossible that the Courts would do anything else, as all Americans are already bound by US law, per Article VI of The Constitution. All that said, unless I am mistaken or missing something, or the statistics I quoted from the internet are grossly off, which I am certain will be pointed out, this law is bigoted in nature because it points out the law of one particular culture. No, I have not forgotten 9/11.

I am open to being, and expect to be, raked over the coals for posing opposing thought on your forum, but I have been polite and respectful, I think. With that said, tear it up! Rip me a new one!

By the way, I am gay, so feel free to have a field day with that. I am also very good-looking.

Stammon| 12.8.10 @ 4:20AM

"this law is bigoted in nature because it points out the law of one particular culture"
That "culture" happens to be the legal framework of this country. Do you want to live under Sharia Law or US Law? Why can't US Law assert it's right to be the law of the land? I think you let your need to be "multicultural" confuse you.

liberal| 12.8.10 @ 4:46AM

Stammon, you misunderstood my statement. I made it very clear that I like living under US law, and that, according to The Constitution, that is our only choice. US law, IS the law of the land. The culture I referred to was Islamic culture. Your need to be ethnocentric has confused you.

Mel Torme| 12.8.10 @ 11:18AM

I still don't get why you are against this OK law then. Yeah, maybe it's not necessary (YET). So, it just affirms the current way.

Of course, we do have too many laws, but this is not one of the too many I'd be worried about. Again, what's your problem with this law?

liberal| 12.8.10 @ 3:08PM

Something that really raises my ire is when politicians play on fear and latent bigotry for their own political benefit. It’s sort of like a playground bully who gives a wedgie to an unpopular kid to elevate his social cachet, but worse: if an elected leader feels it’s okay to pick on a small population (0.4%), that gives tacit permission for the general populace to do the same. So now we have a majority of good, respectful people who might find it a little more okay to look askance at someone, tell tasteless jokes or be suspicious of them because they are different.
As a secondary issue, unnecessary laws are truly a waste of legislative time, and therefore, taxpayer money. How much legislative time has been consumed with debates, voting, and gloating press conferences, with no discernable benefit? Weren’t there more important issues to address in the Oklahoma legislature?

Mel Torme| 12.8.10 @ 5:08PM

First off, it's not picking on anyone. Why should a Moslem in Oklahoma be upset that the state is affirming laws will stay based on US legal principals, not some 7th-century-based bullshit legal system? I would be pleased - I mean, as a Moslem, I probably immigrated to the US. Part of the great thing about America WAS rule of law, not men (or Inmans or Priests - still men, of course).

Secondly, it's not a waste of money to keep the legislators busy with resolutions and stuff like this. Your money starts getting wasted when the legislators start rolling up their sleeves for the real business - taxing the crap out of people and finding new ways to take away your freedom.

If the US House and Senate, from the (almost) Goldwater Administration on, had just been all down with Cholera, Syphilis, pubic lice, and Whooping cough, our nation would still be a free nation. Alas!

Stammon| 12.8.10 @ 9:11PM

I cannot fathom being "ethnocentric" as I am a regular American. That is I am: Danish, English,Welsh, Native American, and who knows what all.
I understand only what you wrote. You were referring to US Law and Islamic Culture. I quote:
"the law seems highly unnecessary"
"hardly a "takeover" risk"
"as all Americans are already bound by US law"
I was referring specifically to your inability to understand that Americans might want US Law to be the only law that governs them, and that they have a right as Americans to vote that law into existence. They might want only laws that they have voted for to be the laws that apply to them.

Stammon| 12.8.10 @ 9:15PM

Oh, and the fact that you are gay is a complete nonsequitur. Why do you bring it up? Is it supposed to mean something?

Stammon| 12.8.10 @ 9:17PM

Oh, and I like that you are up early as I am. So early that you have to read the previous day's Am Specs, with the yesterday letters.

YeloStalyn| 12.8.10 @ 2:07PM

Name one other theocracy. Sharia is, as far as I know, the only legally recognized religion law system by a nation. As such, it's not a legal philosphy of rule, but a religeous one. The OK law forbids courts from viewing foreign (legal) law. And it also includes theocractic law (Sharia being the only one, if not at least the only one of any real merit).

The number of Muslims in OK is irrelavent. That's a liberal's attempt to justify letting Muslims do what they want. The minority getting a pass becasue they're the minority rather than EVERYONE being treated equally under the law.

And as I said above... the OK law does NOT outlaw Islam. It does NOTHING to prohibit ANYONE from worshiping as they see fit. It simply defines what a JUDGE can use to determine the legality of an action before him in his court. That's it. Period.

It's not that hard to understand. Once you get that critical point about the law, you see that there is NO REASON a Muslim should be upset with the law so long as he is an adherent of the US Constitution and American laws as a citizen. If he has problems with that because of his faith, he should leave.

liberal| 12.8.10 @ 4:41PM

I’m just going to respond by quoting from an article on uwire.com:

“…the framework for sanctioning Islamic tribunals in the United States has existed for years. As one legal blogger notes, Sharia courts—such as those in England—fall under the category of “alternative dispute resolution” mechanisms. If two parties in a dispute agree to abide by the decisions of a third party, the government must enforce that third party’s decision so long as it does not violate public policy or the law. In the United States, resolutions like this can take secular form in arbitration, religious form in Orthodox Jewish Beit Dins, and entertaining form in popular shows like “Judge Judy.” There is nothing frightening about this, and certainly nothing “militant.”

