See other Editorial Articles
Title: PJB: Can Diversity Destroy Us?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://buchanan.org/blog/?p=892
Published: Dec 10, 2007
Author: Patrick J. Buchanan
Post Date: 2007-12-10 20:49:15 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 398
Comments: 19
On the Great Seal of the United States, first suggested by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776, there was to be emblazoned a new motto: “E Pluribus Unum” – “Out of many, one.” It was in their unity, not their diversity, that the strength of the colonies resided. So Patrick Henry believed, as he declared, “The distinctions between Virginians, Pennsylvanians, New Yorkers and New Englanders are no more. I am not a Virginian, but an American.” National identity must supersede state identity for America to survive. Yet it has lately become fashionable to say that America is great not because she is united, but because she is diverse. It is because America is a multicultural, multiracial, multiethnic, multilingual nation that she is a great nation. A corollary is that the more diverse America becomes, the better and greater she becomes. After the Los Angeles riot of 1992, Vice President Dan Quayle was asked by his Japanese hosts if perhaps America did not suffer from too much diversity. “I begged to differ with my hosts,” Quayle retorted. “I explained that our diversity is our strength.” And so our rulers, marinated in the myths that we “are a nation of immigrants” and “our diversity is our strength,” continue to embrace mass immigration – the more the better. But are the myths true? America was settled by colonists from the British Isles. In 1789, two centuries after Jamestown and Plymouth Rock, we were 99 percent Protestant. Until the Irish came in 1845, there was almost no immigration. Even during the Great Wave of 1890-1920, the number of immigrants was a fraction of the 38 million here today. And all had come from Europe. By 1960, we were almost 90 percent European and more than 90 percent Christian – of one nationality, American, one language, English, and one culture. That America is gone forever. Last week, we learned that in the last seven years 10.3 million people, almost all from the Third World, entered the United States, more than half illegally. The nation that was one-tenth minority in 1960 is now one-third minority. European-Americans will soon be a minority in the nation, as they are today in California, Texas and most large American cities. And when that day comes, what then will unite us as a people? Certainly not religious faith, for the last 40 years have seen a large influx of Muslims, the rise of a rabid secularism and the break-up of Christian churches – the Episcopalians most recently – over issues of morality: abortion, civil unions, homosexual bishops, assisted suicide, stem cell research, Darwin, creationism. No longer are we united by a common language, as the fastest growing radio and TV stations are Hispanic. And certainly not culture, as we are in a cultural war over history, heroes and holidays. And how can we say diversity is a strength, when the most diverse nations of Europe, Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, shattered into 22 nations as soon as they became free, and Slovaks and Czechs divorced? Ethnic and linguistic diversity is now pulling Belgium apart, as they tore Cyprus in two. Since World War II, diversity – racial, religious, ethnic, cultural – has pulled Malaysia, the Indian subcontinent, Pakistan, Indonesia and Ethiopia apart, and is today pulling Iraq, Turkey and Lebanon apart. How, when tribalism is everywhere ascendant, is diversity a strength? When Islam arose in the 7th century, our world became more diverse. Fourteen centuries of war followed. When Catholic Europe became more diverse with the Protestant Reformation, a century of war followed, ending in a Thirty Years War that carried away a third of all the German people. There came a new diversity when the English came to the Red Man’s continent in 1607 and Africans were brought as slaves in 1619. From that diversity came the near annihilation of American Indians and a racial divide that led to the American Civil War, bloodiest in the West in the 19th century. Our racial diversity has ever been the most divisive issue in America – and remains so, as we see daily from Jena, the Imus affair and the Duke rape case. Britain is more diverse than in the time of Victoria and Churchill. Is Britain a better, stronger nation now that London is Londonistan, madrassas defend the London bombers and race riots are common in the industrial north? If diversity is a strength, why do Scots wish to follow the Irish and secede? Has Germany been strengthened by the diversity the Turks brought? Is France a stronger nation for the 5 million to 8 million Muslims concentrated in the banlieus? How have the Japanese suffered from their lack of diversity? The Melting Pot – language, law, culture – worked to make us one nation and one people. But that Melting Pot, cracked and broken, is rejected by multiculturalists as an instrument of cultural genocide, crafted by white Europeans to annihilate native cultures. This generation is witnessing the Deconstruction of America. Out of one, many.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: christine (#0)
Diversity is the greatest crock of shit that has ever been sold to the most brain-dead societies on this planet. Check your Funk & Wagnells if you doubt me on the meaning of 'diversity.'
