In a recent nerf-ball interview with Vox, President Obama gloated at the disintegration of the American nation into a dissociated congeries of human particles.
In his remarks, Mr. Obama said the following thing:
…I’m pretty optimistic, and the reason is because this country just becomes more and more of a hodgepodge of folks… So people are getting more and more comfortable with the diversity of this country, much more sophisticated about both the cultural differences but more importantly, the basic commonality that we have.
Passing over the sly use of the word “sophisticated” (the unpacking of which probably deserves a post of its own), the phrase “basic commonality” is exactly right: as you muddle together more and more people of alien and immiscible cultures, the area of possible overlap — their “commonality” — moves from the complex to the simple, from the sublime to the sensual: in other words, from what is highest in us to what is lowest.
I made this point in some detail in a post from 2013 entitled Culture and Metaculture. An excerpt:
It strikes me here that we need to be clear about the meaning of the word “culture”. The word, properly understood, refers to the ideas and folkways that are characteristic of, and above all shared by, a particular group of people. Indeed it is the sum of these commonalities of culture, as much as anything to do with biological relatedness, that defines “a people”, and binds them together as one people — and that defines nations as something more than mere patches of land enclosed by frontiers.
Culture, then, is what a common people share. Its very essence is its distinctness. The commonalities that have until now formed the essential foundations of culture, throughout history and around the world, are such things as language, religion, moral norms, history, myths and legends, great heroes, music, poetry, literature, cuisine, dress, and rituals of birth, marriage, and death. Above all, there is always a sense of extension in time: a reverent awareness of the shared culture’s unique embedding in history, and of the duty to preserve it for future generations by honoring and propagating its traditions.
By contrast, look at modern American (or more generally, Western) “culture”. Its highest value, its summum bonum, is now the very antithesis of culture itself: not commonality, but “diversity”.
At the heart of this unnatural, Utopian ideology is a fatal paradox: the notion of a single “culture” that is, somehow, all cultures at once. But if culture itself is that which is common to a people — that which is shared — then, given the profusion of incommensurable features that make up the world’s cultures, any hybrid that seeks to combine and assimilate them all can only have as its own core of commonality the vanishingly small area of overlap between them.
It is like a Venn diagram linking an ever-increasing number of sets: as each new human group is added to the collection, the intersection between them — the set of what is common to all, and thus the limit of what can form the shared basis of the new metaculture — becomes smaller and smaller. In the end, as is now plain to see, all that remains are the basest commonalities of our animal nature, grafted onto a few philosophical abstractions about the form of government.
The post goes on to quote a trenchant analysis from Leszek Kolakowski — but rather than re-post it all here, I invite you to go and have a look. See also James Kirkpatrick’s comments, over at VDare.
35 Comments
The logical extension of your thoughts is that people should stay in their place of birth and embrace their own culture, never mixing, diluting their uniqueness. As I understand it, the USA has always been a melting pot and much of the “diversity” was deliberately introduced.
I think that what you are objecting to Malcolm, is the latest wave of immigrants into all western countries. These people have their own cultures, traditions, and religions which they bring with them. Whereas in bygone days there was an attempt to assimilate into their adopted country, today there is an emphasis on maintaining a foreign culture within a new country where the majority have no understanding of your traditions, and no concept of the fervour that you bring to your culture, and it’s practices. So much so, that you wish for others to get the message and live like you do because it is the only way. It is the right way.
In the past newcomers accepted that their new country had it’s own values and culture. Sometimes, maybe they ever felt inferior. Certainly they knew who was in charge so everything was relatively peaceful.
Today, the minorities are far more disaffected and much more militant. Many, but not all, do not seek commonality. They deplore the depravity, and lack of belief or values, in the host community. Maybe they always felt that way because integration never really happened, but today the discontent is widely articulated. It has now gone a step further as evidenced by the crazy minority who would like to convert all unbelievers to their bonkers religion, which is incompatible with the system that is in place and has worked well in their adopted countyr.