So what of the apparent fear that, if given a toehold in America, Sharia courts will establish a “parallel legal system” that enshrines honor killings and spousal abuse? Twenty years ago, in Employment Division v. Smith, the Supreme Court precluded this fear by ruling that absent a compelling state interest, religious law cannot override secular law. As Antonin G. Scalia wrote for the majority opinion, it would contradict “both constitutional tradition and common sense” to “make an individual’s obligation to obey” the law “contingent upon the law’s coincidence with his religious beliefs.”

To be sure, there is still a compelling question as to how voluntary these courts are in some cases. Often in Britain, writes one editorialist for The Guardian, Muslim women face tremendous community pressure to accept decisions that are clearly biased against them. But the United States can deal with issues of duress individually. It should not impact the rights of Muslims who genuinely desire to resolve their financial and civil disputes among themselves.”

And again, as Justice Scalia asserted, US Law supercedes any other law, tradition or belief.

That’s my last post as I don’t have time to keep up with this. I have learned a lot from exploring this with you all, and I apologize if I was invasive in your forum.

Mel Torme| 12.8.10 @ 5:10PM

Thank, liberal, and very civil responses are appreciated. If you're not careful, you might learn something (hey, hey, hey).

Occam's Tool| 12.12.10 @ 12:54AM

The difference is, as I say again and again, Jewish religious law is binding only on Jews in the US, and is subordinate to secular law in the US. Sharia law does NOT work that way in Europe. Gotta pay attention, Liberal sir.

MikeD| 12.7.10 @ 4:50PM

Your well written post prompts two responses from my feeble mind. First, multiculturalism is truly a malignant tumor taking root across our country, and anybody who thinks it has passed its 'hayday' is dead wrong because we have two generations of Americans who have suffered unending indoctrination from our terrible schools, and these attitudes will not be destroyed easily. The triple pillars of Academia, Media, and Demoncrap Politics have done their very best to use this poison to degrade and destroy the whole proud tradition of American exceptionalism. Our ignorant president who crawled around the world groveling was not as well received as his "willing lackies" in the media want us to think. I have friends all over the world and they tell the same story: Their media is as biased and shameless as ours. Europeans still know how we saved their collective a$$es in WWII, regardless of the sniveling utterances by obama and his apologists.

Second, it is, once again, time to push hard for the "BRICKER AMENDMENT" which does nothing but include language in the Constitution that clearly establishes the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the U.S. The current language in Article IV, named the "Supremacy Clause" has a nasty loophole that allows the possibility that an unscrupulous president (barry the muslim?) and congress (reid and pelosi?) could hide behind a U.N. treaty or agreement to directly affect American citizens with the poison spewed by that 'august' body; including things like the right to bear arms and direct U.N. taxation of Americans. Don't laugh, these people have proven more than once that they are evil and self serving, and perfectly willing to sacrifice the United States of America on their perverted altar of multiculturalism and any other cause that drips from the U.N. sewer.

Sometime ask me how I REALLY feel!

Occam's Tool| 12.7.10 @ 8:22PM

I despise the UN. They serve no purpose, and contribute to the exploitation of children.

The Hague treaty, which is to "supervise" adoption from foreign countries, actually shuts it down. No children from Guatemala are up for adoption in the US, and that is quite sad.

MikeD| 12.7.10 @ 10:03AM

Historians used to call this "Balkanization", the process of destruction of a country or culture by the continual breaking into smaller and smaller groups until nothing is left but all sorts of small clans or tribes who aggressively defend their 'differentness' by whatever means at their disposal.

This is just one more bit of evidence that Liberalism is a dangerous mental disorder. These cretins are so caught up in their own 'noble' love of anything anti-American that they are truly too stupid to see the mortal damage they have caused. Combine this with the equally stupid 'deconstructionism', as given us by Stanly Fish, a true traitor if there ever was one, these twin daggers have been carving at the heart of America since the late 60's.

These two horrors of academia need to be thrown where they belong, on the ash heap of history, and their apostles need to be purged from our schools and institutions as quickly as possible. From these two, every other liberal fantasy of intellectual superiority have been spawned.

These are the people who taught obama and form the backbone of his malignant administration. C'mon 2012!!!

Occam's Tool| 12.7.10 @ 6:13PM

It's important to realize that the aspects of "multiculturalism" that are abhorrent are those that infringe on the rights of fellow citizens to live peacefully. For example, I'm eating whenever during Ramadan, but Scottish MDs and Nurses are forbidden to in hospitals during the day.

If I kept Kosher, Jewish law would not have me forcing that on you. I think it's fine to celebrate different cultures, as long as the basics of respect for the essential building blocks of our society (free speech, free assembly, bikinis) are respected. This the Islamists refuse to do.

darcy| 12.8.10 @ 1:52AM

MikeD writes:
"These cretins are so caught up in their own 'noble' love of anything anti-American that they are truly too stupid to see the mortal damage they have caused."

That may be true of the commie drones, but the movers and shakers, the liberal "elite," shall we say, know perfectly well that their aim is the destruction of Western culture. All that inheres in Western civilization -- well, let me quote my favorite traditionalist conservative, Lawrence Auster:

"The liberal vision
That world view [that gives birth to political correctness] is liberalism, the belief in equality and non-discrimination as the ruling principles of society. Liberalism attacks all the larger wholes—natural, social, and spiritual—that structure man’s existence, because those larger wholes create differences and distinctions which violate the rule of equality and non-discrimination. Liberalism attacks God, truth, religion, objective morality, standards of excellence, social traditions, the family, parental authority, sex differences, nation, ethnicity, and race. It aims at a world of liberated, equal human selves, with no God above them and no country or culture around them, free to interact on a basis of total freedom and equality with all other human selves on earth. To achieve this universal freedom and equality, the ability of actual peoples to define and govern themselves must be eliminated. Democratic and constitutional self-government must be replaced by the regime of the global elite, a regime that is beyond criticism and democratic accountability because it represents and embodies the very principle of liberal goodness: the equality of all.
That’s the liberal vision. Political correctness is one of the weapons by which this vision is imposed, it is not the vision itself. "

Moral relativism gave birth to multiculturalism; it was inevitable, once the Enlightenment thinkers decided that human reason alone was sufficient to understanding man's existence and that with science all questions pertaining to life could be answered. They largely jettisoned the Bible and with it the Judeo-Christian underpinnings of the civilization they now tinkered with.

