: If you are opening this page from another webpage, please click here to bring up the Multi-Culturalism webpage where the corresponding links can be found.
Multi-Culturalism in the Classroom
With the education reform, ie, systems education, came a plethora of new phrases, one being multi-culturalism or multi-cultural diversity. What is it? Is it just a new name for "melting pot"?
In the classroom, children are being taught that we are a pluralistic society. Plural meaning more than one of something, such then indicates that a pluralistic society is a society of many societies or cultures.
And this is what children are being taught we are a society of many cultures, of many ethic groups or tribes ... Japanese, Chinese, Pilipino, Asian, German, French, English, Spanish, Russian, Polish, Swedish .... the list is endless, each "tribe" with its own origins and culture.
For instance, Black students are being taught the dances and chants of their "native" African tribe, even though most are more than a 150 years beyond the borders of Africa, even though these children are AMERICANS by birth.
So, German children are being taught their culture; Japanese children their culture; Spanish children their culture; and so on each ethnic group its own culture from the time when the tribe was "pure". Many schools are now sporting "ethnic" clubs: Spanish Club, German Club ... if you aren't that ethnicity, you can't join. Many will remember that one of the goals of Hitler was a "pure" Aryan society!
What multi-culturalism teaches children is that America isn't a "melting pot" one society of many ethnicities, living side by side as one culture that we are a society of many different tribes, each tribe with its own culture.
Should parents be concerned about their child being taught multi-culturalism or multi-cultural diversity? In a word yes.
A nation will not long stand when it is a society of many cultures or tribes. Multicultural diversity sets one culture against another, as it did in Yugoslavia with the Croats, Serbs and Slovenes. It's called "divide and conquer". Once the various tribes are at odds with one another, it is easy for those seeking power and position (a despot) to walk in and take over as the various tribes consider each other more of a threat than they do a despot.
America or the United States, which-ever one chooses to call it, was established as "One Nation Under God; Indivisible...". We are one nation, one culture, whether we are of German, French, English ... ancestry. Once we became American citizens, that is what we are. We aren't German-American, Spanish-American, or any other type of hyphenated American.
If our nation is to survive as a nation, our children must be taught that we are one society, one culture of many different ethnic people; that we must all live together in OUR American culture.
Lynn M Stuter
Education Researcher
Washington State
Multi-Culturalism
Long before multi-culturalism because an infamous buzz word most large cities in the US were voluntarily divided into ethnic areas; Polish town, Italian town, Jewish town, and so on. First and second generation immigrants preferred to live in an area of the city where others spoke their language and shared their old world "culture." Those folks were not hostile to their adopted country, which they loved, but merely using their free choice to live among their "own" where they felt comfortable. This was not so much segregation, as it was a preference. In a couple of generations the, by then, higher educated children and grandchildren of these original immigrants inter-married with other "cultures" and moved up and out of the ethnic sections and into the more affluent suburbs. It was a natural progression called Americanization. The public schools supported this process then by leaving their hands off this natural progression. Pre-WW2 teachers never mentioned the different cultural backgrounds of their students. Children were only introduced to and taught the American culture.
The multi-culturalization of today is a deliberate social engineering scheme by government to keep us all at each other's throats and it begins in the schools. This, to me, is the most dangerous of all new-fad educational programs as it propagandizes and sets in cement and encourages bigotry by stopping a natural process which, if left alone, would solve itself, as it once did, by assimilation.
Socialism, on the other hand, has much to gain by revolutionary tactics of divide and conquer (multiculturalism). It is able thus to pass legislation which makes central government a leviathan, growing larger and larger each year, which, after all, is the aim of socialism. Once all the legislation is in place then the iron boot of totalitarianism can come down on the face of our citizens and the Constitution will be merely a nice piece of paper, held in esteem but mostly disregarded. Marxism used this tactic in every country it went into. It worked for the last one hundred and fifty years and it still works. It is our job to stop it.
Joan Masters
Multicultural Education in the Classroom
Is the following in your school, in your child's classroom? Maybe it isn't called "Passports" in your school, but by whatever name it is known, it is undoubtedly the same, and for the same goal the production of a "world citizen".
When my kids were still in public school, the grade school did a big, school-wide project called Passports. Each class studied one country in depth for a couple of weeks, integrating all subjects around it. Then, for a week, the class became that country and the students visited one another.
Prior to their visits, they had to fill out a passport application, as much like the real thing as they could make it. The students were to bring a photo of themselves, if they could, and provide a physical description of themselves. The information requested included birth date and Social Security Number. I told my kids they were not to supply their SS number. Other parents were also concerned and complained. The children were told to just make up a number.
My girls went through this for two or three years. Theoretically, this could be a pretty good activity for learning geography, history, and culture. Unfortunately, it didn't turn out that way. After the first Passports, I quizzed my daughters on what they had learned. My oldest was in 5th grade. Her class was Egypt. She did learn quite a bit about Egypt, but could not remember learning a thing about any of the "countries" her class had visited. The only thing my then second-grader could remember about visiting Egypt was, "They barter there." She also could remember nothing about any other class.
I quizzed my second daughter on her own "country", the Ukraine. She could not tell me what continent it was located on. She did not know the races or religions of the people, nor what were their industries and crops. She knew nothing about their history or governmental structure. What had she learned? How to count to ten in Russian and how to write the words for the numbers one through ten in the Cyrillic alphabet. (Integrated with spelling and math?) It was basically a travelogue from the teacher's trip there.
I complained big time about this at the LIT [Learning Improvement Team] meetings. (I was an LIT member.) The 5th grade teacher told me that if all that the other kids got out of his class was that that they barter in Egypt, he had achieved his goal for the project. "Someday," he told me, "your daughter will probably have to work with someone from Egypt or somewhere else in the world. What is more important, that she can locate their country on a map or that she know something about that persons culture?" The principal intervened and said, "Hopefully, both." I think he saw I was about to blow a gasket.
