Multiculturalism has failed

We need a new politics devoted to bringing people together.

Rakib Ehsan

Topics Politics UK

Over the years more and more mainstream European politicians have woken up to the failures of multiculturalism in their respective countries.

Back in 2010, at a meeting with young members of her Christian Democratic Union party, German chancellor Angela Merkel conceded that Germany’s multicultural approach – known as multikultihad utterly failed. In Germany, as in so many other European countries, culturally disparate communities are living side by side, but with minimal cross-group interaction and meaningful contact.

Many of Merkel’s colleagues, such as Horst Seehofer, have long declared that the concept of Leitkultur (a ‘leading German culture’) and a more regimented immigration system are needed to create a more cohesive Germany.

But although Merkel has had the courage at points to talk about the problems of multiculturalism, her actions more recently have only exacerbated them, and undermined her reputation as a steady, sensible and responsible leader in the process.

Her decision in 2015 to allow in approximately one million refugees from unstable Muslim-majority countries, such as Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan, placed considerable strain on Germany’s social fabric. This decision was all the more mind-boggling in light of the fact that Germany had already struggled to integrate migrants of Turkish Muslim origin – and even their German-born children.

When it comes to the issue of multiculturalism, many countries across Europe are in need of robust political leadership. We need leaders who acknowledge the drawbacks of multiculturalism and are willing to confront deeply concerning cultural practices and norms within migrant communities. On this front, there are reasons to be hopeful.

Under the thoughtful leadership of Mette Frederiksen, the Danish Social Democrats are seeking to create a national culture based on shared identity, common purpose and mutual obligations. The party has also adopted a mature approach to public concerns over immigration and social cohesion. The Danish premier has openly criticised problematic attitudes within her Danish Muslim communities – including a lack of respect for Denmark’s judicial system and embedded forms of patriarchal coercion.

It is not racist to have reservations about multiculturalism. Nor is it racist to be concerned about the social impact of allowing into your country a great number of people from unstable countries, in which prevailing cultural and legal norms vastly differ from those of your own. You can be comfortable with racial diversity and simultaneously anxious about religio-cultural diversity. This is by no means a contradictory position.

We here in Britain need to grasp this issue. Multiculturalism here has led to a similarly divided society, and we desperately need to foster more integration. But to do so requires us to pose the question: what are we asking migrants to ‘integrate’ into? When we ask people to adopt ‘British values’, what are we referring to? Because all is not well within mainstream British culture.

The UK has established itself as a world leader in family breakdown. We have among the highest rates of binge-drinking in the world. We have an unhealthy obsession with celebrity ‘icons’. The level of loneliness among the elderly is not only a social scourge, but also a national embarrassment. These features of modern British society and culture are not desirable by any stretch of the imagination.

What the UK requires, therefore, is moral and political leadership. We need someone brave enough to call out problematic behaviours and attitudes in society – both in the general public and less-integrated migrant communities. And we need to carve out a set of common values.

Multiculturalism is ultimately doomed to failure. In championing difference over cohesion, it fails to provide a central moral and cultural standard. Without this shared social framework, it is nigh-on impossible to cultivate the bonds of trust and mutual regard needed to tie together a multi-ethnic, religiously diverse society. This should be a particular concern for those who are supportive of a comprehensive welfare state, which can only be properly sustained by a high-trust, cohesive society.

The answer to all this is a brand of patriotism that is inclusive, community-spirited and family-oriented: one that understands the human desire for neighbourliness; that celebrates hard work and encourages social responsibility; that emphasises respect for the British rule of law; and that recognises the socially harmful effects of ‘parallel societies’, which particularly blight post-industrial northern towns.

Brexit could well be the catalyst for the social renewal that this country so desperately needs. As a self-governing nation state, we could develop a sensible immigration system that prioritises individuals with English-language skills and those from Commonwealth nations with similar political and legal systems. A post-Brexit Britain could strive to develop a model of cohesion that firmly rejects both an ethno-centric understanding of nationhood and the grievance narratives peddled by the identitarian left.

We should embrace a politics of mutuality, reciprocity and responsibility, and consign multiculturalism to the dustbin of history.