The God haters will always be with us, in one form or another. Liberalism, multiculturalism and PC are just the current faces of man's natural enmity toward God, which also happen to be weakening our nation.

marianne | 12.7.10 @ 10:06AM

At last, Multiculturalism is dead, let's speak about Integration!
For many years Newropeans, and by its president Franck Biancheri, argued that multiculturalism is a nonsense in Europe, but it has never been clearly stated by the political leaders so far it has now be done in Germany by Angela Merkel. The statement of the German Chancellor is essential in order to move to something else, namely integration of immigrants and define a common policy urgently needed in Europe, essentially in Euroland, to tackle with the raising difficulties we face in this time of global crisis, awakening hatred and leading to easy solutions against foreigners, especially when they live on the margins of the society, its common values and rules. NewropMag presents the discussion on German/Dutch/French visions of the debate Multikulti vs Integration.
http://www.newropeans-magazine.....9/lang,fr/

Bob K.| 12.7.10 @ 10:16AM

It is good for The Ruling Class. They use it to keep their positions of power in the Academy and in the myriad State and National bureauocracies.

It keeps people divided. The Ruling Class can exploit the resulting resentments and fears and hatreds and play off one culture or race or sex or nationality or religion against others under the guise of "bringing us together." They like it because it is a tool they can use to maintain their dominance.

Mel Torme| 12.7.10 @ 10:50AM

I didn't think I'd see the day - an article in the Spectator that acknowledges the problem of unlimited immigration (not like the author provides any of the easy answers, but that would be expecting too much). I thought there was some type of moratorium established by the editors.

In regards to America, the problem with our million+ legal and equal amount illegal immigrant levels is that there is no more assimilation (the melting pot). It's all about the numbers, and I, unfortunately, didn't see any numbers in this otherwise good (albeit overly optimistic) article.

Since the Ted (FIH) Kennedy law in 1965, if we had had on the order of 100,000 or 200,000 immigrants per year and no illegal immigration, instead, that'd be 4.5 to 9 million. That's a lot of people, but over the years, it's not enough to where they don't even try to become Americans and just form their own foreign lands within the US like now. Nobody minds some new people on the block who cook some new weird food, dress a little funky, buy nasty-tasting alcohol and use the bathroom differently (don't ask about the last part). In fact, Americans are very tolerant to begin with, and some of the new ways may catch on - think burritos and margaritas.

But, when the whole block turns into a foreign nation, that's when it starts to piss people off. We all want to stay living in America, for now, at least, and that's why we are here. If we wanted to live in Mexico, just as the major example. we'd be down there prontomundo Mexico has it's good parts - many that are now better than in the new, Motherland Security controlled America, even. (Try lighting up a cigarette here, or just buying a teenager a Miller, or starting a small business - much easier in Mexico and not so much freaking out.) However, I live here, and I don't want Mexico to move up here (out of California del Norte). The same goes for the strange Somalian village that is now mysteriously located in southern Minnesota. Did anyone ask the native un-diverse Minnesotans what they thought about that idea before making tens of thousands of Somalis US citizens? Do you think they will become as American as apple pie after a year or two in Minnesota, or is it more likely they wouldn't know apple pie or baseball from shinola, and a few of them have already headed back to Somalia to learn the art of Jihad?

Did anyone think about all this, or was that just not important compared to cheap labor for farmers, housewives, and builders, extra democrat votes, more food varieties, and cheaper IT help?

Occam's Tool| 12.7.10 @ 6:15PM

Islamists in Minnesota are not fun. Again, I don't care how one prays, so long as they don't want to kill me for being different. Years ago, that would go without saying.

Bill| 12.7.10 @ 10:51AM

Marx was ethnically Hebrew, raised religiously within Judaism. He was culturally a German. Stalin was a Georgian by ethnicity, but Soviet culturally. You would think liberals would understand the ethnic-cultural distinction thoroughly; after all, don't they preen and pride themselves on their cosmopolitanism?

Bob K.| 12.7.10 @ 11:45AM

Stalin, educated in an Orthodox Seminary, was a master at playing one nationality or ethnic group off against another and moving others out (like the Chechins to central asia) or eliminating them if necessary (like the Ukrainian Kulaks) and the Volga Germans seem to have disappeared.

He feared the Russians most of all. He finally put them in charge of his Army when Germany invaded Russia. The head of his Secret Police was a Georgian and his foreign minister was from Armenia in the Caucasus region near Georgia.

Bill| 12.7.10 @ 1:38PM

The term "kulak" is not an ethnic or racial term. It means something like "wealthy peasant," and was interpreted by Stalin and his lackeys to mean any peasant who hired other peasants to assist him on his farm, or who had a mule or steer to pull his wagon or wagons. Kulaks were systematically starved to death not only in the Ukraine but everywhere in the USSR, although it's true that the Ukraine "kulaks" perished on about a 3:1 basis with "kulaks" elsewhere (6 million Ukrainians to 8 million overall) during the Terror Famine.

