Article

2007-05-21 Home Front: Culture Wars

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by anonymous5089 2007-05-21 11:22|| || Front Page|| [4 views ] Top

#1 "There are so many ideas about Multiculturalism, and the author [Fjordman] treats them all as if they were one, without even referring to one coherent set of such ideas." This is not a valid criticism of Fjordman's essay but a rhetorical attempt to change the subject and amounts to 'begging the question'. 'Multiculturalism' is not a coherent set of ideas, just a mishmash of recycled Marxism/nihilism/transnational b.s./etc. I semi-agree with Fjordman's Finnish academic critic: Multiculturalism is an incredible mixture of ideological, political and scientific ignorance and misunderstanding.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2007-05-21 11:35|| 2007-05-21 11:35|| Front Page Top

#2 If one believes, as I do, that some cultures are superior to others, one could argue that by settling in another country, you have indirectly admitted that this country has a superior culture and should thus be required to adjust yourself to this culture, i.e. to assimilate.

Dangerous thinking in this Multicultural era. How dare Fjordman show such blatant disregard for the primacy of moral relativism?

It is true that if you cannot define your enemy, your criticism is bound to be vague. But this is part of my point: I, and numerous others with at least average intelligence, have spent a considerable amount of time trying to analyze the doctrines of Multiculturalism. We have found this to be quite challenging, precisely because it is vague, incoherent and doesnt have any clear philosophical foundation. Multiculturalism seems to be a curious mix of older, Enlightenment ideas such as Rousseaus noble savage and later Marxist ideas, among other things. There are those who claim that it was never supposed to be logically consistent and that we shouldnt look for any cohesive, rational arguments behind it because there are none. What little can be discerned from its ideas is sometimes quite disturbing, with elements of anti-Western hatred, totalitarian impulses and Utopian ideas involving large-scale social engineering.

As with so many of the left's nebulous pet ideologies, they must be "felt" and cannot be subjected to the harsh rigors of critical analysis or mere reason.

Multiculturalism is primarily championed in Western nations. It is highly unlikely, to say the least, that a person from Finland, Canada or the Netherlands would want, much less be allowed to, move to Pakistan or Iran and expect to get state support for keeping their culture, but the reverse happens every single day. In the 21st century, many of the least economically successful cultures on earth are in the midst of the largest population boom in human history. If they should be allowed to continue to export, indefinitely, parts of their unsustainable population growth to other nations and those who move should be allowed to keep their culture, human rights de facto amount to the unilateral eradication of Western culture. And thats precisely why the anti-Western Left support it. They can permanently destroy the West, and they can claim to do this in the name of tolerance and diversity.

With a deft and fatal set of combination punches, Fjordman lays bare the incredible hypocrisy of Muslim majority nations and their Multiculturalist facilitators.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-05-21 17:58|| 2007-05-21 17:58|| Front Page Top

Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.

Posted by wxjames 2007-05-21 19:37|| 2007-05-21 19:37|| Front Page Top

#4 "...they [academics and I take it liberals] tend to view cultures as equal and interchangeable, which means that they perceive it to be of little practical importance, with the very notable exception of Western culture, which is important to destroy.

I have always wondered why there is this self-loathing and desire for cultural suicide mostly in liberal circles in the West--primarily in free countries. I guess they would prefer an Islamic dictated country, or a socialistic or communistic country? Or is that they just think they are smarter than and superior to everyone else? Dictators at heart?

Posted by JohnQC 2007-05-21 22:36|| 2007-05-21 22:36|| Front Page Top

23:43 Mac
23:30 Zenster
23:20 Zenster
23:15 Anonymoose
23:10 M. Murcek
22:56 trailing wife
22:55 John Frum
22:53 trailing wife
22:50 anymouse
22:48 JohnQC
22:36 Pappy
22:36 JohnQC
22:35 Pappy
22:22 gromgoru
22:22 JohnQC
22:20 Eric Jablow
22:19 Atomic Conspiracy
22:19 Seafarious
22:16 JohnQC
22:10 ptah
22:09 Sock Puppet of Doom
22:08 Procopius2k
22:05 Spolusing and Tenille6935
22:05 Barbara Skolaut