Rakib Ehsan is a spiked columnist and a research fellow at the Henry Jackson Society. Follow him on twitter: @rakibehsan

Picture by: Getty

Clarification: an earlier version of this article stated that Angela Merkel had discussed multiculturalism at a ‘recent’ meeting. This has now been changed to clarify that the meeting referred to was in 2010.

To enquire about republishing spiked’s content, a right to reply or to request a correction, please contact the managing editor, Viv Regan.

Topics Politics UK


Peter Gardner

9th November 2019 at 2:28 am

Rakib Ehsan, Sir Walter Scott would agree with you 100%. In his Scottish poetry and novels he attributed the success of the Scottish nation to the realisation among Scottish clan leaders that instead of dwelling on their rivalries they should dwell on and develop what they held in common: their country, their culture. Of course, the Left don’t read Scott. He was disgustingly patriotic and his English a tad difficult for those passing through the proliferation of necessarily second rate universities – everyone has a right to a degree. But they should they would learn the lessons of history. We’ve been here before and not only us. It’s the same story the world over. Nation states exist because of the human need for cultural identity and they develop in different ways. this is the diversity we need, not diversity within a society which inevitably divides it rendering it incoherent.
The degree of coherence necessary to support government by consent of the governed is stretch and broken by multi-culturalism. However, across different nations we can have a whole range of ideas about what rules we should live by. If they work in one culture others are free to adopt them or not as they wish. As in any biological system, that kind of diversity ensures survival in a dynamic environment.
If multi-culturalism is progressed ultimately all nations will be culturally identical. If a mistake is made, the entire world pays the price. If only one nation makes a mistake the others don’t suffer and can learn from it. That is how progress occurs naturally. Let’s keep it that way. It’s safer.
One world government is the product of the same political philosophy as the EU and the end result of multi-culturalism. Both are wrong and dangerous. Diversity among nations is far, far safer.

Marvin Jones

8th November 2019 at 2:05 pm

The campaign of Blair, Mandelson and Cambell etc, that went out and forcibly enticed a primitive dogma riddled third world illiterates, who would not integrate or assimilate for their total and utter allegiance to something so opposite to our way of thinking, living, culture and worship. Promised them that they would not have to change their medieval baggage but would enjoy all the benefits and protections of the citizens of this now cesspit of the world.

woweco6974 woweco6974

7th November 2019 at 5:27 pm

My Boy pal makes $seventy /hour at the internet. She has been without a assignment for six months however remaining mofiventh her pay have become $16453 genuinely working at the internet for some hours. immediately from the source…

a watson

7th November 2019 at 10:30 am

Whenever I hear or read ‘multiculturalism’ I feel it as an attack on British culture and history. In particular as an attack on British working class culture. Surely most of the imposition of the idea of ‘multiculturism’ has been in working class areas in our major cities and is starting to create frightening social consequences. Of course the political elite do not want to admit that this is a problem let alone discuss it.

jon perry

7th November 2019 at 8:42 am

Some people believe they can change human nature. That is a fantasy. On a micro level we can look at the difference between a family home and a house shared by strangers to get an idea of the difference. The families cohesion will come from the fact that they have a loyalty in built to one another and a natural hierarchy, the strangers do not. So the strangers will compete for the upper hand and naturally form alliances with those that are similar. In fact, division will create tighter bonds between the smaller groups. If the occupancy of the house is managed carefully this can work but if all of the strangers are thrown together overnight it can lead to problems. The immigration in the West is artificial and happening at such a huge rate it can never work. Left as it is major breakdown is inevitable. Especially when one of the strangers have already declared they intend to control the house and its tenants.


6th November 2019 at 7:23 pm

The rapid disintegration of this country is directly attributable to the wilful repudiation of Biblical Christianity by the intelligentsia and the masses. We are all paying for this folly. Thousands died to give us freedom during the Reformation, and now you’ve cr***** it all away. Only Christianity can save this country.