They were sensitive about my criticisms and tried to push the academics a little more the next year. The teachers were asked to send a list of their academic goals for the program home to the parents. Unfortunately, there was little improvement. [A side note: That year, they selected Maundy Thursday of Holy Week for the Passports Parent Night. How's that for cultural sensitivity?]
By the last year we were in the public schools, my youngest daughter (third one) was in second grade. She had a real flake of a teacher who is heavily into the whole reform ideology. She chose Japan for their class and totally obsessed over the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They read the 1000 cranes book and folded cranes. She even had them doing bomb drills in class (something I didn't find out till much later.)
The entire exercise was a colossal waste of time. It was three weeks of fun and games. Of course, the kids loved it! The final straw is that the teachers responsible for coming up with the idea and organizing it were given a big award from the district's multiculturalism committee.
Is this really happening? You bet it is!
Marda Kirkwood
Kent, Washington
Three weeks of class time, and if all that the child learned was that Egyptians barter, that was okay??!! To a parent who believes schools are for the purpose of educating the child, this is unacceptable. But when one understands that schools are no longer there to educate, but there rather to condition the child to a perceived environment, then the above makes perfect sense!
Multiculturalism and Marxism -- Part I
by Professor Frank Ellis
[Joe McCarthy may have been a drunk and everything else. He used a shotgun rather than a rifle. But what's been coming out of the Soviet Union since the fall of the Iron Curtain supports much of what he claimed back in the 1950's about communist activity in the United States. -- Insight magazine, 23 September 2002.]
No successful society shows a spontaneous tendency towards multiculturalism or multiracialism. Successful and enduring societies show a high degree of homogeneity. Those who support multiculturalism either do not know this, or, what is more likely, realize that if they are to transform Western society into strictly regulated, racial-feminist bureaucracies they must first undermine these societies.
This transformation is as radical and revolutionary as the project to establish Communism in the Soviet Union was. Just as every aspect of life had to be brought under political control in order for the commissars to impose their vision of society, the multiculturalists hope to control and dominate every aspect of our lives. Unlike the hard tyranny of the Soviets, theirs is a softer, gentler tyranny but one with which they hope to bind us as tightly as a prisoner in the gulag. Today's "political correctness" is the direct descendant of Communist terror and brainwashing.
Unlike the obviously alien implantation that was Communism, what makes multiculturalism particularly insidious and difficult to combat is that it usurps the moral and intellectual infrastructure of the West. Although it claims to champion the deepest held beliefs of the West, it is in fact a perversion and systematic undermining of the very idea of the West.
What we call "political correctness" actually dates back to the Soviet Union of the 1920s (politicbeskaya pravil 'nost' in Russian), and was the extension of political control in education, psychiatry, ethics, and behavior. It was an essential component of the attempt to make sure that all aspects of life were consistent with ideological orthodoxy which is the distinctive feature of all totalitarianism. In the post-Stalin period, political correctness even meant that dissent was seen as a symptom of mental illness, for which the only treatment was incarceration.
As Mao Tse-Tung, The Great Helmsman , put it, "Not to have a correct political orientation is like not having a soul." Mao's little red book is full of exhortations to follow the correct path of Communist thought and by the late l980s Maoist political correctness was well established in American universities. The final stage of development, which we are witnessing now, is the result of cross-fertilization with all the other "isms" -- anti-racism, feminism, structuralism, and post-modernism, which now dominate university curricula. The result is a new and virulent strain of totalitarianism, whose parallels to the Communist era are obvious.
Today's dogmas have led to rigid requirements of language, thought, and behavior, and violators are treated as if they were mentally unbalanced, just as Soviet dissidents were.
Some have argued that it is unfair to describe Stalin's regime as "totalitarian," pointing out that one man, no matter how ruthlessly he exercised power, could not control the functions of the state. But, in fact, he didn't have to. Totalitarianism was much more than state terror, censorship, and concentration camps; it was a state of mind in which the very thought of having a private opinion or point of view had been destroyed. The totalitarian propagandist forces people to believe that slavery is freedom, squalor is bounty, ignorance is knowledge and that a rigidly closed society is the most open in the world. And once enough people are made to think this way it is functionally totalitarian even if a single dictator does not personally control everything.
Today, of course, we are made to believe that diversity is strength, perversity is virtue, success is oppression, and that relentlessly repeating these ideas over and over is tolerance and diversity. Indeed the multicultural revolution works subversion everywhere, just as communist revolutions did. Judicial activism undermines the rule of law, "tolerance" weakens the condition that makes real tolerance possible; universities which should be havens of free enquiry practice censorship that rivals that of the Soviets. At the same time we find a relentless drive for equality: [Homer], the Bible, Shakespeare, and "rap" music are just texts with "equally valid perspectives." Today Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment would have been repackaged as Crime and Counseling.
In the Communist era, the totalitarian state was built on violence. The purpose of the l930s and the Great Terror [of the French Revolution ] (which was Mao's model for the Cultural Revolution) uses violence against "class enemies" to compel loyalty. Party members signed death warrants for "enemies of the people" knowing that the accused were innocent, but believing in the correctness of the charges. In the 1930s, collective guilt justified murdering millions of Russian peasants. As cited by Robert Conquest in The Horror of Sorrowing (p. 143), the state's view of this class was "not one of them was guilty of anything, but they belonged to a class that was guilty of everything." Stigmatizing entire institutions and groups makes it much easier to carry out wholesale change.
