Multiculturalism and the death of democracy
The liberal elite have succeeded in fostering the idea that the diversity that multiculturalism brings is a positive addition to Canadian culture. Look at all the colourful costumes and foreign delicacies that visible minorities have introduced into "white bread" Canada, they proclaim. Furthermore, they say, the widely divergent cultural attitudes towards equality and liberty that do not go along with our past beliefs will only make us more inclusive and expand democracy. Obnoxious cultural beliefs such as honour killings, forced marriages, female exclusion and genital mutilation, the dowry system and religious hatreds will wither away over time. That our greatest terrorist plots have been linked to Sikhs and Muslims (second generation at that) is put down to aberrations. Considering that the champion of multiculturalism, the CBC, was a target for car bombing is simply not discussed at all, nor was the CBC poll that showed only 73% of Canadian-Muslims could completely condemn the Toronto terrorist plot. So deluded was CBC that they even tried to paint this horrifying statistic as a plus.
The idea that our new Third World immigrants should welcome our Western concepts of female equality, rule of law, and scientific rationalism is quickly becoming passe. Any attempt to make these concepts stick is dismissed as racism or ethno-centric neo-colonialism. Shakespeare and all those dead old white historians and philosphers must not be elevated above aboriginal oral song poems nor any non-white traditional narratives. Somehow the contradictions between the abolition of Western values in favour of promoting a hodge-podge of immigrant customs are never logically explained as a good thing.
A case in point is the complete distruction of the National Organization of Women. This was a government funded organization that was supposed to advance the equality of all Canadian women, but turned into a claque of "women of colour", who excoriated what white women stood for. It went from being headed by Judy Rebbick, a New York Jewess, to Sunara Thobani, a transplanted East-Indian, to Barbara Grant-Cummings, a Barbadian-Canadian, to (name lost to me), an Aboriginal woman. Not only is this organization not reflective of all Canadian women, its voice is so stridently connected to leftist, racial identity politics that it doesn't even champion the concerns of visible minority women. Yet the left still demands that taxpayers keep on amply funding it. [Does it still exist?]
In his blog, entitled "How Multiculturalism Took Over America", Lawrence Auster (FrontPageMagazine.com, July 9, 2004) gives us the straight talk on what multiculturalism has wrought. His opening salvo is in the form of a supposition. He asks you to imagine a large population of Italian-Americans moving en masse into a Muslim country and demanding that the host country drop all public observations of its religion. When the majority religion gets upset, the Italians reply that they are merely enriching the country with diversity, and if they change some of their laws and traditional customs to accommodate we newcomers that will only doubly "enrich" them. Reverse this scenario and you have the Charter-driven Canadian model. We can't even rid ourselves of the gangsters and terrorists who gain entry into our country.
While Austen gives examples from America, most have applicablity to Canada. The liberal media and the universities have had the same pernicious effects on our Western culture. Lost to reason is that these visible minorities have fled their repressive and corrupt countries for life here. If they have to give up some of their more negative religious and tribal customs, that is the price they should pay. There is no reverse migration to their countries because most are failed, or semi-failed states, with no freedom or chance of economic growth. You only go to Saudi Arabia or any other totalitarian state if the company gives you a huge salary boost, plus a "hardship allowance". Yet we allow the negative aspects of these foreign cultures to entrench themselves in Canada. And as the massive influx of these cultures continues, they will eventually demand entrenchment of these beliefs into law.
I highly recommend the lengthy article by Lawrence Auster [see below], as he rigorously lays out the dangerous path we are on. Already, we have seen massive demonstrations in the United States calling for "No one is illegal". The immigrant lobbies and the loonie-left have picked up that refrain here. Our wonderful culture is under ferocious attack and we retreating on many fronts. We must stop this before it is too late. And it is already late in the day.
© Bud Talkinghorn
A must read
Lawrence Auster: How Multiculturalism Took Over America ... , FrontPage magazine.com , July 9, 2004
Some years ago the Harvard sociologist Nathan Glazer declared that "we are all multiculturalists now." One's initial response to such an unwanted announcement is to say: "What do you mean, 'we'?" Yet, even if "we" do not subscribe to that sentiment, it cannot be denied that over the last twenty years multiculturalism has become the ruling idea of America, incarnated in every area of society ranging from educational curricula to the quasi-official establishment of foreign languages, to mandated racial proportionality schemes in private employment and university admissions, to the constant invocations by our political, business, and intellectual elites of "diversity" as the highest American value. How, so quickly and effortlessly, did this alien belief system take over our country? In this article, I look at multiculturalism as an ideology that has advanced itself by means of a set of propositions. My intent is to examine the false arguments of the multiculturalists themselves, and to see how they have used these arguments to fool an all-too-willing American majority to go along with them.