A Game

6th November 2019 at 3:52 am

Yeah… its a disaster. The beginning of undermining the nation state. I guess globalisation didn’t sound warm and fuzzy enough, didn’t sound pleasing or dynamic or exciting.
Its sad that the vast majority of immigrants seem to integrate, they value many of the things of their new home that were lacking in their old. That they have been actively discouraged to integrate… confusing message. And it can be seen in their children. Caught between cultures, confused, unhappy, self conscious.
To actively tell citizens of a country to work against that country’s ethos, customs, ways, to separate themselves from it… was that ever going to end well?
And those who get all monochromatic about it – all or nothing – homogenised into the existing culture, with zero dashes of your own traditions – people always have to go to the extremes.
I think the poms would have rioted if curries had been kept an immigrant secret.

steve moxon

5th November 2019 at 7:19 pm

‘Multiculturalism’ is a major feature of the Left’s hatred towards the mass of ordinary people for not abiding by the Marxist script.
It’s a demonstrably failed ideology. Even Trevor Philips argues against it (and went on an EDL march).
If you allow or facilitate migrant enclaves of any significant size, then they have no need to integrate, and the natural tendency of in-grouping will ensure the enclave grows and becomes ever more separate. The reverse of integration ensues, and you get what we have seen for some time now here in the UK: third generation migrant stock being actually less integrated into the host culture than the original settlers.
The problem has never been hostility from the host community, which like all others is founded on in-group affiliation, not out-group hostility — a recent meta-analysis of all studies confirmed this.
But what you cannot have is separately growing very different in-groups in the pretence that there is only one in-group, without generating mutual hostility.
With the elites hating the masses, it’s hard to see how eventual civil war will be averted.

Winston Stanley

5th November 2019 at 4:37 pm

Well, liberalism means tolerance of other cultures and ideas, including those which we may not care for personally. So, multiculturalism is proof of a well-functioning liberal society. Liberalism, by definition, does not demand that everyone has the same culture, ideas, norms and values. That would be illiberalism. People are free to have their own language, dress, religion, food, music, whatever. If some do not like that then that is just too bad. Not everyone is like them and they just have to cope with that. A monocultural mono-community would not be liberal, it would not be tolerant of difference.

I suspect that some of the older ppl on here were simply raised in different times and they want to get back to a mono-ethnic, mono-cultural society, and that simply is not going to happen. The mono-ethnic part is “taboo” in this society so they tend to focus on the mono-culture part. It is not clear whether they would really want or care whether the “culture” continued without their ethnic group. Maybe, maybe not. In any case, it is sad for them that they maintain permanently dissatisfied dispositions. We only live once and we may as well make the most of life as it is. Adaptability.

In Negative seems to be the only other poster with a realistic interpretation of what has happened. The transformation has been driven by capital. The capitalist state wants more workers, and capital is just as happy to sell ppl ethnic food, clothes and music as it is to sell ppl ethnic British stuff. It makes no difference to capital whether ppl go a mosque or to bingo or to an ethnic restaurant on their time off, so long as they work and buy plenty of stuff. It has become almost a point of dogma for some to try to “blame” it on the “left” or even on “neo-Marxist” subversion. Like their own society, capitalism and liberalism could not itself suffice to explain what has happened. It “has” to be some “alien” or “subversive” tendency.

steve moxon

5th November 2019 at 7:04 pm

As usual from the PC-totalitarian Marxist poster., ‘Winston Stanley’.

Winston Stanley

5th November 2019 at 9:06 pm

Pls do not tell lies about other posters, it makes for a rather grim exchange.

Jerry Owen

5th November 2019 at 9:20 pm

Posted anything supporting the IRA of late ?

Cedar Grove

5th November 2019 at 9:44 pm

The expression of pious platitudes may offer momentary gratification, but it’s not a method for creating good governance.

Multiculturalism isn’t about being anti-racist, or enjoying diversity. It isn’t about personal relationships. It’s an irrational attempt to pretend that a society can be stable when it’s operating from several centres of gravity.

Many immigrant groups have arrived with cultural norms and values which either were compatible with those of the historically-dominant culture, or could at least accommodate them.