What I’m saying in a roundabout way is this: sometimes there is no wish to find commonality, just to live separate lives in separate communities, until such time that the original inhabitants give up and embrace their truths.
That is never going to happen.
Musey, America has been successful because of the “melting pot” attraction–out of many, one. It has been part of our unique nature. Beginning in the 1960s, many on the left worked to stop immigration from Europe in favor of poorer people of color and different ethnicities. Over the years, the left has sought to use these immigrants to cement political power for themselves under the phony banner of “multiculturalism”. As in live here just as you have done before only remember us at voting time. With most of education and media under its control, the left sets about remaking the workable America into a dysfunctional hodge podge of unassimilated cultures butting up against a traditional America and our values and traditions. This is simply suicide. The left thinks that it can be wonderful as long as they hold the power. As with everything else, they are wrong.
http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/multicultural-suicide/
Musey,
I don’t object to the immigrants themselves; they are just looking for the best deal they can get, as anyone would. What I object to is a social and political policy that deliberately sets out to overwhelm and destroy the West’s cultures, traditions, and demography.
No, it’s worse than that. The problem is not any lack of understanding. The problem, rather, is a political majority that actively despises the nation’s traditions, culture, and practices — and by extension, the white European majority population that created them — and wants to see them disenfranchised, disinherited, and displaced.
And what better way to do this than to pulverize the organic and hierarchical framework of Western civil society to dust, leaving only a dissociated mass of human quanta whose only relationship is to a soulless and overarching State?
How in God’s name could any society, any civilization, want to become a “hodgepodge”? That President Obama can use such a term in a public interview, with the apparent approval of his interlocutors, is a terrifying sign of how far we’ve fallen already, of how much we have already forgotten and unlearned.
Whitewall,
I believe there have been two separate leftist policies on immigration — lets call them the “melting pot” scheme and the “diversity” scheme. As you have mentioned, both of them have had, as their main objective, the cementing of immigrants’ allegience to the Democrat left. But, there has been a secondary objective in the shift from “melting pot” to “diversity”.
Whereas “melting pot” urged Americanization, which led immigrants to establishing themselves in the broad middle class, “diversity” herds immigrants into the so-called “plantation” ghetto. This policy maintains the Left’s stranglehold on immigrants’ voting allegience, and it also promotes their secondary objective — the establishment of a two-class society at the expence of the middle class.
Large Henry
I agree. We are pretty much on the same sheet here. Imagine what it will be like for the Left when, inevitably, someone asks the question “why” is it always us on the plantation and why do things never change for us. I suspect many black Americans might start doing this post Obama. For many of us, it is our obligation to turn on the light for them so the questions can be asked. Could get interesting.
Malcolm, I really don’t believe that what is happening now was meticulously planned. I just don’t, not to win elections, not to destroy the western culture, nor to wipe out the middle class. Politicians on the left may enjoy the support of immigrant communities but then they can also count on the indigenous poor to vote their way.
I think this whole mess has been a giant miscalculation. When I was growing up in a community where there was a sizable ethnic population there was no sense of threat from them, the poor devils did the jobs that we didn’t want, and they appeared to be passive by nature. Which sounds dreadfully patronising but it turns out that we were wrong.
I think that Whitewall has it right when he considers when the black people will start to object to being stuck on the plantation. I think that this is what has already taken place in some British communities. Certainly, in England, the jobs that these people did have long gone. The, now, elderly people that arrived in the country as migrants have handed over power to their children who have been born there and who have no feelings of gratitude or respect for their hosts. They see themselves as full citizens, which of course they are, but discriminated against and forced to be forever the underclass. There are a lot of furious, disaffected youths threatening the peace these days.
It’s a very dangerous situation when you have a whole lot of young people with very little to do, very little money and a feeling of grievance or injustice. Having never socialised outside of their own communities and with a religion that binds them together they recognise that they can flex their muscles and cause everyone to sit up and take notice. Furthermore, they look around at the white community which does not adhere to their religious values and has maybe lost its way a bit, they feel contempt. Added to the resentment over what they consider to be unjust wars fought against their kind…well, it’s just a tinder-box.