Bob K.| 12.7.10 @ 3:54PM

Of course it isn't an ethnic term. They were Ukrainians for the most part as you note. Farmers, if you will, and citizens of a slavic state like Russia, the dominant slavic state in the region. And Russia was was run by men from the Caucasus region (not slavs) who in turn organized this finely tuned system of ethnic cleansing. And these people were also in fear that russians and other slavs would end up in charge of the revolution if they weren't first worried about how and where they could turn for their food. That is why the kulaks were exterminated.

Paul D| 12.7.10 @ 4:01PM

Actually Marx was raised religiously as a Christian, because his father had converted from Judaism to Christianity before Marx was born. Marx became an atheist in his late teen years after a brief period -speculative as the witness/records are lost- dabbling in the occult.

frosty| 12.7.10 @ 11:00AM

Multiculturalism is dead? Tell that to Meg Whitman.
As long as the press is willing to use multiculturalism as a sledgehammer to beat those who don't subscribe to it over the head to the benefit of liberals, it will long live.
Until the old guard media is torn down, plank by plank, nothing will change.
Unsubscribe to your local liberal newspaper today. Stop funding their means of enforcement to the multicultural worldview.

Mel Torme| 12.7.10 @ 11:03AM

".... while Prospect, Britain's leading left-wing intellectual monthly, currently carries the caption "re-thinking race: has multiculturalism had its day?""

You never did say what the answer was, inside this British magazine. Maybe you, like I, don't want to catch something requiring an antibiotic by going deeper into this magazine, but I would put money on the magazine's answer being a resounding "no".

These people have an agenda. You're not going to change their minds with any facts. They want to execute their plans, and one of those plans is the cultural destruction of America. They are succeeding wildly, so far.

Frosty| 12.7.10 @ 11:28AM

Mel,
Your last paragraph would be the most relevant of all posted so far. It applies to all things progressive/liberal. Conservatives can argue until with unmatched logic and passion, but the liberal will never be willing to relinquish the vision. Do tax cuts really increase economic activity and increase revenue to the government? Doesn't matter, tax cuts don't fit the vision. And on and on it goes, pick your topic. The only way is to utterly defeat them at the ballot box and in the way conservatives choose to spend their money, and in a willingness to stand up to their crap when we see it being practiced in our individual communities.

Bob K.| 12.7.10 @ 12:14PM

Disagree to some extent here. Their agenda is to STAY in power and if that means cultural destruction then so be it. The liberal Left is in great fear of losing power over the more moderate Democrats. More so after this past election.

Many of the great goals of the liberal Left (always a minority in the USA) have been accomplished. The great problem now is paying for them. Their large base, the moderate Democrats, are deserting them because they now realize they will also have to help pay for them. The Left (which includes
members of both the Republican and Democratic Parties) saw this coming years ago and pushed multi-culturism as a smoke screen and a hope that open border immigration could help solve the inevitable upcoming financial crisis. Unfortunately their plans came into conflict with populist and nationalistic forces they did not account for and the Left is now fighting back like rats in a corner.

Occam's Tool| 12.7.10 @ 8:24PM

Correctomundo, velvet fog!

tj| 12.7.10 @ 11:10AM

Swamp them with emails

Janet Napolitano Places Cameras in Wal-Mart Stores for Department of Homeland Security
This is why I, my family and friends will never buy or visit your stores again. This is outrageous. Big Brother and you in your stupidity will be sorry you ever let this happen in your stores. The TSA goons have never stopped an assault in this country. The people on the planes did and the parents of the stupid bombers reported them. WAKE THE HELL UP!!

Say goodbye to your freedoms.

Seek| 12.7.10 @ 11:16AM

Race and culture aren't the same thing but, contra Professor Scruton, they most certainly do overlap. The notion that they have "nothing to do with each other" is a universalist conceit, utterly ignoring the fact that people really do form beliefs and alliances based on racial affinity, beginning with that most intimate of alliances, marriage. In failing to grasp as much, the author sadly undermines his argument.

DNA does matter. From the begnning of recorded history, whole nations have been founded on the racial affinity principle. Enemy nations of the U.S. especially understand this, which is why they encourage their people come here to colonize us. Or perhaps "La Raza" has nothing to do with race and Mexican cultural identity?

Racial nationalism obviously can be taken too far. But so can the absurd and anti-historical notion of seeking a "color-blind society." We whites may be choose to be blind, but most nonwhites, egregious as so many are, see reality clearly.

Sheila| 12.7.10 @ 11:22AM

Well said, Seek. Tribalism + democracy + stupidity = racist idiocracy.

Pelligrino| 12.7.10 @ 11:45AM

Sorry, but I have tried to find real solid 'umpf' in Frau Kanzelor Angela Merkel's words 6 weeks ago, but I really did not see or hear blistering words trumpeting Multiculturalism's death. In fact, she seemed at times to be again stating the same old 'saw:' German society has failed to best integrate the Turks in particular over these past 40 years due to typical German character traits, e.g. inflexibility.

On the USA's shores, it would be terribly foolish to think Multiculturalism and its acolytes dead. In fact, I see and hear nothing of the kind in academia nor in our government. And if you are presently out of work and feverishly working to attain new employment, then you know that all tenets of Multiculturalism are alive and well.

Hasn't the male employee suffered more in this recession? Yes. White males of a certain age in particular? Yes.

Ask students applying to colleges and universities. Is it not a true plus to be able to claim some legitimate cultural identity that is not American when applying. You betcha.

The only sector -- as we all know -- that has hired vigorously over these past 24 months has been our national government. Let me tell you, you aren't exiting the unemployment line as a white, male with an Anglo-Saxon surname. And you are not rising in the civil service as fast as those who possess good "diversity" qualities.

After all, diversity equates to workplace competency, right?

(A side note: As the US men's soccer national team was in its final few days in America before heading to South Africa to contend for the World Cup 2010, it was repeated over and over in the US media: This is the best US side to ever vie for a World Cup title. Why? This is the most diverse.)