An intrinsic tolerance in the host community ensured that imported languages & cultural practices could at worst find expression in private space, and most groups have been content with that. There are many examples of different cultures continuing to develop in the UK – e.g. a Sikh woman writing a play, expressing Sikh concerns in a form new to the culture of origin; or a novelist from a family of Pakistani origin using the story of Antigone to illuminate the dilemma of a family with a jihadist brother. These are fruitful interactions, as are the personal friendships & cooperation that people from different cultures can develop.

Muslims too may enjoy personal freedom and liberal ideas, & obviously as individuals have the same right to the protection of the state & access to the goods of society as everyone else. As a body, however, they are not content with toleration of their practices, even though it is extended to contraventions of British law in the matter of slaughterhouse regulations, the treatment of young women and the de facto recognition of polygamy. Their demand is for secular democracy to be modified so that it is Shari’a-compliant. There is an incessant lobby trying to ensure that hate-speech laws in effect punish blasphemy, a crime we had removed from UK law.

Islam is a totalitarian ideology providing rules for every single moment of life – what to say when you wake, what order to wash the parts of your body in, how you may dress, what fabrics you can wear, what food may be eaten, whom you may befriend etc. Many Muslim individuals are negligent in these matters, but that doesn’t alter the ideology. On the contrary, such backsliders are guilt-tripped into providing funds for “charities” which cause mayhem, by the argument that if they’re not worthy to be martyrs, they can at least support their purer brothers financially.

A country has the right to establish a distinct identity & preserve it. This isn’t exclusionary. It can invite others to share it.

The postmodern mantra is that all cultures are equal. Each in their own place, that may be so, but context matters. The practice of hacking little girls’ genitals is not acceptable in western society, and ought not to be. Nor is the measure of manhood the biggest knife. Multiculturalism is nihilistic, not liberal. It undoes rights it took 500 years to establish. Secular democracy is new in human history, & fragile. It should be protected. It’s the world’s best hope.

steve moxon

5th November 2019 at 10:46 pm

Guffaw! Grim isn’t the word for the ideological extremism you pedal.

In Negative

5th November 2019 at 11:04 pm

I don’t know whether or not I think this is reversible. Like Nietzsche, I think all the dead values rejuvenate and recur. Globalism (and its liberalism) are currently the dominant values against which ‘the nation’ is being resurrected. I’ve still not decided whether or not I think a solid monocultural nationalism is coming or whether this is just part of a deeper tribal fragmentation. There is certainly a strong anti-global aspect to Brexit, say.

My instinct is to go with deepening fragmentation though. Interesting seeing the Mumsnetters all going PoMo on us and right-wing conservative chicks banging on about ‘mansplaining’. Think we might be on the brink of seeing some deep interesting fissures splitting through middle England. I’d get yr popcorn if I were you – we’re in for an entertaining era.

Julie Bre-zone

7th November 2019 at 11:31 am

Then Liberalism has failed also
… (A person shouldn’t try to rebuild their country in a host country, and expect to bring the problems that they want to escape from)
… (they should fit in & accept host nation values & rules) if they can’t accept it, leave

Liberalism, Marxism-Leninism belong in the history books for reference point under failed ideologies and utopias

Peter Gardner

9th November 2019 at 2:46 am

Winston Stanley seems to be on another planet. Liberalism on planet earth is highly prescriptive. Views on everything are defined by an elite within the Liberals and is then disseminated through various platforms. And anyone expressing a different view is simply banned. They may even lose their jobs just for expressing a contrary view. The Liberals legislate most conscientiously to ensure no contrary view is allowed to escape into general circulation lest it contaminate the delicate minds of those so carefully nurtured through the education incubator. They have even got the Police – yes, the stolid old famous British common sense uniformed plods – raiding homes, confiscating computers and children lest they should be contaminated by heretical views – and all on the whispered evidence of an anonymous ‘honest citizen’, by which is meant a politically correct citizen.
We’ve been her before Winston. Soviet Communism, National Socialism, Chinese Communism, Italian Fascism, Iranian Theocratic Totalitarianism, Saddam the Madman’s Iraq, you name it. They all have Liberalism’s sense of righteousness and heartfelt care for the greater good of the people, their people, at their core.

