Fact or fiction?

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. 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. 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.

Western values are superior to all others. 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. 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.

Can we get some reality based comments

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.

E, you said this so much better than I would have!

Except that I would not have called the Essayist a "moron."
He is a person, just like us,
whose Rights include The Right To Be Mistaken.

He would require everyone to defend
"individual rights"
(multiculturists must feel they are doing just that),
"nonconformity" (ditto),
"a live-and-let-live Philosophy."

InOtherWords, to *conform to* the platform of the Essayist!

But one need not be a moron to proclaim that platform.
Many smart people fall into that trap!

HTM, PHL

The E wrote: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.

Oh, yeah, I forgot something! When writing this, I implicitly assumed from content that the person writing it was a male white person who possibly considers himself "enlightened". How close to the mark am I?

DDHv wrote:

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. 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. 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.

Western values are superior to all others. 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. 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.

Can we get some reality based comments

Whoever wrote that has multiculturalism and political correctness mixed up. And needs to sober up before writing, or take their meds.

Personally I think multiculturalism is leftist crap that obliterates the live and let live that it should be.


Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Annachie wrote:Personally I think multiculturalism is leftist crap that obliterates the live and let live that it should be.

You see, it's this kind of nuanced, well-argued commentary from critics of multiculturalism that really makes one sit up and reconsider deeply held beliefs about how people from differing backgrounds can come together to live in peace.


In case it wasn't clear, the above was sarcasm. Because that kind of trigger-word laden drive-by commentary really does not advance the dialogue in any way. It's just you spouting shibboleths, nothing more.

Odium wrote:Whoever wrote that has multiculturalism and political correctness mixed up. And needs to sober up before writing, or take their meds.

And while we're on the subject of shibboleths: Isn't it interesting how criticism of "political correctness" always boils down to whining about how people who didn't use to object to slurs hurled against them are now actually dishing out as good as they get? Political Correctness, above all else, is about recognizing that freedom of speech does not mean freedom of consequence; you're still free to call everyone around you "nigger" or "fag", but everyone around you is equally free to call you "racist" or "bigot" if you do.

Multiculturalism is akin to a a salad bowl. In theory, the tomatoes will nestle happily with the lettuce while the cucumber and the peppers fit nicely around them and the mushrooms are arranged in pretty little patterns.
It's when the tomatoes decide that they only like to be around other tomatoes and throw the cucumber out of the bowl while ripping the lettuce to shreds that you see the potential issues.

America effectively started as a monoculture and after a brief stint of multiculturalism (see the film Gangs of New York for an idea of how well that worked) shifted to the Melting Pot/Assimilation concept, meaning that apart from the better beer/better cooking traditions, it's quite difficult to tell the difference between American-Irish and American-Italian descended people.

To summarize, Multiculturalism is a high-point balance (needs lots of effort to keep it stable, wobbles easily and will shatter on the floor once control is lost for even a minute) whereas Assimilation is a low-point balance, generally self-righting and less likely to explode into general uncontrollable widespread violence (unless severely provoked). However, those who refuse to Assimilate tend to lash out at what they see as a giant conspiracy against them.

The problem with those leftist multiculturists is that if you question their dogma, you are branded an Elitist or, even worse, a Racist. You are now an Enemy that Must Be Destroyed. They are all in favor of Freedom until you dare to disagree with them.

And no, all cultures are not equal. Those that value superstition over reason, indoctrination over learning, and advocate violence against those who don't agree with them are objectively bad.

The E wrote:Political Correctness, above all else, is about recognizing that freedom of speech does not mean freedom of consequence; you're still free to call everyone around you "nigger" or "fag", but everyone around you is equally free to call you "racist" or "bigot" if you do.

Yes, but not to beat you up or throw you in jail.

The leftists seem to be just fine with their minions physically attacking Donald Trump supporters for carrying signs or wearing hats.
------------------
At my house, the "things that go bump in the night" are cats.

At core, political correctness is basically being polite and not being rude. Don't insult people and be considerate to their feelings.
As always some people stuff things up by being over precious. I'll be non PC enough to note that during my working life the overly sensitive ones tended to be priveliged white university educated young women, who'd never had a truly harsh word or experience in their lives. Everyone else enjoyed good friendly banter.
Multicultureism can be excellent if the society is mature and free enough to support it.
The bit about "western values are superior to all others" is just stupid. Some western values to me seem superior, like a free press and anticorruption attitudes, but many other societies do family support, and tolerance better. We westerners tend to be a strait laced morose lot.