I kid you not. ESPN, Sports Illustrated, USA Today, Time, Newsweek, Soccer America, CNN, the Washington Post, NY Times, LA Times, etc., etc.

I had no idea that athletic success on the field has anything to do with different family heritages.

Doctor Right| 12.7.10 @ 1:03PM

"Jewish by race"..???

WHAT?!?!

Interesting that in an article about the failures of multiculturalism and political correctness that the author would commit a serious and quite REAL faux pas.

Judaism is NOT a race. It is a religion.

There are brown-eyed, dark-skinned Jews; there are Jews with blond hair and blue eyes; there are even black African Jews.

The two main ethnic branches of Judaism are divided into "Sephardic" (middle eastern) and "Ashkenasim" (European). Ashkenasim Jews converted to Judaism during the first millenium, and are genetic Europeans. Sephardic Jews are genetically similar to the people of the modern middle east - Arabs, Palestinians, etc.

Most American Jews are Ashkenasim, and they are far from homogenous. They speak Russian, Polish, French, German, Hungarian, Ukranian, Slovakian, etc.

This is so basic, I can't believe I have to explain it.

ncatty| 12.7.10 @ 2:19PM

I agree that to be Jewish is primarily a religious designation. However, I eat lunch regularly with a conservative Jewish guy and he considers his children to be Jewish whether or not they are observant. This is different from say, a Presbyterian view, where a child born to a tenth generation Presbyterian family is not a Presbyterian until he or she makes a profession of faith.

Derek Leaberry| 12.7.10 @ 4:03PM

David Frum is sort of the same as your friend. He considers himself Jewish but is non-observant. Of course, Frum has become a non-observant conservative as well.

YeloStalyn| 12.7.10 @ 4:23PM

Jewish IS a race. It is this race that the Jewish faith derives it's name. They are not mutually bound, either. One can be of Jewish faith but not born a Jew. One can be born a Jew and not practice the Jewish faith.

Jesus, according to Christians, for example, IS a Jew. But He certainly is NOT of Jewish faith. That's kind of a big difference between Jews and Christians as a matter of fact (in terms of faith).

Occam's Tool| 12.7.10 @ 6:19PM

It is actually best to consider Jews a nationality rather than a race, or a pure religion. The religion of the nationality is Judaism, and it is the major cultural binding factor. But there are converts to Judaism, folks. They are neither sought nor encouraged (it is not necessary to convert to be righteous in G-d's eyes), but they do exist. I mean, does everyone remember Marilyn Monroe and Sammy Davis, Jr.? Both converts (Marilyn stayed Jewish when she devorced Miller), and both kinda famous.

Occam's Tool| 12.7.10 @ 6:38PM

The inability to pin down "Jewishness" is part of the charm of the people. Of course, my favorite descriptor is this: 13 million of 6 billion (0.2% of world population) vs. 22% of the world's Nobel Prizes. (Note, the Zuckers in "Airplane" joked about the light reading being "famous Jewish athletes," not famous Jewish composers, scientists, physicians, lawyers, writers, philosophers, economists, etc. Of course, Hank Greenberg, Sandy Koufax, Harold Abrahams (Chariots of Fire) and Mark Spitz weren't too shabby as athletes, not to mention the greatest Jewish athlete of all time---Daniel Mendoza---the first great heavyweight boxing champion.)

Now, I will argue that the reason for the wins is Cultural, not Genetic. If you put honey on your kids' chalkboards in kindergarten, and make sure that the brainy kids get the hot chicks, you will drive a certain cultural dynamic. A different, but similar in approach perspective is what the Kiwis do with Rugby; unfortunately, they are anti-intellectual and so have won only 3 Nobels out of a population of 4 million in 109 years (all earned for non-NZ work).

"We should remember that one man is much the same as another, and
that he is best who is trained in the severest school."

Thucydides

(My training in psychiatry was at UCLA. I trained during the LA riots. 'Nuff said.)

MikeD| 12.7.10 @ 4:56PM

While I must add a caveat that "race" is the designation used to classify us 'homo sapiens', for the purposes of this exchange I'll define it as physical groupings of humans by physical traits and bodily structure. Having said that, I need to bring up the ultimate irony of all. Jews and Arabs are actually the same 'race', Semites. Their differences are religious, but I just love watching the hatred and acrimony while thinking of their underlying 'sameness'. Ain't life grand!

YeloStalyn| 12.7.10 @ 5:27PM

I totally suffered from foot-in-mouth syndrom because of this! I used to be in retail management (I didn't get fired over this... it was much later that I decided to leave and change industries) and one day these two nice women were checking out. I heard them talking to one of my employess. I politely asked them where their accent was from because it sounded like it was from the Middle East. I happen to like the accent. They said, yes, the Middle East. I said, "I thought so. It sounded little like Hebrew." Not being a linguist in the slightest... it sounded more Jewish than anything else I'd heard. But, alas, they were Palestinians. OOPS. But hey... I got them pegged pretty well, geographically, at least!

Mugwa| 12.7.10 @ 10:23PM

Try being in an International Studies class in the mid-80's at AU discussing Palestine. The hebes and Arabs were going to kill each other right there.

MikeD| 12.7.10 @ 11:12PM

Then there's the cartoon about the last Jew and the last Palistinian on Earth staring nose to nose. The Jew says: "Isn't it finally time to stop? We're the last of our groups?" The Palistinian smiles, embraces the Jew, and detonates his suicide bomb. 'Nuff said...

Occam's Tool| 12.8.10 @ 1:09AM

Only one correction: he wouldn't wait that long. I hate cultures of death---Liberalism, Palestinian Nationalism.