This, of course, is the beauty of "racism" and "sexism" for today's culture attackers -- sin can be extended far beyond individuals to include institutions, literature, language, history, laws, customs, entire civilizations. The charge of "institutional racism" is no different than declaring an entire economic class an enemy of the people. "Racism" and "sexism: are multiculturalism's assault weapons, its Big Ideas, just as class warfare was for Communists, and the effects are the same. If a crime can be collectivized, all can be guilty because they belong to the wrong group. When young whites are victims of racial preferences they are today's version of the Russian peasants. Even if they themselves have never oppressed anyone, they "belong to the race that is guilty of everything."
The purpose of these multicultural campaigns is to destroy the self. The mouth moves, the right gestures follow, but they are the mouth and gestures of a zombie, the new Soviet man or today, PC-man. Once enough people have been conditioned this way, violence is no longer necessary; we reach steady-state totalitarianism, in which the vast majority know what is expected of them and play their allotted roles.
The Russian experiment with revolution and totalitarian social engineering has been chronicled by two of that country's greatest writers, Dostoyevsky and Solzhenitsyn. They brilliantly dissect the methods and psychology of totalitarian control. Dostoyevsky's The Devils has no equal as a penetrating and disturbing analysis of the revolutionary and totalitarian mind. The "devils" are radical students of the middle and upper classes flirting with something they do not understand. The ruling class seeks to ingratiate itself with them. The universities have essentially declared war on society at large. The great cry of the student radicals is freedom, freedom, from the established norms of society, freedom from manners, freedom from inequality, freedom from the past.
Russia's descent into vice and insanity is a powerful warning of when a nation declares war on the past in the hope of building a terrestrial paradise. Dostoyevsky did not live to see the abominations he predicted, but Solzhenitsyn experienced them firsthand. The Gulag Archipelago and August 1914 can be seen as histories of ideas, as attempts to account for the dreadful fate that befell Russia after 1917. Solzhenitsyn identifies education, and the way teachers saw their duty as instilling hostility in all forms of traditional authority, as the major factors that explain why Russia's youth was seduced by revolutionary ideas. In the West during the 1960s and 1970s -- which collectively can be called "the 60s" -- we hear a powerful echo of the mental capitulation of Russia that took place in the 1870s and continued through the revolution. One of the echoes of Marxism that continues to reverberate today is that truth resides in class (or sex or race or erotic orientation ).
Truth is not something to be established by rational enquiry, but depends on the perspective of the speaker. In the multicultural universe, a person's perspective is "valued" (a favorite word) according to class. Feminists, blacks, environmentalists, and homosexuals have a greater claim to truth because they are oppressed. They see truth more clearly than the white heterosexual men who "oppress" them. This is a perfect mirror image of the Marxist proletariat's moral and intellectual superiority over the bourgeoisie.
Today, "oppression" confers a "privileged perspective" that is essentially infallible. To borrow an expression from Robert Bork's Slouching towards Gomorrah, blacks and feminists are [as] "case hardened against logical argument" as Communist true believers are. Indeed, feminists and anti-racist activists openly reject objective truth. Confident that they have intimidated their opposition, feminists are able to make all kinds of demands on the assumption that men and women are equal in every way. When outcomes do not match that belief, this is only more evidence of white-male deviltry.
One of the most depressing sights in the West today, particularly in the Universities and the media, is the readiness to treat feminism as a major contribution to knowledge and to submit to its absurdities. Remarkably, this requires no physical violence. It is the desire to be accepted that makes people truckle to these middle-class, would-be revolutionaries.
Peter Verkovensky, who orchestrates murder and mayhem in The Devils, expresses it with admirable contempt: "All I have to do is raise my voice and tell them that they are not sufficiently liberal." The race hustlers, of course play the same game. Accuse a liberal of "racism" and "sexism" and watch him fall apart in an orgy of self-flagellation and Marxist self-criticism. Even "conservatives" wilt at the sound of those words.
Ancient liberties and assumptions of innocence mean nothing when it comes to "racism." You are guilty until proven innocent, which is really impossible, and even then you are forever suspect. An accusation of racism has much the same effect as an accusation of witchcraft did in 17th century Salem.
It is the power of the charge of "racism" that stifles the derision that would otherwise meet the idea that that we should "value diversity." If "diversity" had real benefits, whites would want more of it and would ask that even more cities in the U.S. and Europe be handed over to immigrants. Of course, they are not rushing to embrace diversity and multiculturalism; they are in headlong flight in the opposite direction. Valuing diversity is [a] hobby for people who do not have to endure its benefits.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multiculturalism and Marxism -- Part II
by Professor Frank Ellis
A multicultural society is one that is inherently prone to conflict, not harmony. This is why we see a large growth in government bureaucracies dedicated to resolving disputes along racial and cultural lines. These disputes can never be resolved permanently because the bureaucrats deny one of the major causes: race. This is why there is so much talk of the "multicultural" rather than the more precise "multiracial." Ever more changes and legislation are introduced to make the host society even more congenial to racial minorities. This only creates more demands, and encourages the non-shooting war against whites, their civilization, and even the ideas of the West.
How is such a radical program carried forward? The Soviet Union had a massive system of censorship -- the Communists even censored street maps -- and it is worth noting there were two kinds of censorship: the blatant censorship of state agencies and the more subtle self-censorship that the inhabitants of "people democracies" soon learned.
The situation in the West is not so straight forward. There is nothing remotely comparable to Soviet-style government censorship and yet we have deliberate suppression of dissent. Arthur Jensen, Hans Eysenck, J. Philippe Rushton, Chris Brand, Michael Levin, and Glayde Whitney have all been vilified for their racial views. The case of Professor Rushton is particularly troubling because his academic work was investigated by the police. The attempt to silence him was based on provisions of Canadian hate speech laws. This is just the sort of intellectual terror one expected in the Soviet Union. To find it in a country which prides itself on being a pillar of Western liberal democracy is one of the most disturbing consequences of multiculturalism.