PJB was just on Dobbs. He mentioned good ONE issue candidates. Tancredo on illegal immigration, Hunter on the wall, and Paul on the war. BUT, he does believe in Pre-emptive strikes. Ohhhhhhhhh kay. There just aren't enough Butterfly nets to go around.
When those millions of illegal browns marched under their nations flags in LA, Dallas, and NYC last Spring they announced to anyone with ears that they are a domestic enemy here to sap our culture and tax dollars. They, and their quisling supporters, are the enemy within and deserve nothing but our contempt. Pat Buchanan has been right about this issue for decades.
Diversity is neutral, it is a given. Social Engineering is the culprit, one which always, by definition even, goes against human nature, otherwise there'd be no need for the "engineering" part.
"Most of the trouble in this world has been caused by folks who can't mind their own business, because they have no business of their own to mind, any more than a smallpox virus has." - William S Burroughs
I disagree. Diversity is not a neutral term. And it was not a given until post WWII. Prior to that time, nations had little or no diversity. Sometimes a minority of "foreigners" lived in nations. But by and large nations had a homogeneous pool of nationals in their midst. Germany had Germans living there. China had Chinese living there. Britain had AngloSaxon Brits living there. The USA had Americans living there. And between the various nations, there existed smug superior attitudes from one to the other. The Brits looked down at the Frogs and the Krauts and the Frogs looked down on everybody. This cultural warfare/rivalry was accepted and no one called the ACLU to register a "hate crime" lawsuit complaint. In terms of post modern ProgressiveSpeak, diversity means "An emphasis on accepting and respecting cultural differences by recognizing that no one culture is intrinsically superior to another underlies the current usage of the term."
All of us were born into a world of individuals. Speaking strictly for my myself, I was born into a world where there were males and females, adults and children, rich people and poor, nice people and not so nice, and even black people, white people, and everything in between. I grew up in a little all white town until I was eight, then my parents got divorced and we moved with my mom to some apartments that were across the road from a huge apartment complex that was almost entirely black. That wasn't social engineering, that was two hundred years of history. I moved to Indianapolis twenty years ago, at the time there were like five hispanics in the entire state, not counting harvest season, now they outnumber blacks. That is social engineering.
"Most of the trouble in this world has been caused by folks who can't mind their own business, because they have no business of their own to mind, any more than a smallpox virus has." - William S Burroughs
That right there is what will kill Western Civilization. Third-world immigrants won't boost a first-world nation any higher in any measureable way.
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite." James Madison
Diversity used to be a neutral term. Post WWII it became a watchword for post- modern thinking - all cultures are equal. All cultures are not equal. Some are better or worse than others at any given time in history. But nothing is static by any means. We currently see that American culture has been degraded due to decadence and sloth. Asian culture appears to be ascending as we speak. Diversity came after WWII with the fear of nationalism and cultural sense of superiority taken to the extreme repeating itself. With every action there is a reaction. The cult of worshipping diversity - to weaken homogeneality of people living in nations - occurred as a reaction to the cult of Aryan Master Race. Social engineering is the misguided effort by government in tandem with media elites and educators to use behavior modification to change attitudes, beliefs and values to achieve the false premise of diversity - that all cultures are equal and Kumbaya. Diversity is a belief system and social engineering is the action undertaken to support the false belief as being true.
It was purposeful. Not misguided. All cultures should not be considered fodder for government experimentation. It was to entirely to manipulate people against each other, to attain total control over them.
It was to entirely to manipulate people against each other, to attain total control over them. Yes, misguided was the wrong choice of word. I don't think that gov't gaining control over people was the original goal. Based on my readings, after WWII the intellectual elites decided that weakening nations of their sense of nationalism, of their sense of unity, of feelings of cultural sameness/ identity was the best antidote against acts of anti- semetism in the future - not the bogus ADL bloated nonsense but rather the Nazi type of vile anti-semetism. If there are alot of different groups introduced to a nation, and each group's differentness is celebrated, then Jewish tribalism would not stand out anymore than other tribal behavior. Control of the general public may have entered into the picture at a later date.