I have no doubt that these people will not win. If there really is a group of elites orchestrating this, then they have surely underestimated the strength of nationalism and the pride that individuals still have in their country, it’s traditions and it’s culture.
Western culture will survive. I expect a surge in church attendance and an embracing of traditions as a backlash to what has been going on. It’s only recently that people have started to recognise that things are not going well but the fight back has well and truly begun.
WW,
I believe the questioning of Obama’s “Hope and Change” snake oil has long begun. Unfortunately, the snake-oil salesmen have been able to lead the plantation dwellers astray (again) with a 2-pronged campaign — It’s racism! And, the rich are plundering the poor, dontcha know?
What’s the response from the “unfortunates”? Why it’s the old standby: envy –> hatred –> murderous violence!
Musey, you have a reluctance to acknowledge the existence and the ubiquity of evil people. That, of course, is your personal prerogative. But, are you familiar with the following statements made by President Lyndon Johnson?
You can google it.
Henry, I recall Lendum Billions Johnson well. Probably one of the most destructive presidents ever. He was emblematic of the generations old, and still going, style of treating black people. For as long as there has been a Democrat party, they have never and will never willingly let black people out of their control. Johnson has left them struggling to stay poor. Sad.
Democrats will also try to do the same with Hispanics. They will have some success but I don’t think as much as they hope for.
Henry, I do acknowledge the existence of evil people but I question their ubiquity. The majority of people are reasonably good, and for that reason have been slow to respond to changes in society that have gone too far. Tolerance has its limits and it has just about run out.
There is a lot of talk these days about the new world order and its evil plans. Whether or not there is a group who are running the show and laughing, which is doubtful, the majority has now woken up. Power is always proportional. If enough people say no, there is nothing that a small elite group can do to stop the revolt.
We can see it in Europe, where PM’s are having to admit that things have gone wrong. They can no longer call out ordinary citizens and label them as bigots because the silent majority is starting to defend its own position. Certainly, politicians in the UK know that the population has grown restless, and the rise of parties such as UKIP are an enormous headache for the two major players.
Never underestimate the power of the people.
I had never seen that statement attributed to LBJ, but I doubt that it was made in a public forum. Can it be verified? I don’t know and anyway, I don’t find it particularly surprising. This was spoken in a different era. The civil rights movement and the empowerment of black people was new, and worrying for the conservative whites. Change is difficult and cannot happen all at once, which is not to make excuses for what he said, just to see it in the context of the past. As it happens it was enough to make a difference, a big difference, when you think about your current president. Who would ever have thought it possible that a black man could be in charge?
Musey,
The concepts of “ubiquity” and “majority” are not mutually exclusive. Even if, as you assert, the majority of people are “good”, it does not preclude the presence of evil people everywhere.
I beg to differ. Joseph Stalin ruled the Soviet Union virtually single-handedly for two decades, until his death. He did it via a strategy of top-down random terror. He personally terrorized his lieutenants, who in turn terrorized their own underlings, and so on — it was turtles all the way down to the vodka-drinking slob in the gutter.
I have and I continue to do so. Most of the people, I assert, are sheeple, just as Stalin famously said to one of his detractors (just before he shot him).
Well it was public enough to wend its way into the googleverse. In any case, I referenced Johnson’s quoted remarks in an attempt to shake your confidence in the inevitable triumph of good over evil.
I guess you are, as the song from South Pacific puts it, just a cockeyed optimist. But I sincerely mean that in a nice way.
“A cockeyed optimist”, I love it, thanks Henry.
We can quibble about the word “ubiquity” and it’s precise meaning, but to me, and I may be wrong, it implies that it is everywhere to a large rather than to small extent.. and yes, people are sheeple a lot of the time, but there does come a turning point, and I think we’re there.
Henry, your faith in the veracity of what appears in the googleverse is quite surprising.
I’m surprised that you’re surprised, Musey. Of course there is a preponderance of nonsense to be found online. But there are also lots of resources to choose from, some of which may even be reputable. I’d rather choose from what’s available online then take the words of someone like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, or even Brian Williams. I have also been known to read a book now and then.