Occam's Tool| 12.8.10 @ 1:11AM

Mr. D, you do beautiful work.

You know, all I want is to keep my money as much as possible, be allowed to practice my religion and profession, take care of people, and not have someone try to blow me up.

And Mugwa: "Hebes" is not a nice term.

Corellburger| 12.8.10 @ 4:54PM

"Hebes" is as innocent a term as a man mayi be guilty of. Surely you know the good old hymn "Bringing in the Hebes, Bringing n the Hebes, we will come rejoicing..." - it's all about successful missionary work.

Occam's Tool| 12.12.10 @ 12:58AM

I thought it was "Sheaves." :)

scott| 12.7.10 @ 1:20PM

Problem is, Europe "realized" their mistake a little too late.

Michael| 12.7.10 @ 2:48PM

Want Multiculturalism?? Go rent a foreign film or go to a resturant!

Pat| 12.7.10 @ 4:26PM

There’s more than a dollop of frustrated wish fulfillment running throughout this essay. And, multiculturalism is an absurd concept Native Americans can alternately laugh and cry about. Immigrants come to your country and “adopt” your language, respect your customs, believe in your laws – sure they do – but, in reality, they take your historic lands by force, break every treaty they sign, kill off your food supply, forcibly move entire communities for their personal convenience – and your descendents end up running blackjack tables or selling rubber tomahawks by the roadside. This multicultural disaster, on both sides of the Atlantic, has to be some form of cosmic poetic justice for Americans whose ancestors immigrated from Western Europe.

However, multiculturalism was always a con job foisted on us by the politicians; a self-serving swindle easily perpetrated on the gullible and guilt ridden among us. What is actually alarming the Europeans is that “their” Muslims pay absolutely no attention to the sacred “tenets of multiculturalism” – they don’t assimilate, don’t learn the language, don’t adopt the customs within their host countries, have no respect for the laws, hate the Europeans and thumb their noses at the entire European cultural legacy.

But, they easily embrace the concepts of European socialism – they understand “entitlements” and have no problem collecting welfare long term, whether that welfare is paid in U. K. pounds or Euros. As citizens who can be manipulated in traditional ways by Europe’s politicians, they’re a complete bust – and, more than likely, that miscalculation is what is presently frightening Members of Parliament, chancellors, presidents, ministers or whatever the Europeans call their version of left wing Democrats.

So, in the future, the descendents of these “Native Europeans” will be hustling drinks and food among Trattoria patio tables occupied by European Muslims or peddling their version of rubber tomahawks outside the Louvre. Somewhere, Chief Sitting Bull must be snickering in amusement over the fate of his Pale Face enemies and their former homelands.

Occam's Tool| 12.8.10 @ 1:13AM

Every Conservative on this thread: go to Amazon and buy and read Tom Kratman's Caliphate. Tom's a friend of mine, but I am not him and have no financial interest in this. But it is a novelization of America Alone.

jason taylor| 12.14.10 @ 9:10PM

Those "paleface enemies" did not do anything to "native americans", nor did they do anything to Chief Sitting Bull. Chief Sitting Bull's enemies are long dead, as is Chief Sitting Bull.

WAKE UP| 12.7.10 @ 5:28PM

Little by litle, I am hearing more sounds of We The People reclaiming ourselves; from independent British MPs standing up to the European “Parliament”, to the November USA mid-terms and so on. The left-wing MSM is now unable to damp down insistent reality, its credibility is shot, and the tenor and terms of battle are changing. Exquisitely slowly, but they are changing.

As Glenn Beck says: “The truth will set you free – but first it’s going to hurt”. Keep the faith.

Seek| 12.7.10 @ 6:08PM

What we need is a leader with the mettle and intellect of the late Enoch Powell. Someone like Sarah Palin just won't do.

Mugwa| 12.7.10 @ 10:21PM

She will do better at that than any of the others.

Combine her with Mr. DeMint, and you may have your wish.

Negro X| 12.7.10 @ 6:13PM

Remission...perhaps, dead?Hardly.

Mugwa| 12.7.10 @ 10:20PM

Diversity is cutural weakness. It has been shown time, and time again. Yet there is hardly a single person who will proclaim this in his workplace, his church or openly. You say Multikaltur is dead do you? I still feel the oppression. Until one can say what he wants where he wants when he wants, the marxists will still be piss((( on our heads.

Simon Templar| 12.8.10 @ 1:02AM

Diversity. Multiculturalism. Let's get our definitions correct here for starters. The Left has not been promoting diversity but rather balkanization. They do not believe in inculturating people nor the classic American melting pot theory. The United States has been a grand and successful experimentation in making one out of many by allowing ethnic and racial immigrants to keep their customs and cultures and at the same time expecting them to learn the language, understand and accept the laws and traditions of America, and participate in its institutions and civic duties. The Left has encouraged and promoted just the opposite of this under the false banner of multiculturalism. Perhaps the question the author should actually be addressing as well as the rest of us is, Why? What do they have to gain in balkanizing a nation?
Any takers?

Answers1| 12.8.10 @ 2:27AM

Good Heavens, man, come out and say it! Islam is not a religion of peace.

Simon Templar| 12.8.10 @ 12:56PM

Not exactly..the whole answer but you are on to something.
The Answer: It is the fastest way to bring down Western society and the culture,values, and beliefs that have made it powerful. It is is tool of anarchism that will assist in ushering in a new world order.

cpgrasshopper| 12.8.10 @ 4:54PM

A few years I saved a phrase without its' attribution. However, it very aptly fits in here. "Multiculturalism – becomes dangerous and demeaning to all cultures when it presents an idealized, and sometimes invented, version of other cultures and contrasts them with a demonized parody of the West."