Michael McHugh

5th November 2019 at 4:06 pm

When people say multiculturalism has failed in the West, they nearly always mean (whether they realise it or not) that it has failed with regards to one religion and community, the Islamic community. The problems with extremism, rape, treachery and backwardness that we have seen with minorities in recent decades have nearly always involved people with an Islamic background. Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Eastern European, Chinese communities, etc. don’t seem to produce people who behave like this (or produce them to a much lower extent). Integration of these groups into the West has been quite successful and they make a valuable contribution to British society. And the vast majority of Islamic people are very decent and make a positive contribution to the UK too.
But it is a destructive, extremist, nasty minority in the Islamic community that has made the biggest contribution to poisoning the multicultural project.

Marvin Jones

8th November 2019 at 2:14 pm

The so called decent Moslems worship and show allegiance to, and only to one entity. So when the time comes, our hospitality, welcoming, benefits and protections that we have afforded them, will mean nothing. We will always be the infidel.

Linda Payne

5th November 2019 at 3:51 pm

What about those who never wanted diversity in the first place? Or those of us who have changed their minds on further immigration due to political correctness and multiculturalism? Is Spiked still for open borders? If so why and if not why have they changed minds

christopher barnard

5th November 2019 at 1:36 pm

Multiculturalism is like socialism.

It is declared to be a good thing by its proponents despite no evidence that it is and plenty of evidence that it isn’t.

Dominic Straiton

5th November 2019 at 3:41 pm

Like the acceptance of “diversity and equality” . Both poison.

Rich Smith

5th November 2019 at 10:41 am

Long time reader first time poster!
I just wanted to add to the list of problems alluded to in this article as this particular issue seems to get very little attention (young white men not considered politically important enough to raise it)
The issue I refer to is of the disproportionate number of young white men who are taking their own lives.. unquestionably there must be many factors and influences at play here but until a conversation is started we can only speculate as to the reasons. Having a massive percentage of our indigenous population ignored or considered unworthy of political discourse over such a huge issue is extremely concerning..

Jerry Owen

5th November 2019 at 10:49 am

Rich Smith
Apparently there is no problem with young white male suicide … according to Jess Phillips, in fact for her it’s a hilarious phenomena !

In Negative

5th November 2019 at 10:00 am

“In recent times it has been fashionable to talk of the levelling of nations, of the disappearance of different races in the melting-pot of contemporary civilization. I do not agree with this opinion, but its discussion remains another question. Here it is merely fitting to say that the disappearance of nations would have impoverished us no less than if all men had become alike, with one personality and one face. Nations are the wealth of mankind, its collective personalities; the very least of them wears its own special colours and bears within itself a special facet of divine intention.”

Solzhenitsyn was kinda right and kinda wrong. Population, capital and information flows destroyed territorial integrity. The multi-cultural melting pot is a trade-off through which we tried to respect the ‘special facet of divine intention’ of other nations’ within our own territories.

But this was only part of the process. What liberated capital, technology and information now do (through the market and through the principle of absolute ‘reality’ that they cultivate) is on the one hand uniformly demand an adherence to ‘reality’ (destroying any potential for radical difference) whilst on the other hand it demands a resistance to the destruction of this radicality.

What we get is a retribalisation of the territory. The ”special facet of divine intention’ in other nations becomes a ‘special facet of divine intention’ in other tribes.

Ray’s conservatism just looks to me like one tribe in the territory. Or rather, I think my own moral position is to respect the various territorial tribes rather than bemoaning the loss of the nation. At the same time, cultivate my own ‘special facet of divine intention’.

Geoff Cox

5th November 2019 at 10:12 am

Fair enough in some slowly evolving global change. But we face violent and asymetrical change to the detriment of our society – a society some might well think was better than most others.

In Negative

5th November 2019 at 11:51 am

I think there are potentially violent asymmetries too. But I think these asymmetries are properties of ‘our society’ – properties of our ‘progress’. Those things you likely see as the achievements of our society are the very things that are transforming its nature.

For sure though, I think ‘the nation’ is being rejuvenated in the face of this dominant ‘global,’ but I don’t know where that is going.