A mode of opinion control softer than outright censorship is the current obsession with fictional role models. Today, the feminist and anti-racist theme is constantly worked into movies and television as examples of Bartold Brecht's principle that the Marxist artist must show the world not as it is but as it ought to be. This is why we have so many screen portrayals of wise black judges, street wise, straight-shooting lady policemen, minority computer geniuses; and, of course, degenerate white men. This is almost a direct borrowing from Soviet-style socialist realism, with its idealized depictions of sturdy proletarians routing capitalist vermin.
Multiculturalism has the same ambitions as Soviet Communism. It is absolute in its pursuit of its various agendas, yet it relativizes all other perspectives in its attack on its enemies. Multiculturalism is an ideology to end all other ideologies, and these totalitarian aspirations permit us to draw two conclusions:
First, Multiculturalism must eliminate all opposition everywhere. There can be no safe havens for counter-revolutionaries. Second, once it is established the multicultural paradise must be defended at all costs. Orthodoxy must be maintained with all the resources of the state.
Such a society would be well on its way to being totalitarian. It might not have concentration camps, but it would have re-education centers and sensitivity training for those sad creatures who still engaged in "white male hegemonic discourse." Rather than the bald totalitarianism of the Soviet state we would have a softer version in which our minds would be the wards of the state; we would be liberated from the burden of thought and therefore unable to fall into the heresy of political incorrectness.
If we think of multiculturalism as yet another manifestation of 20th century totalitarianism, can we take solace in the fact that the Soviet Union eventually collapsed? Is multiculturalism a phase, a periodic crisis through which the West is passing, or does it represent something fundamental and perhaps irreversible? Despite the efforts of pro-Soviet elements, the West recognized the Soviet empire as a threat. It does not recognize multiculturalism as a threat in the same way. For this reason, many of the assumptions and objectives remain unchallenged. Still, there are some grounds for optimism. For example, the speed with which the term "political correctness" caught on. It took the tenured radicals completely by surprise, but it is only a small gain.
In the long term, the most important battleground in the war against multiculturalism is the United States. The battle is likely to be a slow war of attrition. If it fails, the insanity of multiculturalism is something white Americans will have to live with. Of course, at some time whites may demand an end to being punished because of black failure. As Professor Michael Hart argues in The Real American Dilemma (published by New Century Foundation), there could be a racial partition of the United States. We might find that what happened in the Balkans is not peculiar to that part of the world. Race war is not something the affluent radicals deliberately seek but their policies are pushing us in that direction.
I have argued thus far that the immediate context for understanding political correctness and multiculturalism is the Soviet Union and its catastrophic utopian experiment. And yet the PC/multicultural mentality is much older. In Reflections on the Revolution in France, Edmund Burke offers a portrait of French radicals which is still relevant 200 years after he wrote it: "They have no respect for the wisdom of others, but they pass it off with a very full measure of confidence in their own. With them it is sufficient motive to destroy an old scheme of things because it is an old one. As to the new, they are in no sort of fear of the duration of a building run up in haste because duration is no object to those who think little or nothing has been done before their time, and who place all their hopes in discovery."
Of course, multiculturalism is far from being a solution to racial and cultural conflict. Quite the contrary, multiculturalism is the road to a special kind of hell that we have already seen in the last century, a hell that man, having abandoned and in revolt against God's order, builds for himself and others.
Source. "Fact, Fiction & Fraud," July 2000, as cited in the Nov. & Dec. 2000 issues of The Schwarz Report. (Emphasis added.)
For more on the war being waged against Whites of European descent, see Cultural Marxism vs Western Civilization (below).
For more on the Italian Communist theorist whose "March Through the Institutions" for "Cultural Hegemony" is being implemented by the multiculturalists in order to bring down Western, Helleno-Christian civilization, see Antonio Gramsci
To see how Greek "intellectuals" -- like their spineless counterparts in America -- are tripping all over themselves to be "accepted" by their establishment masters, see "Kissinger: A 'Progressive' Greek"
For more on how the "utopian experiment" of communism took the lives of over 100 million innocent souls in the 20th century, see the recently published The Black Book of Communism (Harvard University Press.) for a precisely documented account of this unprecedented -- and as yet unpunished -- outrage against humanity.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some editorial comment on the importance of homogeneity:
The following was written by John Jay under the pseudonym "Publius" in The Federalist, No. 2
"It has often given me pleasure to observe that independent America was not composed of detached and distant territories, but that one connected, fertile, wide-spreading country was the portion of our western sons of liberty. Providence has in a particular manner blessed it with a variety of soils and productions and watered it with innumerable streams for the delight and accommodation of its inhabitants. ...
"With equal pleasure I have often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people--a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established their general liberty and independence.
"This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a band of brethren, united to each other by the strongest ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties." (Emphasis added.)
We beg the reader to consider that when being exhorted about the marvels of "diversity" and "multiculturalism," -- social constructs that even a cursory reading of history will show have always led to bloodshed, division, and strife -- he is most likely being "sold" something that will work to the benefit of the huckster pitching this myth, and to the ethnic, ideological, or social group to which the huckster belongs.
THE CULTURE WAR 2001-2002
"BRING BACK THE GREEKS." "The one and only antidote to the spiritual toxins poisoning our civilization today, is a return to Greek scholarship. Bring back the Greeks!" says Bruce S. Thornton, professor of Classical and Anthropological Studies in the Department of Foreign Languages and Philology, at the University of California at Fresno. This interview is, in effect, an alarm being sounded by another "Hellene" (in the true sense of the word). More and more such men and women are coming to the realization that the millenniums-old "cultural capital" bequeathed to us by the Greeks must not be dissipated: It must be cherished, replenished, and used to save humanity from destroying itself. Hellenism is the only "ism" that is universally accepted and sought after by every living being on this planet. No other method of ordering society has had such world-wide appeal. That is why the entrenched, malevolent minority of elites who hold power today, and looks upon humanity as an economic commodity -- a herd to be kept ignorant of its past and bred only to be consumers -- is doing everything possible to REMOVE CLASSICAL SCHOLARSHIP FROM THE SCHOOLS. Read this interview to learn more about this vital subject, and to see how those of us who care can fight back.
