This flier was electronically sent out to teachers in my school district recently. At least nobody’s being paid to attend. Further commentary is probably unnecessary.
The fatal flaw with our society’s obsession with “multiculturalism” is that it is really nothing of the sort–there’s no anthropological searching for the best of various cultures so we can integrate them into each other’s, there’s no melding of multiple heritages to create a new and stronger fusion, and there’s certainly no understanding that these activities exist with awareness of some cultural values being more productive than others, more in line with the greater, general traditions of civilization than others.
Allan Bloom, in his spiel against relativism in The Closing of the American Mind, makes this point when he notes that only Western European civilization has ever shown any interest in exploring and investigating other cultures. What politically correct history calls colonialism, we might better call sharing and learning. Remember the scene from Monty Python’s Life of Brian when the zealots indignantly ask, “What have the Romans ever done for us?” only to find themselves rattling off an ever-growing list of benefits of their unequal cultural interaction. Bloom also laments that we no longer learn foreign history or languages as well as we used to–for all the bewailed closed-mindedness of previous generations, no one can deny that they took the rest of the world far more seriously than we do now. Now, as Bloom further and incisively recognizes, all that is required is to feel good about other cultures.
This is the thorn in the side of any rational multiculturalism: this refusal to admit that not every facet of every culture is equal and deserves to be celebrated. Continue reading
The massacre at Fort Hood only two days after the premiere of the new science fiction series V, about hostile plotters hiding in our midst, has me thinking about how current events might further factor into the show’s plot. Specifically, I’m inspired by the leftists in our society who misdirect our attention from the real problems here–violent anti-Americans operating in the open because we’re too politically correct to combat them–to their weird pet projects of multiculturalism and diversity.
The strangest and most revolting example of this must be General George Casey’s assertion that a loss of diversity in the military as a result of this shooting would a greater tragedy than the shooting itself. This kind of self-flagellating defeatism, of course, plays right into the hands of terrorists.
So here’s my idea for the show: as rebels try to expose the alien invaders for the hungry reptiles they are, the “Visitors” should respond by smearing their critics, slamming them for their lack of open-minded compassion. Bloggers or talk radio hosts who ask tough questions about the Visitors’ motives should be met with press conferences by aggrieved, indignant aliens who look sternly into the camera and ask, “Why are you so afraid of things that are different or that you don’t understand? Why are your hearts so full of hate?”
Here’s one for Independence Day. This is the thrid time I’ve posted this now, and I like it more each time I read it!
The Federalist Papers are a collected series of essays that originally appeared in New York newspapers during the period of debate and ratification for the new Constitution. In them, the series’ three authors–Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay–very clearly explain the nature of the Constitution and how it was to implemented.
Their authority is, of course, unimpeachable. Hamilton would become the first Secretary of the Treasury. Jay would become the first Chief Justice of the United States. And Madison, the primary architect of the Constitution itself, would go on to become our 4th president.
Here are some of our most auspicious Founders’ answers to the pressing issues of the present day:
- Is America a multicultural society, or a basically homogeneous Christian nation?
Answered by John Jay: “Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country, to one united people, a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs…” –Federalist #2
- Should American government be more Democratic (populist) or Republican (representative) in nature?
Answered by James Madison: “A pure Democracy, by which I mean, a Society, consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischief of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole….A Republic, by which I mean a Government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect and promises the cure for which we are seeking.” –Federalist #10
“In a democracy, the people meet and exercise the government in person; in a republic they assemble and administer it by their representatives and agents. A democracy consequently will be confined to a small spot. A republic may be extended over a large region.” –Federalist #14
- Can America ensure that its citizens have equal success and comfort?
Answered by James Madison: Continue reading