Division in the West Part 1

One of the interesting things I notice looking fairly far back in Western history is how despite our various difference, both idealistically, ethnically and geographically,  a good portion of us seems to band together when its needed. Look at World War II, in the face of an impending threat, the English decided their appeasing, weak-spined prime minister Neville Chamberlain was no wartime leader, and appointed the ideal candidate, an old school imperialist Winston Churchill, who unified and emboldened the spirit of the UK against the Nazi invasion. It was a rough and merciless operation with significant cost of monetary resources aswell as people, but the UK never was occupied by the Nazis.

But what do we have now?

Multiculti
All of the West is under the spell of multiculturalism, believing that opening the floodgates to let in the hordes of third worlders, foreign cultures and foreign entities is a boon to our culture. "They enrich our culture immensely with theirs'!" The leaders and their followers screech, but when asked what these cultures include, and how they enrich ours, there's an awkward filibuster or silence. As Mark Steyn said, a true multiculturalist in the past would have had to know everything about a Muslim group's belief and geographical past, before allowing a mosque to be built in his area of jurisdiction. Now, as long as everyone feels good about themselves, wallowing in their collective ignorance of the introduced culture, it's a good thing. Truer words were never spoken.

The diversification of Western culture with foreign cultures has had a devastating effecting on Europe, a case-study into a country in the grips of severe self-doubt and impotence. The dilution of traditional nationalist values, with a blurry kind of all-encompassing behemoth that we shall call political correctness. This emerged as a sort of semi-optional self-editing speech code, there are certain things you shouldn't talk about, and there's unspoken universal truths; if you're white, your ancestors were terrible and its all your fault; if you're a man, you treated women terribly and it's all your fault; and worst of all, you can't help your sexist/racist/imperialist/bigoted ways and you need your government, your Human Resource Managers,your media and your Cultural Diversity departments to help to regulate and monitor your progress, and make sure you are kept in line.

The reaction has been, mostly one of muted acquiescence by the ethnic Europeans, silenced by the media's and the self-appointed thought police's accusatory reactions to anyone who dissents, begs the question: If your own government and social conventions have served to trap you in a kind of proto-Orwellian stage of diminished individual responsibility and thought self-censorship, then what loyalty should you have for the nation you were born and raised in? Or indeed, if you believe the force-fed multiculti dogma, then if your country needs the other cultures, how much value is your culture?

Globalisation Versus Nationalism
I remember speaking to an easy going French couple about a similar issue, and they introduced a concept I had never really heard of. "A global culture". I found this an interesting idea, that we can all abandon our borders and all people from different lands can be part of a global nation. A romantic but severely flawed nation, when a good part of the world is at war with itself, and a large portion of the world (Islamic) is conducting a cold war against another large portion of the world (Western) without a large part of the latter realising it. An airy fairy idea of all nations coming together as equals and leaving all their past (and current) grievances behind, that is not only counter to human nature, or counter to presented evidence, it's also counter to how the world runs.  Competition is a major motivator.

Indeed, the globalisation of culture embraced by many misled Westerners has at least (at the very least) several major flaws: What culture are we all gonna agree on? What customs are we gonna pick and choose? And how will it be regulated? The fluidity of it is its downfall, a kind of post-imperalist socialist notion of peaceful unification.

Fortunately for this leftist French couple, this concept is one that many radical Imams and Islamic zealots agree with, but their idea of "One global nation" differs a little in its inception...

The Far Left
The major proponents of this internal Western division, advertedly or inadvertedly, are the left-wing socialists. They bank on their position being a rebellious uprising fighting against the fascist and bigoted right wing, or indeed, anyone not in agreement with their clearly superior moral higher ground. We can observe this in a previous article I uploaded about the radical socialist indoctrination in American universities. The merging of socialist indoctrination in the lecture hall has been a surprisingly unchallenged action, possibly due to the successful muting of opposition with slanderous accusations, embedding the fear of being branded "racist" or a "bigot"; indeed, when a  dissenting but reasonable political opinion becomes a moral crime, you know you're in trouble.

The far leftists have indeed hijacked the notion of liberalism at least in certain US universities; you're no longer free to speak your mind if the words are counter to the "revolution". They have been conditioned to believe that not accepting multiculturalism is equal to racism, and that opposing the traditional systems we take for granted is the right thing to do. Indeed, if you know you're right, so what is the point of letting anyone else have equal time on the floor?

Another aspect of the left, the modern feminists, undoubtedly one of the earliest and the group who benefited most from political correctness (especially in the workplace) have now come at a crossroad. The previously "brave and independent" feminists are now, largely, too afraid to comment on the oppression of Muslim women for fear of being branded racists or culturally insensitive. Their own politically correct monster has served to turn its horns on its creator. The prospect of confronting and appealing for a real victim is territory they dare not to tread upon, the potential cost of losing their position or being deemed a bigot.

A major failure of the political left, and sadly of the West is the fusion of morality and politics. We now have a system where typically biased media human interest stories now dictate public opinion to complex and  events with complex histories. Take for example the Palestinian-Israeli situation, a few interviews and heart-wrenching stories about the wrecked lives of Palestinians. This leads to a heaping of international condemnation on Israel, even though the Palestinian terror group HAMAS typically initiate the conflict via launching rockets into Israeli residential areas, and that Israel has to fight a non-conventional war against a guerilla army notorious for using human shields.

Expect part 2 soon.