CONSTANTINOS BARBIS, historian, author, and lecturer, gives the following statistics that will never be seen by the masses so long as power continues to be in the hands of the crypto-Marxist left, or, for that matter, the neo-conservative "right" in Greece. These statistics fly in the face of the Simitis government's distortion of history. What follows is a comparison of the penal records of the "liberal and progressive" government that ruled Greece from 1929 to 1935, and the Metaxa "dictatorship" of 1936 to 1940: From 1929 to 1935, there were 37 murders, 4 death sentences, 16,550 people were arrested, 8093 were jailed, 2219 filed charges of abuse while imprisoned, and 630 persons were exiled. From 1936 to 1940, there were 0 murders, 0 death sentences, 1035 people were jailed, 2 filed abuse charges, and 850 persons were exiled.
So much for the "Hitler-like dictatorship" of John Metaxa. Remember, it was this man who uttered his famous OXI (NO!) to fascist demands for submission, while our leftist comrades fled to the hills where they were supplied and funded by the likes of Marshal Tito and "Uncle Joe" Stalin. Their stated objective was to bring Greece into the Soviet sphere of influence. Had their side won, instead of the bars and brothels of Greece and Western Europe being filled with Albanian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Yugoslav, and Russian prostitutes, many of our Greek wives, mothers, and daughters would be practicing this "profession" as well.
CULTURAL MARXISM VS WESTERN CIVILIZATION. Is the romp through Afghanistan the last hurrah of a culturally hollowed out superpower? It is difficult to believe otherwise after considering the facts laid out by Patrick J. Buchanan in his new book, The Death of the West. Mr. Buchanan has strong opinions, but his opinions are based in facts, unlike those of his equally opinionated opponents, who have bought into the multiculturalist dogma of the evils of Western civilization wishful thinking. Mr. Buchanan rests his case on demography and immigration and on the multicultural attack led by Cultural Marxists on Western history, values, and institutions.
Demography is destiny. In 1960 people of European stock comprised one-quarter of the world population. Today white people make up one-sixth of the world population [actually, some estimates put the figure as low as 12% ed.]. By 2050 people of European descent will comprise less than one-tenth of the world population. Whites are shrinking into a minority even within their own countries. Massive uncontrolled legal and illegal immigration, together with collapsing fertility rates of whites everywhere, foretell a vanishing race.
In the U.S., whites are no longer a majority in California. Many are now leaving the state looking for a place to live that bears some resemblance to the country they grew up in. Before a lifetime passes, there will be no place [to go]. In 1998 [that bought-and-paid-for moral degenerate], President Clinton, boasted to a cheering Portland State University audience that by 2050 whites would be a minority in America. "No other nation in history," he said, "has gone through demographic change of this magnitude in so short a time."
A changing racial composition would not mean the death of the West if immigrants from Third World countries were assimilating: but the "melting pot" no longer exists. Discarded as racist and hegemonic, the "melting pot" has been replaced by the multicultural "salad bowl." As Jacques Barzun wrote in his recent history of Western civilization, From Dawn to Decadence, "not even native-born whites are being assimilated to their culture."
Americans are largely unaware, but Cultural Marxism reigns in our universities and our public schools. The old Marxists blamed capitalists and the economic system for oppression and exploitation. The new Marxists blame the white race and Western civilization itself. As ["philosopher" and liberal guru] Susan Sontag (among others) puts it, "The white race is the cancer of human history." Ms. Sontag is highly respected by American intellectuals [sic]. A survey found her to be the most respected intellectual of our time. She was awarded a MacArthur Foundation "genius grant."
Cultural Marxists assault not only our history but also the family, the chastity of women, and Christianity; important pillars of our civilization. Cultural Marxists use education, entertainment, and the media to create a new people that shares their values. Mr. Buchanan thinks that the Cultural Marxist revolution will succeed but be short-lived, like Soviet communism, because it is based on lies and the disregard of reality. Mr. Buchanan's optimism seems contrary to his facts and, perhaps, is an expression of his fighting spirit. The test is whether people respond. Does anyone care, or is the future too scary to be acknowledged?
A case can be made that the situation is worse than Mr. Buchanan says. In the U.S., native-born whites already are second-class citizens in their own country. Unconstitutional group privileges have arisen based on race, gender, and disability. White males no longer have equal rights. As the current chairwoman of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission says, "Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of white men and do not apply to them." The protections in our legal system that make law a shield of the people, not a weapon in the hands of government, have largely been eroded. But the most fearsome fact is that the demonization of white people in the universities today is more extreme than the demonization of the Jews that was a prominent feature of German university life for 60 years prior to the rise of National Socialism. Demonization of the whites is the weapon used by multiculturalists to break up Western civilization. But teaching hatred has other consequences. Demonization has already demoralized some whites, making them ashamed and fearful of their skin color.
By the time whites become political minorities, decades of demonization will have prepared the ground for legislation prohibiting their propagation and, perhaps, assigning them to the gulag as a final solution to "the cancer of human history."
None of this is ordained. Faculties could replace multicultural propagandists with real scholars, and legislation could halt or reduce immigration to assimilable numbers. Is Western civilization worth the effort? Does anyone any longer know what Western Civilization is?
Source. The Washington Times. by Craig Roberts. 9 January 2002. p.A14 (Emphasis added.)
For a must see account of the war against our Western, Helleno-Christian world by the "politically correct" culture-annihilators, see Multiculturalism and Marxism (above).