The Fraud of Inclusion [....]
There is much more. For example from Lawrence Auster: continued , FrontPage magazine.com , July 9, 2004
The more outspoken multiculturalists—i.e., the articulate ideologues of the left—will admit that the cultures they want to "include" in the American culture are radically at odds with it. Diversity consultant Edwin J. Nichols teaches the following model explaining the divergent intellectual styles of ethnic groups:
The Philosophical Aspects of Cultural Difference:European and Euro-American: Member-Object; the highest value lies in the object or in the acquisition of the object.
African, Afro-American, Native American, Hispanics, Arabs: Member-Member. The highest value lies in the inter-personal relationship between persons.
Asian, Asian-American, Polynesian: Member-Group. The highest value lies in the cohesiveness of the group.
Native American: Member-Great Spirit. The highest values lies in oneness with the Great Spirit.(5)
Observe how Nichols portrays the Western orientation in negative terms ("Member-Object," "acquisition") that suggest cold selfishness and materialism, while he describes the non-Western cultures in positive terms ("inter-personal relationship," "group cohesiveness," "oneness with the Great Spirit") that suggest warmth and humanity. Yet Nichols' very attempt to debunk the West and praise the non-West has the opposite effect from what he intends, since the unpleasant-sounding phrase "Member-Object" is really a way of describing the Western belief in objective truth—the very basis of Western religion, science, philosophy, law, and government. [....]
Auster explores the myths, ending with "Moderate Myth Number Six: The 'Equality' That Becomes 'Diversity'"
Nipigong, Myanmar -- Burma
Did you see the BBC news item showing the new Burmese capital, Nipigong? It is set in the middle of a nowhere dusty plain, with six lane avenues, sweeping gates (painted in garish colours) and wedding cake palaces--all stunningly grotesque. Something that even Ceaucescu couldn't have dreamed up. Right up there with Mobuto's new capital, whose international airport is now almost totally reclaimed by the jungle. The Burmese military junta will probably demand that you take a trip there before being allowed to visit Pagan. After all, they poured billions into it. The march of folly never ends.
© Bud Talkinghorn
"Go, tigers, go!"--Motto of the World Wildlife Fund
Well, don't go so far that big game hunters can't blow them pesky critters to smithereens. It seems that this champion of the salt water croc, the koala bear, and the tiger has limits to its largesse. It turns out that one of India's premier tiger sanctuaries was actually used as a shooting gallery. The top administrator admitted that he had fudged the tiger tally for years. There weren't 4,560 tigers in the reserve, but probably no more than a thousand and a half were left . The administrator said he sold licences to hunters. So much for the "Save the Tiger" fund.
Being a cat lover, I had actually contributed to this cause. Therefore, I took particular umbrage at this obscene fraud. Somehow the Aga Khan, who is one of the WWF's great sponsors, remained untarnished by this scandal. But Khan is a man who knows how to cultivate the leftist club of the U.N. Just to stay with the animal theme, he has many tentacles in high places.
You want to support the feline world? Put out a tin of cat food for the woods cats.
© Bud Talkinghorn
WorldWideFeedKittiesFund -- a new charity idea -- If you would like to improve upon this idea, leave a comment. It's for the good of the kitties.
All donations to the WWFKF charity gratefully accepted. We accept loonies, if you don't have millions ... or even hundreds to give away for the good of the kitties.
Memo to the GG: If it's good enough for millionaires and billionaires, it's good enough for Canucks, you know, the rest of us who live in Canuckistan. One of us who contributes to the WWFKF expects to be honoured with an Order of Canada, Humanities award. We're going to run a lottery -- a buck a ticket -- ticket to be drawn by someone with a spotless ticket drawing reputation, the owner of the local corner store, probably.
Note: This is a New Charity, developing, as we speak; official charity status, soon come, sure to come. If it's good enough for the Khadrs to set up a charitable foundation, to say nothing of coming to the notice of a former PM, it's good enough for those of us here for generations. We affirm that no money will be sent to jihadis abroad; all monies collected will be only for kitties ... well, maybe the odd liquid bash to admire and pet kitties. We save Heinz 57 kitties with liquid eyes.
Founded by Frosty, kitty lover, member of the hoi polloi and from the lower end of the charity spectrum.