I don’t really trust the world that Rakib is presenting above. Do we need to start pulling down polish bars and mosques? Make the Hasidic Jews a bit more liberal? Bring the Chaos Magicians and pagans into line with some common cultural norms? Close down the S&M clubs? Reduce the number of bands that can play on the MTV? Get some control over commonplace social dress codes and put more people in suits? Or are we all about Jeans and t-shirts these days? How about the new earthers and the XR lot? Are we having a national religion? Are we sticking with good old CofE or shall we adopt secular atheism? What would this mean for the Catholics? Is it ok if they have their own churches? Are we gonna have to control information feeds – make sure other realities don’t bleed into the dominant feed? North Koreans actually look quite happy really. It might be a plan.

Honestly, I’ve no idea what people are talking about when they start waxing lyrical about an end to multi-culturalism.

In Negative

5th November 2019 at 11:54 am

I replied, but you know, “Your comment is awaiting moderation”.

You may or may not get to read it.

Geoff Cox

5th November 2019 at 1:23 pm

I had one or two comments put in moderation. I don’t think they ever appear, so best to cut and paste just before you “post comment”. I actually emailed Viv Regan, the Managing Editor, and as with another matter she was very helpful. I rather think her plate is full! We need to donate a bit more cash to Spiked to allow them to make a few improvements in the way the comments work. I like to use italics or occasionally an underline, plus, as with everyone else, would like an edit button for those misspelt worms etc. I would also really like it if we were automatically notified by email when someone replies to a comment. But Spiked is a work in progress – and so far an excellent one imo.

Jerry Owen

6th November 2019 at 1:49 pm

Geoff Cox
I couldn’t agree more with your post. I have had three under moderation in the last day, sometimes they never ever appear or they appear too late when the moment has gone.
An edit facility would be much appreciated as I use my phone often with only a small area to type in despite the tv sized screen, and ‘mistooks’ happen !

Richard Brown

5th November 2019 at 8:56 am

It is too late, sadly, but as I one said , we live amidst chaos masquerading as order. I think it was me, anyway.

Geoff Cox

5th November 2019 at 8:25 am

Politicians speak with forked tongue – if you will permit the cultural appropriation! The EU project and the cultural marxist project is to destroy our European nation states and with it our culture. If a brave new world was to emerge out of the wreckage, then maybe it would be worth it, but that we can’t foresee. All we know is the terrible destruction we witness all round us.

As Alexander Solzhenitsyn said as far back as 1975 when he collected his Nobel Prize:

“In recent times it has been fashionable to talk of the levelling of nations, of the disappearance of different races in the melting-pot of contemporary civilization. I do not agree with this opinion, but its discussion remains another question. Here it is merely fitting to say that the disappearance of nations would have impoverished us no less than if all men had become alike, with one personality and one face. Nations are the wealth of mankind, its collective personalities; the very least of them wears its own special colours and bears within itself a special facet of divine intention.”

Dominic Straiton

5th November 2019 at 8:02 am

Cultures clash.

Philip Humphrey

5th November 2019 at 8:00 am

Multiculturalism failed because the leftists and so called liberals never really believed in in the first place. What they really wanted was a multicoloured society in which everyone complied to their values. You can see it in such an organisation as the BBC, multi racial certainly, but a monoculture politically and philosophically. Such thinking demands not just tolerance, but active approval of such ideas as same sex marriage, abortion, gender swapping etc.
Add to that the constant playing of identity politics by leftists, dividing the world arbitrarily into “the oppressed” who must be rewarded and “oppressors” who must be punished for the deeds of their ancestors, and it’s quite clear that it was never going to work.
Multiculturalism could have worked if all that was demanded was mere tolerance of others, not active approval. But the left and the social justice warriors were never going to leave it at that.

Jerry Owen

5th November 2019 at 7:25 am

Unfortunately the author does not understand the concept of what multiculturalism is. It means that all cultures are equal. That no culture has favour over another culture (ha!). It means all cultures can practice their cultural values without discrimination.
Given this, why would any culture want to adopt integration ie change their culture let alone the host culture?