For more on the battle plan being followed in the assault on our Helleno-Christian civilization by the cultural Marxists, see anything on Gramsci below.
As an example of how "Cultural Marxists use education, entertainment, and the media" to destroy our Helleno-Christian civilization, read the introduction to "How the 'Grekili' Stole Christmas" before linking to the article.
E.U. FORCES HOMOSEXUALITY ON ROMANIA. On 20 December '01 the BBC reported that "human rights campaigners in Romania were celebrating their victory in getting a Ceausescu-era law which criminalized homosexual practices scrapped." The law, article 200 of the Romanian penal code, was repealed "under fierce pressure from the European Union." The E.U. made abolishing the statute a precondition for the country's pending membership in the European superstate.
Romania has historically banned homosexual behavior, and public attitudes among Romanians toward sodomy are decidedly negative. In 2000, a nationwide survey found close to 90% of Romanians would not want to live next door to a homosexual.
"We need healthy young people in mind and body, like any civilized country, and we must try to protect them from contamination by such serious sinners," said a spokesman for the Romanian Orthodox Church. When asked about the E.U.'s role in coercing Romania to jettison its anti-homosexual laws, the spokesman replied: "We want to join the European Union, not Sodom and Gomorrah."
"GAY DAYS" AT SANTA ROSA HIGH. Anti-homosexual activist, attorney Scott Lively, gets a glimpse into "the brave new world of sexual diversity in California schools." What is especially worrying is that this kind of degeneracy is not confined to "off-the-wall" California, but is spreading like a cancer throughout America. Even worse, this metastasizing process is being aided and abetted by U. S. politicians, educators, and, yes, even prominent and not-so-prominent religious leaders. The only hope is that the American people -- who have so far shown themselves to be little more than lemmings -- finally wake up and take back their nation, their culture, and their children.
GRAMSCI AND THE U.S. BODY POLITIC. Who is Antonio Gramsci? You'd better learn!!! Why the interest in Gramsci? This study gives a short bio and a quick glance into the mind of a diabolical genius whose theories are being used to convert America (and the rest of the Western world) into a class warfare arena where the dominant Helleno-Christian culture is methodically being marginalized. Understanding Gramsci, "you will understand the 'peculiar' and 'weird' theories that are in vogue today."
GRAMSCI: A METHOD TO THE MADNESS. Behind the many maddening attacks on the West's popular Helleno-Christian culture is Italian Communist theoretician Antonio Gramsci's strategy for achieving the total state. Gramsci (1891-1937), described as "...the most significant Marxist thinker since Lenin," diverged from purist Marxist theory by insisting that, given food in his belly and a marginal existence, the average worker would never bestir himself to revolt. No, said Gramsci, it is through the undermining and domination of their institutions that the masses must be guided into the anthill. Destroy their faith in religion, undermine the educational process, erode the strength of the family, take control of the means of communication, and you will soon reduce individualistic humanity into an amorphous, easy to subjugate, mass of aggressive consumers and docile citizens. Then, and only then, can the process of remaking society into the New World Order of a Marxist/Socialist "paradise" begin. One need not have a degree in Political Science, nor the brains of a genius, to see that his planned "March Through the Institutions," in order to "capture the culture" is working.
GRAMSCI'S GRAND PLAN for gaining "cultural hegemony" over our Helleno-Christian civilization is explained in this article by philosopher, theologian, writer, and researcher, Fr. James Thornton. Antonio Gramsci--"the most significant Marxist thinker since Lenin"-- broke ranks with traditional Marxist theory by stressing that the domination over the institutions of culture is of far greater importance than class or economic considerations. When one looks at the sorry state of our Western Culture, and considers how our once inviolate institutions have fallen into disarray, one can appreciate the diabolical genius of Gramsci's strategy.
GRAMSCI-ISMS
"It will be necessary to replace Latin and Greek as the fulcrum of the formative school, and they will be replaced. But it will not be easy to deploy the new subject or subjects in a didactic form which gives equivalent results in terms of education and general personality-formation from early childhood to the threshold of the adult choice of career. For in this period what is learnt, or the greater part of it, must be -- or appear to the pupils to be -- disinterested, i.e. not have immediate or too immediate practical purposes. It must be formative, while being "instructive" -- in other words rich in concrete facts." (No abstracts, you see, just "concrete facts" needed by the consumer-worker drone of the future.) Selections From the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci (SPN). Int'l Publ. 1999. p 39f.
HALLMARK CARDS of Kansas city obviously believes that "assisted suicide," followed by "assisted grieving for suicide," have created a marketing opportunity. As a result, they've come out with a new line of cards for the "suicide market." The idea has been tested in six cities, with the cards appearing on shelves under the "suicide" category. The company reports "an overwhelmingly positive response." The news item does not say whether there will be the usual sideline of humorous cards ("Hooray! She finally did it!"). According to conservative editor and author, Richard John Neuhaus, "Hallmark's decision is a testimony ... to our culture's continuing determination to mainstream the aberrant in the hope that the very concept of the aberrant will one day be eliminated." (For more on "mainstreaming the aberrant" see "Gramsci's Grand Plan." )
"HELLENISM WILL NEVER DIE" says Classics professor Victor Hanson, who with his colleague and fellow Classics professor, John Heath, discuss their book Who Killed Homer? with Davlos correspondent, Nancy Biska. "[Hellenism] is the first and last hope for Mankind. ... We are so fortunate that those 'relatively poor' Greeks of the 8th to the 4th centuries B.C. developed such a brilliant and indestructible civilization. ... [It is] the one and only institution in the world under which we can all unite while adhering to the principles and values of the West that they bequeathed to us. We are all Greeks now, whether we want it or not!"
