“Great empires do not die by murder, but by suicide,” observed English historian Arnold Toynbee. The poison of the West is multiculturalism and mass immigration.
Two people cannot sit on the same chair, without one eventually being pushed off. There can be an uncomfortable sharing of the same seat for some time, but eventually both sides will become tired of the arrangement, and either one person will have to leave or the two people will get into a fight.
There is no society where diversity did not lead to hostility. It is true that similar ethnicities – e.g., Caribbean, African and American Blacks – can eventually integrate voluntarily (usually in one generation, sometimes faster). But that is because the values of these people are close enough that a compromise is possible. But when two strangers with different moral and cultural values are forced to not only live together, but share power, violence is inevitable and usually immediate.
Diversity, real diversity between radically different people, is a failure throughout the world. The only result of diversity is war. Different African tribes are at each other’s throats in every country they are forced to share. Muslims fight each other, Sunni against Shia, Arabs against Persians. Certainly we’ve seen tremendous warfare in Europe, which involved diversity (Britain vs. France much more than Holland vs. Germany). As hard it may be to bring bring people of the same race together, it’s that much more difficult to cross racial race.
Races develop when people evolve in different environments, which place different biological and social pressures on people. Social norms, therefore, must be as radically different as the differences in people’s appearances.
We are told repeatedly that Mexican Indians, Moslems and Africans will successfully integrate into Western societies. But what proof is there? It is true that allowing a small number of immigrants will force them to join the greater society by learning the language and the customs of the dominant people. But if you are a majority, why should you adopt to the minority, even if the minority resided in your land before you? When Mexicans are a majority of the people in this country, why would they adopt to our values? When Moslems are the majority of Europeans, why would they choose to speak French and Spanish instead of Arabic?
Mexicans, Africans and Muslims may become wealthier than they were in their native land. They may be nice. They may be pleasant. They may be hardworking. None of this is relevant to this discussion, however. Just because someone is wealthy, nice and hardworking, does not make them Western.
The people of Hong Kong are wealthy (as compared to most of the world), usually nice and usually hardworking – but they are not Western. Being Western has nothing to do with any of these qualities. The term “Western” does not describe whether a person is good or bad, it describes a distinct culture created by a distinct people. Theirs is the East Asian culture, a product of East Asian people. The Indian culture is likewise the product of the Indian people. The African culture too is the product of the Black people. And yes, the Western culture is the product of the white people. Blacks are no more likely to want to watch Opera than whites are to want to run around the jungle with a stick.
To the extent diversity works anywhere, it is a result of the White Westerners’ belief in the God of Multiculturalism and Peace. During the first half of the 20th century, European and Western nations fought the two bloodiest wars of all time. This was not a result of some inherent White brutality, but rather a product of innovation that created airplanes, tanks, rockets, missiles, machine guns.
Coming out of World War Two, the White man was simply tired and could not go on fighting. The idea of embracing each other seemed like a way out of a permanent disaster with constant warfare. And so the West agreed to look beyond one’s tribal instincts and embrace one another. Of course, that is relatively easy for nations that are similar. The French embraced the Walloons. The Germans embraced the Dutch. The Norwegians embraced the Danes. The English embraced the Irish. But it’s easy for people who are already similar to join hands and sing the kumbaya around the campfire.
But what to do when Muslims who believe in cover up their women from head to toe arrive in Holland, a place famous for its libertine sexual mores?
What to do when Africans arrive into Western countries and set fire in the middle of their hotel rooms when they want to cook food? Or when Mexicans demand that the City of Los Angeles spends its money celebrating Cinco De Mayo rather than Fourth of July?
Most cultures would fight back. But Whites simply backed down and went along with their own cultural destruction. The City of Los Angeles now sponsors Cinco De Mayo, but not the Fourth of July. One holiday is not inherently better than the other. But when you consider that the second largest city in the United States prefers celebrating a Mexican military victory rather than American independence, you begin to understand the kind of cultural destruction that awaits us in the near future.
Most people understand what diversity means, and hardly anyone believes it. Italians can live in the same neighborhood with Jews, their fellow Mediterraneans, and Germans can live with the English. But outside of their own race, people feel uncomfortable.
No White person will admit publicly that he is opposed to integration. They will sing praises to the Brown v. Board of Ed decision. And yet, the White people who joined Civil Rights demonstrations and sang “We Shall Overcome” were no different from those who stood in front of school doors to prevent integration.
Both groups opposed integration when it came to their own children. The rich got to move to neighborhoods that excluded blacks with unnecessarily high prices, and in cities, through coop boards.
The poor couldn’t afford to do that, so they stood in front of school doors screaming at black students. The media reported their actions as “hate”, but the reality was that they were mad out of frustration and fear. If your son got beaten (like Mike Berman) and your daughters raped (like Mike’s two sisters) by blacks, with the school and the courts refusing to punish the criminals, and you could not afford to send your child to private school, you too would stand in front of school doors screaming “Nigger”.
The history of the rise of American suburbs is a history of a desperate White flight away from schools that were being filled with Black children. It is undeniable that suburbs would not be even a quarter of their current size but for school integration.
White teachers fled from the schools that turned black, and even government programs giving educators significant additional benefits, such as full tuition reimbursement in a Master’s degree program, cannot attract whites into predominantly black schools.
So how can you tell if a person is a “racist” and opposed to diversity? He lives in a white town or neighborhood. Ultimately, that is all you need to know about a person. White neighborhoods are much more expensive than minority areas and usually have poor public transportation (which is what prevents poor blacks from moving in). Why are Whites traveling for hours to and from work when they can buy a similar house for much less right near their job in the center of the city where they work? They will never admit it in public, and in many cases they will never admit it to themselves – but they are paying a premium merely to avoid diversity.
And that’s all you need to know about the success of American multiculturalism and diversity.
Next time a white liberal tells you to support non-white immigration, ask him where he lives. If he’s not from Gary, IN or South Central LA, you can safely tell him that he’s lying – to you and to himself.