It is easy to doubt anything anyone asserts. But pure speculation to the contrary is hardly a convincing alternative.
Also, I was not quibbling about the meaning of “ubiquity”. It simply means existing everywhere. I had no need to assert that evil people are a majority — only that they can be found anywhere that people can congregate.
Henry, I looked up the definition of “ubiquity”. There was something in there about “all pervasive”. That is what I was referring to, also that there are many words in the English language that don’t “simply mean” anything. Nuance.
Have we had this conversation before?
Malcolm,
Please delete the word “simply” from my comment at:
Posted February 12, 2015 at 10:06 pm
(Musey? This might take awhile, hang in kid.)
Not picking on you, personally Whitewall – it’s just I need a convenient place (contextually speaking) from which to begin fleshing out some points.
Now Whitewall, hopefully you’ll begin to recognize my heading: Pat Buchanan;
Where to begin. Hell, just dive right in.
The Choir suggests Musey, all this stuff we’re seeing now has the one, single, convenient bugaboo – while I agree with parts eg The Left, I have some problems at the same time with The Choir conflating “if there’s a D before their name, they’re therefore Leftists. Or, to be precise, The Enemy.”
(It’s easier Musey to, rather than have some who hold a very few policy disagreements, some more than a few, and some Full-out Leftists to combine the many however disparate “somes” consolidating all into something more convenient.
Thus “Democrat” becomes “Enemy.”)
_______________
Nevermind within the (also for convenience) Republicans – or The Right – there’s Chamber of Commerce Republicans [who prefer lawn care cheap] Establishment Republicans [who hold to the notion they know best *see RINO] all the way to the other end of the spectrum, The Tea Party Republicans [who tolerate at times, some frankly Libertarian views] all of The Right contend amongst themselves every couple of years which, Chamber of Commerce, RINO or Tea Party can get the most money together to put The Bestest Person up to get beat by The Enemy.
_____________
http://buchanan.org/blog/new-south-black-conservative-7095
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/we-blew-it
JK, do you know how much I love you?
Let me count the ways?
You’ll very likely not Musey, recognize what I’m talking about here .. perhaps not Henry, but Whitewall certainly will.
Above I’d subdivided The Right numerating one particular third – RINOs.
Buchanan somewhat illustrates with his point
But it worked tit for tat the other way round just after the Cantor debacle (the Republicans colluding with the Democrats)
Mississippi’s ultimately winning “Conservative” Thad Cochrane.
You see how this is working Whitewall?
Yep. That’s The Question.
The Left or … well nowadays the acceptable (or accepted)
And it’s Tit For Tat.
Since the Patriot Act.
______________
The Left & The Right is … The Enemy.
Our Generation is the last to Comprehend Liberty.
When we’re gone, it’s over.
JK
I do envy your standing with Musey.
Beginning in the 1960s is fine but it is about a hundred and fifty years after where I was beginning when I said “as long as there has been a Democrat party…”. I currently live next to one of the worst gerrymandered districts in the USA. It is true that the VRA made some weird district boundaries and that took deal making in state legislatures. This is what it took to maintain a status quo with enough elected blacks to make a good showing in Congress and for black voters to have the privilege of always sending them there to get wealthy and the voters making do with government programs, paperwork and checks. Good government you know.
Also JK, to boil it all down regarding the various factions within the R party, isn’t it interesting all these factions can find ways to get along and debate? On the other side, so far we see the Red Queen is waiting for her coronation. Any opposition from within a party that large? Nope, not yet anyway. Is that healthy? In a dictatorship it would be expected. What if some Ds decide that enough radical socialism by force of government is really not what they want and offer up an actual Democrat to run against HER? Think they would be fairly civil like the R side or would there be wholesale bloodletting in the backrooms and alley ways of Democratdom?
JK,
I never thought the Democrats specifically were the enemy, nor the Republicans, which is why I never joined a political party. I have always been an Independent voter, because I feel it is pointless to vote for or against any party platform; the platform is generally ignored after the election.
