A practical result of believing that all cultures are equal

Complementing my discussion with Jeff in England about the meaning of liberalism, Simon N. writes from England:

A UK Conservative party think tank has just released a security report on “uniting the community.” On my reading it seeks to reject cultural Marxism/left liberalism, while also rejecting conservatism, and seeking to adhere to classical liberalism, thus keeping the door open to cultural-Marxist values. It says: “Integration is a two way street”—i.e. we must change our way of life to conciliate hostile immigrants.

LA replies:

It actually says, “Integration is a two-way street”? Amazing. Proof that liberalism is incompatible with the continued existence of any particular society. After all, if we believe in equality, how can we expect that assimilation should be a one-way process in which immigrants assimilate to our culture but we don’t assimilate to theirs?

Simon N. reples:
They say “In an age of migration, the mental image of ourselves as a settled society to which incomers should conform without change or effort on our part is unhelpful.”

The two-way street comment is a quote from an anonymous Muslim. Note that the tone of this report is well to the “right” of UK govt policy and statements made by David Cameron!

LA replies:

I’m laughing out loud at that “mental image of ourselves” quote.

By the way, if readers are wondering why I find this disaster funny, it’s because the liberal ideology is so unsound, self-contradictory, and blatantly fraudulent (for example, if it had been made plain at the outset that “we” must conform to the newcomers, we never would have allowed the newcomers to come here in the first place) that it could pushed over with a twig. Yes, the liberalism still has great power over us, power enough to destroy everything we have and everything we are. But that’s only because we give it the power to do so. In itself, liberalism has no reality, it is a joke. So in laughing, I’m momentarily seeing the “true world”—the world as it ought to be—where liberalism would be understood as the joke it really is and would have no power over us and would be blown aside in an instant.

LA writes:

The idea that assimilation or integration should go both ways, meaning that the culture of the host society to which the immigrants have immigrated has no priority over the immigrants’ culture, is exactly analogous to the late-liberal idea that democratic majority rule must be rejected because it gives the majority more power than the minority.

Liberalism used to mean that the host society should allow people to immigrate on an equal basis, not discrimiating against them for their culture, ethnicity, and so on. Now liberalism means that the very idea of a host society is wrong.

In the same way, liberalism used to mean that all citizens have an equal vote, and that the side that has the most votes wins, and rules. Now liberalism means that no one should ever win, or rule. Only an unelected elite, not representing any coarse majority, but standing only for the pure idea of rights and tolerance for all, has the right to rule.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at August 02, 2007 06:53 AM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):