Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 5/12/2004 6:09:10 AM EST
The followers of the quasi religious dogma of pacifism and cultural diversity have done this country great harm in the last few decades. Let’s take each ideology one by one.

Pacifism is not an unworthy ideal, when viewed in the context of basic civil behavior. Friendly and considerate behavior should indeed be a cultural model for all Americans. Thus, when a dispute arises, a nonviolent solution can possibly be achieved. Unfortunately, for many Americans, the pacifist stance has gone from that of ‘violence as last resort’, to ‘violence is never the solution’. Obviously, this is an asinine position, but it’s made even worse by the silly way ideological pacifists believe that their belief will spread. That is, they believe that pacifism is a communicable ideal that can be spread by conduction. A person who is not a pacifist, will have an awakening to the pacifist light once in direct contact with a pacifist. The reality of human behavior is somewhat different than that of the studio audience of the Phil Donahue show (think a mixed gender Oprah audience). Strict pacifism is an invitation to problems as it legitimately invites conflict. Does leaving your house unlocked deter a burglar, or does it attract them? The evolution of our survival instincts has to some degree placed both predation and problem avoidance into our beings. Thus, pacifists are easy to take advantage of, as they are low hanging fruit for those who don’t wish to join their peaceful crusade…

Diversity is also a worthy ideal, but not as it’s practiced in American politics. Often, we hear an analogy comparing cultural diversity to diversity in ones investment portfolio. This is actually a horrible analogy as portfolio diversity is a hedge against individual failures. Thus, Darwinism rears its ever present existence and portfolio diversity actually means having some investments that will likely survive, while acknowledging that some others will likely fail and be sacrificed. Such diversity can be viewed as a competitive learning experience. The most worthy survive, and the rest are cut loose. Diversity as practiced by the American political scene bears no resemblance to this. The acceptance and assignment of equal value to all cultures, beliefs, customs, and rituals is the dominant believe of cultural diversity. One ends up treating society as a bunch of sub groups, with ‘cultural traits’ all of equal value. It’s important not to confuse the right to have customs and beliefs, with the right of them to be legally defined as being equal to others. For example, compare English cooking to Italian, compare German engineering with Greek, compare American basketball players with Korean, compare American movies to Indian, and compare American soccer players with Brazilian. The fact remains that although each of these groups has the right to do what they do, none of these comparisons are truly equal. The market flushes that out every hour of every day. Unfortunately, the only place market filtration does not occur is in the annals of government. There, being an alternate cultural attribute is the only thing that matters. In an official context, it’s actually not legal for one culture to judge another.

How does this bear on Western society? Cultural diversity when combined with lax immigration (legal and illegal) allows non western populations to develop and thrive WITHOUT adopting the culture of their new land. Government and media become very timid around these new populations for fear of the receiving a career ending scarlet letter of “racist” or “Ameri-Euro-centric”. Not assimilating into our culture becomes problematic because in many cases, these new immigrants main intention is not to become American, but rather to live their prior culture while reaping the economic and constitutional benefits of the United States. In the past, this hasn’t been a huge problem, because most of the immigrants didn’t have a goal of reclaiming America (A very small part of some Hispanic intentions) or “de-corrupting” America (a not so uncommon goal of Islam in America). Enter conductive pacifism... The pacifists believe that all who hear their word will eventually come around to their point of view, regardless of original intention. The dramatic consequence of this is that they build NO defenses. The diversity people believe that the more differences we have, the better.

The result? America has NO tangible defense against growing power blocs of anti US (or worse, non western) groups in our own borders. Socialists love this, because private interests are their enemy, and American culture is composed of mostly private interests. Anything that causes a weakening of the current economic/governmental system is seen as a benefit. I’d never ask anyone to come over to my house if their intention was possibly malicious, but diverse America doesn’t allow the question to be asked, and pacifist America doesn’t care about the answer. Constitutionally, this must be allowed, but American culture itself must deal with and prepare for the fact that many that it accepts, want to change it to varying degrees (from a minor change, to complete destruction)…


PS: Before any of you dopes thinks I’m being a hypocrite because as an Atheist I’m part of the problem, keep in mind that I’m incredibly western in my thinking, and believe that the success of the west is man made, not a blessing from god.
Link Posted: 5/12/2004 9:55:30 AM EST
To clarify, I am not a racist, I am an elitist. All are welcome, just be prepared to adopt western culture...
Top Top