"HATE CRIMES" legislation advocate, Harvard law professor Allan Dershowitz, speaking in St. Louis on the need to obtain information from suspected terrorists, made this profound observation (according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch 5 Nov.'01): "Even torture may not be off the table as an information-gathering tool." In an article on the same subject, the Washington Post, referring to the dismay felt by some federal authorities over the refusal of various terrorist suspects to divulge their secrets voluntarily, wrote that "alternative strategies" were being discussed. Some of these "alternative strategies" include "using drugs or pressure tactics, such as those employed occasionally by Israeli interrogators, to extract information."
Shortly thereafter, Attorney General John Ashcroft announced that the Justice Department would monitor conversations between attorneys and their clients in terrorism cases, something some have described as "[a] grotesque and blatant violation of longstanding criminal procedure and constitutional law." Not long after that the administration announced that it would authorize secret military tribunals for foreigners charged with "terrorism," either in the U.S. or abroad. The media, meanwhile, almost from the moment of the tragedy of September 11th, has kept up a steady harangue about "hate groups," and their connection -- if any -- to the attack. ("Hate groups" have become nothing more that code words for 1st and 2nd amendment proponents, Confederate flag defenders, Religious Americans -- especially Christians, those who consider homosexuality a sin, pro-lifers, advocates of a strict interpretation of the Constitution, and anybody who looks back upon pre-1960s White Euro-America with fond remembrance.)
Political analyst Samuel Francis, writing in Chronicles magazine (Feb. '02), concedes that though "most of these extraordinary measures so far proposed or adopted are against foreign terrorists, [the ruling elite], having demonized law-abiding and nonviolent dissidents on the political right as members of 'hate groups,' ... may well find it expedient to use [these] 'precedents' ... to justify locking up or silencing political forces that have nothing to do with terrorism but a great deal to do with defending the right to keep and bear arms, resisting the New World Order, protecting national sovereignty, opposing immigration, or upholding traditional cultural symbols and icons. In the minds of the ruling class, there is little practical and virtually no moral difference between American militias and similar groups on the unreconstructed right, on the one hand, and the Islamic mass murderers of Al Qaeda, on the other. There is, quite literally, no telling what the ruling class will do or how far its greed for power will reach once it has liberated its mind and conscience -- as well as its actual policies -- from whatever constitutional and legal restraints it has so far been unable to shatter."
As far as that self-proclaimed defender of human rights, Dershowitz, is concerned, on a Fox-TV interview (23 March '97), during which he defended the O. J. Simpson verdict (even after saying that "if O. J. were poor, he'd be in jail today"), this culture-destroyer arrogantly proclaimed that: "Justice is a process, it is not an end result. We say that sometimes we have to free the guilty in order to ensure that the process works efficiently."
Where was the "process," you hypocrite, when you advocated the possible use of torture as an "information-gathering tool" in St. Louis?
HOW THE "GREKILI" STOLE CHRISTMAS
A sampling of a Christmas without Christ in "Greek" TV programming on Christmas Day in Greece. Nazi Propaganda Minister Goebbels and Communist genocidal mass- murderers Mao and Stalin, could not have done a better job of promoting the New World Order's war against Hellenism and Christianity.
OLD AND NEW AMERICA came out to vote in the 2000 election. The Old America supposedly "won" that time, but as more people are brainwashed into the secularized collective by a determined, well-organized, totalitarian elite, the future holds little promise for the Helleno-Christian values upon which America was founded.
"QUEER SEX" was the title of a school workshop conducted by Massachusetts state health and education employees in March of 2000. The program was part of the annual conference of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network-Boston (GLSEN-Boston). At this event, attended by students as young as 14 and their "teachers," any misconception about how homosexual militants are "simply fighting intolerance" was immediately dispelled. As an example, pederasty was promoted in a video narrated by a 7th-grade girl who unwittingly promoted the lie that man-boy love was an accepted practice among the ancient Greeks. After the video, an adult assured the attendees that "there is nothing wrong with an adult approaching adolescents for sex." (For the truth about Greece, read a short introduction to "Homosexuality in ancient Greece" before linking to the article.) What follows is a small sampling from across America of similar initiatives by homosexual activists pursuing an increasingly open and defiant program to recruit children into their "lifestyle," and who are being aided and abetted by the American Establishment in their goal.
In the rural Rio Bravo-Greeley Union School District in California, parents of 15 students seeking to transfer their children out of the classroom of a militant "gay" teacher were denied the right to do so by a decree issued by the state. The students complained that the teacher "rubbed" their backs, and placed his arms around them when they would ask questions in class.
Parents across the U.S. are incensed over the wide-spread showing of a lesbian-produced film titled It's Elementary: Talking about Gay Issues in School. The video, which is being shown to children from 1st grade through middle school, is all about teachers giving pro-homosexual instruction in the classroom.
According to GLSEN, as of January 2000 more than 600 gay and lesbian student clubs meet regularly in schools throughout America; up from fewer than 100 in 1998. Some school boards tried to withhold their approval for these clubs, but backed down when threatened with law suits. So far, and to our knowledge, only one school board has succeeded in thwarting such activity, but it did so at a high cost to other students: it abandoned all extracurricular clubs rather than yield, but this is the exception.
Four Portland, Oregon, public school teachers protested in Sept. of 1999 that their school district's "Sexual Diversity Committee" was promoting homosexuality by insisting on books promoting the "gay" lifestyle be used in the classroom, and by rejecting books presenting Christian or other contrary points of view. The teachers charge that they have been aggressively "harassed" ever since.
A transsexual high school teacher was dismissed for discussing "sex-identity" issues, and for openly and graphically discussing his own sex-change operation in class. He sued and received a $150,000. settlement from the school board.