Mark Veil| 12.9.10 @ 11:35PM

I think that more thought is needed about race. Look at the example of China. They are the most ambitious people you could find. They have the longest history. Hundreds of thousands of people have revealed themselves. That seems to be a good sample size. Yet, the Chinese allowed a tiny dynasty to dominate them right up to the present. The communist party is, after all, no different from a dynasty. It seems very aparent that this people, for whatever reason, lacks the courage or the conviction to stand up for human rights and a proper standard of living. As well, they seem to have few achievements if you compare them to Europeans, who developed many areas of knowledge and were prolific in discoveries.

If every one of the Chinese people were courageous enough to go on a hunger strike today, insisting on human rights, their situation could change in a month. Yet, they likely never will.

If we tell ourselves that they are identical to those of European descent, we miss entirely how very different they are. If those of European descent intermarry with them, we should not be surprised for the offspring to lack the independence of spirit and complexity and originality of thought needed to stand up for freedom. We cannot assume attitudes and actions which they have never ever held or taken.

Scotty| 12.12.10 @ 9:07AM

The depth of muticulturism is far to complex to define it simply. There are more cultures than there are countries, yet how do we define culture.
I may be alittle off but please let me try.
I notice culture comes from the word cult and it is my understanding that a cult lives by a certain set of what they perceive to be moral laws or doctrines that define their worldview. And in their understanding of that, is how they behave within the cult and beyond to the culture or should I say neighbors.

To put it another way might be to say that America's ideas alow for many diferent cults to abide side by side under the guidance of her laws and doctrines, thus creating a cult or culture with much diversity or views. Yet we need to allow for the diverse ways of other cults such as food and dress and celbrations and holidays... to enhance our nation but not persuade it or to change our great constitution (doctrines governing our land). For if that happens than everything becomes relative, instead of us becomming relatives.

So in America, as we embrace one another and our differences, let us not forget what are similarities are; that we are all created by God with certain unalienable rights. These rights include the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness......(even that pursuit has become perverse) equality because we are all made in the image of God and that we realize we do not live in the brotherhood of man but the neghborhood of man.....Race has nothing to do with color, we are all a part of the human race

I hope that makes alittle sense

Harry| 12.14.10 @ 7:01AM

Pelligrino,

If we all go back to a shipbuilder called Noah, we are all products of incest. And how did Noah's Aboriginal children get to Australia, along with Koalas, Kangaroos, etc. ? How did the freshwater fish in all the rivers of the world avoid being killed in the flood? Did Noah's Ark have aquariums for them? I am a Christian, but bracketting this kind of Biblical literalism with conservatism does neither Christianity or Conservatism any good.

James P Galivan| 12.14.10 @ 2:29PM

There is a strong over-lap of doctrines in the church of leftist 'thought.' Among the sacred dogmas that must never be questioned are feminism, the equality of all cultures, and the moral superiority of third world countries.

I once lived in a Chicago suburb in which a neighbor killed his daughter and a distant cousin. As it turned out, the killer did the deed because the couple announced that they planned to marry. In the murderer's defense, his lawyer, who shared his cleint's religious affiliation, claimed that the daughter was sold to someone in the old country, and indeed, the bride money had already been paid, and in the dearly loved old country, the father's action would have received approval by lovely old Sharia.

It is my fear that as immigrant populations from such wonderful old countries increase and reproduce, such tales will become told far too often.

Charles Napier| 12.14.10 @ 3:25PM

Its not the hardware its the software that makes us different.

yahudie| 12.14.10 @ 5:56PM

Good and true article, however, you are too optimistic. The problem, above and beyond the pandering politicians, is academe which put the ideas into the heads of the politicians and general public in the 1st place. And academe has not changed. In fact it is becoming more and more doctrinaire in its ideology (for that is what multiculturalism is - an ideology and received wisdom), which is in large part driven not just by “cultural opening”, as they claim, but in a virulent hatred of western culture. To them, any criticism of other cultures is driven by hatred of the “other”, as spelled out for them by received wisdom like (e.g., “orientalism”).
If academe was isolated in its own cloud like the La Putans that they are, then we could just sit back and laugh at them. But it is not so. They educate our young and thus get their ideas into polite (i.e., politically correct) society.

brandon| 12.14.10 @ 6:31PM

Interest article that is right on for the most part. But if one does not support reducing immigration (legal and illegal) then it makes no sense to complain about multiculturalism. It's like saying you oppose racial preferences and generous welfare, yet support the unending mass immigration of those who will benefit from such policies. It makes no sense whatsoever. If the number of those who will respond to multicultural nonsense increases, it will be all that much harder to do away with. Officials in Germany and France may talk tough (and intelligently on occasion) now, but what about when 30% or more of their population is Muslim? Cameron in Britain has the right idea in wanting to reduce immigration...though I'm skeptical if he'll truly carry through or if it would be enough.

And as someone else already pointed out, it is too early to talk about the demise of multiculturalism in the US when the Army chief General Casey basically said that having fewer Muslims in the military would be worse than the slaughter of all those people at Ford Hood.

Jacob Moh| 12.15.10 @ 12:52AM

Observing what's been happening across Europe with increasing migrations, I do sympathize with both the local and migrant communities. I am certain the present-day situation is not an easy one for all concerned. Even in Malaysia, where I come from, the presumption that race and culture are so closely related like flesh and bone is rife. Hence, the persistent dead-lock in political and social progress. But I am inclined to believe that there's some truth to this - that race has something to do with culture and vice versa, for it surely explains two things common to all of us: our origins (past), and our hopes (future). Social and cultural theorists need to properly discover how this relationship works in today's complex multi-cultural (multi-racial) society. The solution is not to divorce culture and race (flesh from the bone). The solution is to broaden our concepts of both race and culture, so that each includes the other. Liberating ourselves from narrow concepts of race and culture would be a first step to a more understanding co-habitation between cultures on the same turf.

