And it's DDHv again with an unsourced statement! Could you please provide some context for these things in the future?
Both in Europe and in the U.S., multiculturalism is a leftist elitist vision with its roots in academia. The intellectual elite, courts and government agencies push an agenda that is anything but a defense of individual rights, freedom from conformity and a live-and-let-live philosophy.
Right off the bat, this rant makes it clear that the person who wrote it is not exactly interested in doing a fair assessment. Note the various trigger words in here ("leftist", "elitist", "academia", "government"), all employed to get a hypothetical US conservative person riled up against the ideas described later on.
Secondly, take note how this positions multiculturalism as something hostile to individual rights, nonconformity, and "a live-and-let-live philosophy. This will be important later, so keep it in mind.
Instead, multiculturalism/diversity is an agenda for all kinds of conformity -- conformity in ideas, actions and speech. It calls for re-education programs where diversity managers indoctrinate students, faculty members, employees, managers and executives on what's politically correct thinking.
More trigger words here -- conformity, reeducation, political correctness.
Also, think about it for a minute. Multiculturalism is, fundamentally, about respecting the Other. Being aware that other individuals have rights regardless of whether or not they conform with your ideas of what proper living is; it's about letting people live their lives as they please.
But, according to the moron who wrote this, it's all about creating one big bad metaculture that is the same all around, apparently? I don't know. I bet he doesn't, either.
Part of that lesson is nonjudgmentalism, where one is taught that one lifestyle is just as worthy as another and all cultures and their values are morally equivalent.
Because, and hold on to your hats people, that's actually true. No one culture can claim blanket supremacy over another. That's just not how it's done. And what goes for cultures goes for lifestyles too; the measure of a "worthy" lifestyle is how happy the person living it is, and what it's impact is on the community you live in.
Again: Live and let live. Accept the individual for what he or she is, not what he or she isn't.
Western values are superior to all others.
I will just jump in quickly here and note that this is not a statement that can be treated as axiomatic, as this text does. It needs to be supported and proven first, which the utter bell-end that wrote this piece did not bother to do.
But one need not be a Westerner to hold Western values. A person can be Chinese, Japanese, Jewish, African or Arab and hold Western values. By the way, it is no accident that Western values of reason and individual rights have produced unprecedented health, life expectancy, wealth and comfort for the ordinary person. There's an indisputable positive relationship between liberty and standards of living.
And yet, the more restrictive nations of Europe, which if US conservatives are to be believed are way across the border to authoritarian communism, are consistently shown to have a higher standard of living and a happier populace than the US. Interesting to note, isn't it?
There is also indisputable evidence that we in the West are unwilling to defend ourselves from barbarians. Just look at our response to the recent Orlando massacre, in which we've focused our energies on guns rather than on terrorists.
Right, "we". Who is we? Is "we" a bunch of commentators on the internet the author disagrees with? Is "we" a bunch of politicians that said things that the author found outrageous? Or is "we" actually
the entire western world? (Hint, the answers are, in order: Yes, Yes, No)
I would actually agree with this idiot on one thing: We aren't doing enough to combat the barbarians that wish to teach us that people of other colors and creeds are worse than us.