In the "Mathematics" section of the Project Organizing Handbook, a widely-circulated teachers' aid, the following "math" story-problem was recommended: "If 10,000 people marched in the Gay Pride March in 1990 and 25,000 in 1992, what was the average increase? The Handbook openly -- and, it seems, without fear of opposition from the pusillanimous denizens of "the home of the brave" -- recommends that teachers insert "The use of gay/lesbian specific situations in explaining mathematical procedures."
At a 1998 GLSEN-Boston conference, New York kindergarten teacher Jaki Williams said that teaching 5-year-olds about homosexuality is important because children at that age are "just developing their super-ego" and "that's where the saturation process needs to begin." [ Saturation!!? Of 5-year old kids? This is Bejing-style indoctrination, pure and simple.]
In the January 1999 issue of Young Children, authors B .J. Cahill and R. Theilheimer offer this "politically correct" advice on how teachers should respond to the question from 5-year-old Tommy about whether he can marry his best friend, Sam, when they grow up: "Tommy and Sam can choose to live together when they grow up. There are men who prefer to make a family with another man instead of with a woman. And they love each other just like other families. They can even have a wedding if they want."
In Jacksonville, Florida, parents of high-school students objected to the pornographic and scatological filth called "poetry" written by that blatantly homosexual sodomite, the late and unlamented Allen Ginsberg, being assigned to their children in an English class. In September of 2001 they got the full (and usual) treatment: They were made to feel stupid and uncouth by the diploma-mill hoodlums of the school's English Department, who assured them that what this America-hating, piece of shit had written was worth learning. Ginsberg loved to brag "I sleep with young boys" at every opportunity given him by the naive and stupidly "open-minded" and "tolerant" Americans his kind are hell-bent on destroying. He was obsessed with his anus, and wrote all about the many uses he'd put it to through the years. He also fantasized in his poetry about having sex with his mother, and wrote about her bowel movements in graphic detail. This man is to literature what the stuff that sticks to the heels of your shoes when you walk through a dog kennel is to your brand new wall-to-wall carpeting. Yet his pornographic scribbling is being taught in high schools and universities throughout America today. Of course, the parents in Florida ultimately had to yield to the "experts" who insisted that Ginsberg had "greatly influenced the development of modern American poetry," and deserved to be taught to their young.
Although this blurb is zeroed in on what's going on in the schools of America concerning homosexuality, the same nihilistic message of death is being huckstered to the citizens of that once great land by their media, their politicians, and their corporate "captains of commerce and industry." Even the majority of their churches have not been able to withstand the conspiratorial onslaught against the Helleno-Christian values that created America and made her the bastion of liberty and decency she was until not so very long ago. Those who still believe, even at this late date, that all of this is simply the way things are naturally developing are either incredibly naive, or, as we say in Greece, hiding behind their finger.
To give us a hint as to what such people described above have in mind for America's children, take a glance at the revealing vision of the future made by the Boston-based Gay Community News in its February 1987 issue: "We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. ... Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us."
THE DWINDLING LIGHT OF HELLENISM
The Portland Public Schools' "Baseline Essays" tell us that the Greek philosophers "fell at the feet of the Egyptians" in order to learn from them.
WILHELM ROEPKE MEANS "CONTRA GRAMSCI." At last the work of one of the most important economists of the past century is beginning to get the recognition it deserves. Roepke (1899 - 1966) was forced to leave Nazi Germany because he was vehemently opposed to Hitler's policy of concentrating power in a centralized and oppressive bureaucracy. He had no confidence in any system which collectivized authority, whether that be socialism, communism, or group-think decision-making of any kind, including capitalism. Against this "anthill" syndrome, he championed local institutions, small towns, rural and local communities, family, church and neighborhoods.
His market principles -- like E. F Schumacher's (author of Small is Beautiful) -- are grounded in the theory that "the market flourishes best when it is protected by tradition and local prejudice against the predations of the State and Big Business."
This thinking stands in total opposition to Antonio Gramsci's dictum that only by undermining and ultimately dominating their institutions, and by ridiculing and destroying their traditions and faith, can the masses be led to the collectivist/Marxist "paradise" of the future. Of course, such Gramscian and Marxist mental masturbation has brought rampage and ruin wherever the people have been forced to live under its idiocies. Whereas, in the case of Roepke the opposite is true. When he returned to Germany after the war he became the driving force behind that country's postwar economic miracle.
WILHELM ROEPKE'S WISDOM. Excerpts from the writings about or by the man we here at TGR refer to as "the Samuel Johnson of Economics." Writings devoid of the pompous dictates and latitudinarian orthodoxies of the "usual suspects" of guileful economists with an agenda inspired by a self-serving worldview, a deluded self-aggrandizement, and a misapprehension of reality. The fact that what Roepke espouses has been tested and proven carries no weight with such people. These are the kind of 3rd raters Edmund Burke was referring to when he lambasted the ersatz "progressives" of his time "... who have cold hearts and [a] muddy understanding" of human nature. People whose motto should be: "Don't confuse us with the facts." Well, the "facts" show that were Roepke's economic theories to become policy, the world would be a better, safer, and more humane place by far.
YUGOSLAVIA taught us that there is no such thing as a multicultural nation. Certainly what has made the United States a great nation is its cultural heritage. The talents which immigrants brought to America from various cultures blossomed in the context of our [Helleno-Christian] culture. We are a product of Western civilization and Christianity, both of which evolved in Europe [from Hellenic roots]. Our own derivation of this civilization emphasizes individual rights and responsibility, strong family bonds, limited representative government, religion separated from state, a strong sense of community, free enterprise, private property, the rule of law and reason, and a common language with which we communicate this cultural heritage. To be an American citizen (or, as an immigrant, to aspire to be one) is to join these cultural bonds, not import alternatives. The only real alternative is the eventual dissolution of America -- which if history is any guide, will likely occur under conditions of savage hostility. From David Hartman. "Reflections on a Texan's visit to Bosnia." January 1999.