ROBERT| 12.15.10 @ 1:22PM

Multiculturalism is a poisonous species of totalitarianism. The fascist who is its preacher banishes all who refuse to surrender their mind, and heart to an orthodoxy more strident than Catholicism's Spanish Inquisition. (No offense to Catholics; I am one).

The cultural fascist who pushes multiculturalism demands nothing less than the right and power to control every nuance of what you believe, think, write, say and do, on pain of societal banishment.

The only individuals coming close to the multicultural ideal was, of course, Mao Zedong, Hitler, V.I.Lenin and Stalin. Under their regimes you pledged yourself mind, heart and soul to the reality they commanded or your were executed, often along with your family-- or banished to slow death in a gulag.

While multiculturalism is still popular and mandatory, among the Left those who embrace it ,as a Machiavellian means to raw power, are traitors to their country and the truth; they are craven, and spineless creatures, shorn of moral any sense who hold that ingratiation is, as it was in the Soviet Union, the way to wealth and power.

Multicultural is perhaps the most ignorant of nihilist philosophy ever to dumb down an American and European people. First the doctrine is not multicultural. Such people care nothing for the philosophies of Athens and Rome, the Enlightenments or "diversity" of ideas.

Then too, if one excises, blacks, muslims, homosexuals, lesbians, and soon, those pedophiles who are now seeking "intergenerational" marriage, i.e. with adolescent male children, there is nothing left to be multicultural about. When have your read or seen portrayed, for example, a resounding praise of the Irish, Anglo-Saxon, in particular, the White Anglo Saxon Protestant, the joys of religious practice, family or love of country. Where do we find praise for the Polish and their lately deceased, that man of splendid intellect, courage and love , Pope Jean Paul?

No, multiculturalism smells of the grave; and it is a fast, certain way to certain national and self destruction. Those who embrace it are insane.

Ralph Pattison| 12.15.10 @ 8:23PM

when multiculturalism was first introduced in Australia, by a compliant Parliament, I nearly went crazy because it was so stupid and was such an obvious recipe for disaster. I had to make a conscious decision to not think about it unless I became seriously disturbed. I was accused of Racism and all the rest .
Now, of course, I get no credit for having said
"I told you so"no one ever does.
Larf !

Old Soldier| 12.16.10 @ 8:03AM

I never understood this contradiction. Leftists are completely devoted to the Theory of Evolution and "survival of the fittest." Yet they refuse to believe that some cultures and some individuals are less fit than others.

The only reason I can think of is their hate of all things Western European / American.

Dario| 12.20.10 @ 10:05AM

I am against multiculturalism.

But to deny that race and culture are connected is a major fallacy. They are. If you go to China no matter how much you adopt Chinese culture and practices, you will never be Chinese. You will always be looked upon as a foreigner.

That is the cold hard truth.

Don| 12.20.10 @ 2:01PM

Muslims in the west are not immigrants. They are settlers.

Lesley| 8.30.11 @ 6:22PM

One needs an Anthropologist to clarify this discussion: RACE is a CREATION of culture. It is not a real thing, but an idea created and maintained through culture (what is culture? A system of beliefs associated with a group of people). I would highly disagree with Mr. Scruton's description "Mendelssohn was Jewish by race and German by culture"....race does not exist...he was born into Jewish culture and raised in German culture. Period.

I would encourage everyone to check out the new Public Awareness campaign on RACE presented by the American Anthropological Association (AAA)...it's whole goal is to help people clarify the whole idea of RACE and have open, productive discussions about it: http://www.aaanet.org/resource.....rogram.cfm

Latest Headlines

From the Obama Ministry of Truth

Ben Stein|48 comments

Despite the WaPost, Benghazi Is a Major Scandal

Quin Hillyer|43 comments

IRS Union Chief Stonewalls

Jeffrey Lord|55 comments

McCain-Feingold Gave Us the IRS Scandal

Ross Kaminsky|99 comments

Anyone Still Believe Me?

Aaron Goldstein|29 comments

The Book We Still Can’t Spare

Lars Walker|44 comments

Delivering Serbs to the Wolves

Doug Bandow|17 comments

Wincing at Cumberbatch

James Bowman|9 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Did Virginia Republicans Just Elect Terry McAuliffe?

Ross Kaminsky | 3:41PM

Lois Lerner Will Take the Fifth

Ross Kaminsky | 3:27PM

Cook Insists: No Income Shifting, Tax Avoidance

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 3:01PM

Democrats Outraged Over IRS, But Not the Right Aspect of It

Kaylin Bugos | 2:10PM

What Happens If the Uninsured Can’t Register Under Obamacare?

Patrick Ryan | 1:22PM

Whitehouse Berates Republicans for Causing Tornadoes

Claire Healey | 1:11PM

UPDATED: Former IRS Chief Refuses to Apologize

Kaylin Bugos | 12:45PM

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Pope Culture

By George Sim Johnston

A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck

By P.J. O'Rourke

Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
Dames at Sea

By John Corry
In the Absence of Guns

By Mark Steyn

In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The Metaphysical Martini

By Werner J. Dannhauser
Counting the Costs of Clintonism

By Robert H. Bork

The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
Chuck McHagel

By George Neumayr

It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted

By Douglas Bartholomew
It’s the Best Time of the Year

By Mark Steyn

The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
The Bush Crack-Up

By Brit Hume

Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?

The American Spectator

The Pursuit of Knowledge