H McLean

5th November 2019 at 7:52 am

In the words of the great Inigo Montota, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

Mike Stallard

5th November 2019 at 7:09 am

Our local Church has a “prayer group” of Muslims who come on Fridays at midday. A friend decided to make them a qibla for their salat. He dared to approach them and asked to speak to the Imam, who did not speak English. Another man was thrilled and immediately invited himself to my friend’s house – an offer which was politely declined! Small steps…
“Bayitee baitak” – Muslim hospitality: My house ifs your house.

H McLean

5th November 2019 at 7:05 am

You can’t take aim at the failures of multiculturalism without first criticising the unhinged political left and the academics and politicians who continue pushing it as the only way forward.

If there was an explicit understanding that the host culture was dominant in it’s own country then, yes, multiculturalism might work, but the prevailing dogma is precisely the opposite – that the host culture, especially if it is white, Anglo or European, should be diminished and undermined in the face of neoMarxist ideology. That this doesn’t happen anywhere else in the world should tell us something about the motives of the people pushing the ideology of multiculturalism. Of course, for decades they circumvented this by telling us we had no culture. Even now, it’s not uncommon to hear a bigoted progressive proclaim, ‘What even is British/Australian/American/etc, etc culture ANYWAY? The subtext is white people have no culture, and it is a lie.

A successful multicultural society would look like a stained glass window with different colours representing distinct and separate cultures within a cohesive picture framing the many aspects of society. What the left actually want is a a variety of cultures stirred into a murky hodgepodge that obliterates the original country, to create a new and “better” culture.

Make no mistake, ending all western capitalist Anglo culture is at the core of multiculturalism as we live and experience it.

Jim Lawrie

5th November 2019 at 12:30 pm

The immigrants bring with them that which they say they want to escape, and destroy that which they say they seek. The neo-Marxists know this, and welcome it.
Good post BTW.

Jim Lawrie

5th November 2019 at 12:56 pm

The aftermath of the breakdown of The Ottoman Empire is the nearest we have to enforced multi kult in the modern era. From Tirana to Sofia to Baghdad and to Morocco.

H McLean

5th November 2019 at 5:53 pm

That reminds me, there’s a memoir I would recommend called ‘No Going Back to Moldova’ by Anna Robertson, who was born on the banks of the Danube just north of Serbia in what was originally the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

During her lifetime her birth-country changed name three times and she eventually married a Scottish airman during the war and moved to Britain. It highlights why, at the time, there was a genuine need for an organised global system of handling refugees – when the country you were born in doesn’t exist anymore and the new one has made it clear you are not welcome.

After the Ottomans were pushed back in the mid-nineteenth century financial incentives were offered to Germans to move to the Banat to start a new life rebuilding and making the land productive, and by the end of WWII descendants of these were no longer welcome by their new Romanian overlords and told to leave. Her family were scattered across Europe.

This is precisely the kind of circumstances that produces genuine refugees, and also the kind of circumstances that no longer exist. I’ve long said that western countries should withdraw from the UN Convention on Refugees, which is no longer fit for purpose. Maybe it’s just a matter of time.

Anyway, it’s a fascinating read and although it’s long out of print (it was published 1987) but it’s possible to find online.

Claire D

8th November 2019 at 9:47 am

I just bought it for £2 from you know where, thanks for the tip H McLean.

Jim Lawrie

5th November 2019 at 1:43 am

” … develop a model of cohesion that firmly rejects both an ethno-centric understanding of nationhood … ” Having failed to destroy our nation, you want another shot at eradicating it with more social engineering.
What you hark after is The UK before immigration. The immigrants have totally rejected that and must be forced out, just as they were forced upon us. The Britain you envisage is still there in the few towns untouched by mass immigration, but is fast disappearing as immigrants are mandated to them.

Marvin Jones

8th November 2019 at 2:21 pm

This so called multi crap was designed by Blair and co purely to stick the right’s noses in it. What these asinine imbeciles didn’t realise, was that they sowed the seeds of the demise of Christianity and western cultures, and the spread of a non stoppable cancer to engulf this country and then the planet.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register now.