|
Rural diversity
There’s an air of unreality to the Voice of America assertion that slower processing of refugee claims is causing problems in North Dakota because the state is “struggling to maintain its population” and “refugees are a vital part of [its] economic development.” Even if it’s true that the arrival of mainly unskilled third-world immigrants improves things for those North Dakotans who haven’t moved elsewhere, it seems unlikely that a shortfall of 250 or so from one source among many—which seems to be the concern—would make much of a difference. Accounts from England of racism in rural
areas and demands for “practical strategies to develop an effective anti-racist agenda” may help fill out the picture of the
effect of efforts to promote “diversity” in the hinterlands. First outsiders move or are moved into areas where the people have
a settled way of life. Then when there’s friction the locals have to be reformed to extirpate any assumption they’ll be able to
live in the way and among the people to whom they’re accustomed. All to the good, if the purpose of government is getting everyone to get with the program.
Comments
The story on combatting racism in rural England illustrates Auster’s First Law of Immigration and Multiculturalism: Whenever a significant number of nonwhite, non-Western people are admitted into a previously all-white community, that community—even if it has never been accused of racism before—will suddenly find itself accused of racism and will be required to abandon its very culture and identity in order to get rid of its racism. Anyone interested in a fuller exposition of these ideas can look up my speech at the 1994 American Renaissance conference, published in the August 1994 issue of AR, http://amren.com/948issue/948issue.html A problem is the principle of zero tolerance. Any “racism”—any friction attributable to ethnic or cultural differences—is utterly intolerable and justifies all means needed to eradicate it. Eradication of course involves abolishing the practical effects of cultural differences, which means some combination of abolishing the established local culture and establishing a totally administered society. Posted by: Jim Kalb on July 17, 2002 2:55 PMWhile friction may be a sufficient cause for setting in motion the anti-racist dynamic, I would try to make the account more precise than that. The problem manifests when the new group has trouble fitting into or performing according to the standards of the majority. This produces awareness of inequality and difference, both of which must be blamed not on the minority, but on the majority. Posted by: Lawrence Auster on July 17, 2002 6:03 PM |