Having said that, however, it had dawned on me in the wake of 9/11 that most of the crazies in Congress have a D next to their name. And most of those crazy Democrats are most definitely Leftists.
Incidentally, JK, I specifically referred to Congressional (and by extension, Presidential) elections because I am seldom familiar enough with the candidates in local elections. So, whereas I vote for the candidate I prefer for Congress and President, my strategy in local elections is to vote against the incumbent! I figure fresh blood is generally a good thing.
Musey,
Insha’allah.
Whitewall, all that lovey-dovey stuff is a bit of an in joke. Malcolm has stolen my heart.
I’ve just found some beautiful red roses on the kitchen table. It’s Valentine’s Day, and I had forgotten.
“Insha’allah”, I’m not entirely sure what that means, but it doesn’t sound promising. Speaking as a cock-eyed optimist, and an agnostic, I wish you all, “God Bless”.
Musey, the translation from Google is “God willing”, which I am confident is the correct translation. You really ought to give Google a try sometime. You’d be amazed at what one could learn from its use …
:)
Henry, I know. I looked it up after writing the comment. Google is great!
Musey, Malcolm, et al.,
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if those who exclaim, “God is great!” instead exclaimed, “Google is great!” I am sure Larry Page and Sergey Brin would approve.
I’d agree at this point that’s what we *apparently* see. Just a personal admission from me, my “Inner Nostradamus” hasn’t been particularly reliable ever since I lost that thou betting Clinton couldn’t possibly beat GHW.
Not even my “Inner Nostradamus” has noted any. As to it being healthy, I’d prefer to wait for the labwork on the Epstein/Clinton to come back before I do any diagnosing.
I’d agree that “just looking at the results” one could get the impression all Democrats are all lemmings. Digging into the votes however tells me not every legislative act has been unanimous.
https://www.congress.gov/
November 2016 is a ways off at this point. I suppose we’ll see.
Checking my OED … fairly … “handsomely,” from fair (adj.) + -ly. Meaning “impartially, justly” is from 1670s. Sense of “somewhat” is from 1805, a curious contrast to the earlier, but still active, sense of “totally” (1590s). Old English had fÁ¦gerlice “splendidly.”
I guess I’d have to reply – depends first which blog I’m on then secondly, if the commentors admit to there being some ambiguity rather than it’s either or. Adding, it’s probably a good thing the Secret Service doesn’t look at every blog comment.
JK, I have so much fun with your comments, but I never understand them. I reckon the Secret Service will keep an eye on the goings on around here, because Malcolm could turn out to be a dangerous adversary. That means that you’re busted.
Can you post the photo of yourself, so that we can all have a look? You need to give Malcolm a run for his money.
Second line down Musey, touch the screen with your right index finger. Whenever I was flying in decades passed and handed my passport to anybody with the authority to so ask, it never failed;
“You’re not JK, you’re JE.”
//www.pinterest.com/caesar56/jack-elam/
This is the pic JK asked me to post for him:
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/Jack_Elam_in_Kansas_City_Confidential.jpg[/img]
I was expecting something like Yosemite Sam.
JK, you look like the kind of guy that my mother warned me about. Very dangerous.
Have you considered donning a white suit? It’s a lot less threatening and shows off the tan.
I did what you suggested with my right index finger but nothing happened. Could you send further instructions?
Nothing happened? !!!
You sure Musey you’re, from Australia?
An here I was thinking … well nevernind.
Tennis. Yes. Musey plays tennis. And Musey beats boys. The big boys. Drives the big boys to humble. Humble pie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJb0zZUT3R0
Well.
Somebody anyway tried.
JK, I haven’t played tennis for months and anyway, I’m not that good, but I came up against a man who, on the day, couldn’t hit a ball into court. That’s what happened. He was so desperate not to be beaten by a woman, he beat himself! He should have stuck to footie.
BTW, I’m sure you’re lovely. I hope you had a good Valentine’s Day with somebody interesting.