I grew up in Indianapolis, left when I was about 27 and never looked back. I have some family there that live in the suburbs. The inner city was lost long ago, turned to slums ... but the Mexican Invasion is relatively new. Hard to believe they outnumber the blacks. I can't imagine living there. Large cities are susceptible to invasion.
If a large group of people formed a corporation purposed to produce and market automobiles (like GM), could they then hire gunmen as salespersons to increase their sales? Well that's exactly what governments do.
Amen
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition "Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." © IndieTx Illegal immigration is a symptom, not the problem. Drug abuse is a symptom, not the problem. Guns and gun violence, are a symptom, not the problem. Home foreclosure are a symptom, not the problem.
Mark If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
That still smells like control, but, perhaps you are right, that the goal of total control came later.
Drug abuse is a symptom, not the problem. Guns and gun violence, are a symptom, not the problem. Home foreclosure are a symptom, not the problem. I don't understand what your point is. So what action do you recommend if these are symptoms of disease in our body politic? In medicine, often physicians begin by treating a patient symptomatically - that is the first step to get the patient on the road to recovery, wellness.
You don't treat a fever or runny nose, you treat the infection or virus. Drug abuse is a personality/character issue. Home forclorsures are the end result of lax loan practices/regulations that were fostered by the FED lowering interest rates to 1%. Guns don't create violence/murder, its a cultural/social environment that teaches it. Illegals are the end result of policies that encourage it like NAFTA, corporations and bussiness, non enforcement of laws.
Mark If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
I still don't get your point. You are trying to sound very deep and philosophical but you offer no realistic answers. Who cares whether drug abuse is a character weakness issue or illegal immigration is a by-product of NAFTA or gun violence is a result of a negative cultural/social environment? The end products are harmful in themselves like a fever. You must treat a fever immediately and not sit on your hands doing nothing while contemplating what possible disease is causing the fever.
Please put me on bozo, or don't reply to me. Thanks.
Mark If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
I don't do bozo, but henceforth I will not reply to any of your posts per your request. Ciao!
#2. To: lodwick, all (#1)
(Edited)
#3. To: All (#0)
National identity must supersede state identity for America to survive.
#4. To: christine (#0)
#5. To: Dakmar (#4)
Diversity is neutral, it is a given. Social Engineering is the culprit, one which always, by definition even, goes against human nature, otherwise there'd be no need for the "engineering" part.
#6. To: scrapper2 (#5)
Diversity is not a neutral term. And it was not a given until post WWII. Prior to that time, nations had little or no diversity.
#7. To: scrapper2 (#5)
...diversity means "An emphasis on accepting and respecting cultural differences by recognizing that no one culture is intrinsically superior to another...
#8. To: Dakmar (#6)
#9. To: scrapper2 (#8)
Social engineering is the misguided effort by government in tandem with media elites and educators to use behavior modification to change attitudes, beliefs and values to achieve the false premise of diversity - that all cultures are equal and Kumbaya.
#10. To: Peppa (#9)
It was purposeful. Not misguided.
#11. To: Dakmar (#6)
#12. To: Jethro Tull (#3)
(Edited)
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#13. To: christine (#0)
#14. To: scrapper2 (#10)
Based on my readings, after WWII the intellectual elites decided that weakening nations of their sense of nationalism, of their sense of unity, of feelings of cultural sameness/ identity was the best antidote against acts of anti- semetism in the future - not the bogus ADL bloated nonsense but rather the Nazi type of vile anti-semetism. If there are alot of different groups introduced to a nation, and each group's differentness is celebrated, then Jewish tribalism would not stand out anymore than other tribal behavior.
#15. To: Kamala, christine (#13)
Illegal immigration is a symptom, not the problem.
#16. To: scrapper2 (#15)
#17. To: Kamala (#16)
#18. To: scrapper2 (#17)
#19. To: Kamala (#18)
Please put me on bozo, or don't reply to me. Thanks.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest