Multiculturalism as a process of globalisation

Posted by Guest Blogger on Thursday, 26 November 2009 12:02.

by K R Bolton
Academy of Social and Political Research

Multicultural politics, including that concerned with immigration, is a method of social engineering. Whoever raises a voice in public in opposition or even merely of caution is pilloried as a “racist” and a “reactionary”. Conversely, those who champion multiculturalism are upheld as the paragons of ‘progress’ and humanitarianism. Yet behind the moral façade multiculturalism is a cynical stratagem, an important part of the process of globalisation in the interests of a small, self-appointed plutocratic elite. This essay examines how multiculturalism is an aspect of globalisation.

“See, capitalism is not fundamentally racist—it can exploit racism for its purposes, but racism isn’t built into it. Capitalism basically wants people to be interchangeable cogs, and differences among them, such as on the basis of race, usually are not functional. I mean, they may be functional for a period, like if you want a super-exploited workforce or something, but those situations are kind of anomalous. Over the long term, you can expect capitalism to be anti-racist - just because it’s anti-human. And race is, in fact, a human characteristic - there’s no reason why it should be a negative characteristic, but it is a human characteristic. So therefore identifications based on race interfere with the basic ideal that people should be available just as consumers and producers, interchangeable cogs who will purchase all the junk that’s produced - that’s their ultimate function, and any other properties they might have are kind of irrelevant, and usually a nuisance.”
Noam Chomsky

It is ironic that an intellectual championed in particular by the anarchist-Left has given such a cogent definition of the motivating force behind multiculturalism. Among the numerous references to Chomsky made by the Left his diagnosis of capitalism as being “anti-racist” because it aims to create a society of humans as nothing more than “interchangeable cogs”, does not receive the same attention as his other views. As Chomsky states, individuals cannot function at an optimum level as producers and consumers if there are racial or what we might further categorise as cultural and national, divisions.

Chomsky is outside the mainstream of Leftist ideology, which sees humanity and the individual in precisely the same terms as capitalism sees humanity as defined by Chomsky in the above passage. Both capitalism and Marxism are globalist, and both are reductionist in seeing economic factors as the primary determinants of human behaviour and history.  Marx himself was not adverse to Free Trade capitalism. He supported Free Trade insofar as he saw it as a dialectical catalyst for the destruction of national boundaries, which would internationalise “the proletariat” and eventually lead to a global system. Global capitalists maintain the same outlook today. Marx’s analysis in regard to Free Trade was correct, although his alternative is nothing more than to change the ownership of production and distribution. Marx said of Free Trade:

“National differences and antagonisms between peoples are daily more and more vanishing, owing to the development of the bourgeoisie, to freedom of commerce, to the world market, to uniformity in the modern of production and in the conditions of life corresponding thereto. The supremacy of the proletariat will cause them to vanish faster.”

Today’s global corporate executives and planners concur with Marx. Marx further identified “protectionism” as the conservative position, Free Trade as subversive and revolutionary. Those – mainly political scientists and journalists, especially in the English-speaking world – who insist on defining “conservatism” (sic) as Free Trade liberalism, should return to an actual source; in this instance Marx, to re-evaluate their definitions:

“Generally speaking, the protectionist system today is conservative, whereas the Free Trade system has a destructive effect. It destroys the former nationalities, and renders the contrasts between workers and middle class more acute. In a word, the Free Trade system is precipitating the social revolution. And only in this revolutionary sense to I vote for Free Trade.”

South Africa Succumbed to Plutocracy – Not Communism

A classic example of the way by which multiculturalism is sold behind the moral guise of ‘anti-racism’, ‘equality’ and ‘human rights’ in the interests of plutocratic exploitation is that of South Africa. Without arguing the merits or otherwise of apartheid, the salient factor in considering multiculturalism as part of the globalisation process is that the fall of the Nationalist Government was the outcome of a nexus between Black communist-inspired terrorists from below and plutocracy headed up by the Oppenheimer interests working from above. Here communism and Big Business served as pincer movements with the ‘Boer’ in between. In eulogising Harry F Oppenheimer on his death in 2000 Mandela stated:

“His contribution to building partnership between big business and the new democratic government in that first period of democratic rule can never be appreciated too much.”

The result has not been a regime that would deliver South African wealth to the Blacks in a new utopia of peace and plenty. Rather the African National Congress (ANC)/Communist Party regime has opened South Africa up to globalisation and destroyed the remnants of the economic nationalism of the Afrikaner nationalist governments. It was the Afrikaner nationalists who stood for State economic intervention and who stood up to monopoly capitalism, since the days of the old Boer Republics. The Black regime has reversed this economic nationalism in favour of globalisation and privatisation.

In 1996, according to a Reuters report, Nelson Mandela, heralded as a saint by the capitalist press and the Left alike, stated that: “Privatisation is the fundamental policy of the ANC and will remain so.” Now the ANC Government is busy dismantling the state economic structure erected by the Afrikaner nationalists to safeguard their nation from the incursions of international finance capitalism. The ANC/CP Government is turning State run utilities over to global corporations, just as ‘privatisation’ and globalisation in New Zealand was originally enacted under a so-called “Labour” Government. For e.g. the State has divested itself of its 40% share in South African Airways, once the most profitable airline in Africa. The Johannesburg municipal water supply has been privatised and is now under the French corporation Suez Lyonnaise Eaux. Eskom the state electricity producer, was made into a public corporation to pave the way for privatisation. The ANC stated that: “Eskom is one of a host of government owned “parastatals” created during the apartheid era which the democratically elected government has set out to privatise in a bid to raise money.”

This good comrade, Mandela, nurtured by the Communist apparatus in South Africa, lauded by the Western media as a saint, paved the way for the privatisation and globalisation of the South African economy. He has followed the example of the rest of de-colonised Africa, where the global corporations moved in once the colonial administrations had pulled out. Global Capitalism and Cultural Identity

It is with the view to destroying national, cultural and ethnic boundaries that global capitalism promotes open immigration.

In their study of global corporations based on interviews with the corporate elite, Barnet and Muller state that both Adam Smith, theorist of Free Trade, and Marx, predicted that capitalism would become international, which has been pointed out in the opening passages of this essay. Barnet and Muller write that, “The world managers are the most active promoters of this Marxist prediction” of globalisation , of which we have previously quoted from The Communist Manifesto.

Barnet and Muller state that Jacques Maisonrouge, president of the IBM World Trade Corporation “likes to point out that; Down with borders, a revolutionary student slogan of the 1968 Paris university uprising – in which some of his children were involved – is also a welcome slogan at IBM.” Maisonrouge states that the “World Managers” (as Barnett and Muller call the corporate executives) believe they are making the world ‘smaller and more homogeneous”; that the “global corporation is “the great leveller’”, or as Chomsky puts it, everyone is being levelled down as an “interchangeable cog” in a world economy. Maisonrouge approvingly describes the global corporate executive as “the detribalised, international career men.” It is this “detribalisation” that is the basis of a “world consumer culture” required to more efficiently create a world economy.

These “detribalised, international career men” were more recently described by G Pascal Zachary, financial journalist, as being an “informal global aristocracy”, recruited over the world by the corporations, depending totally on their companies and “little upon the larger public”, a new class unhindered by national, cultural or ethnic bonds. They are without nationality, and are quite literally ‘interchangeable cogs’.

Creating The World Consumer

National, cultural and ethnic boundaries hinder global marketing. Barnett and Muller quote Pfizer’s John J Powers as stating that global corporations are “agents for change, socially, economically and culturally.” Barnett and Muller state that global executives see “irrational nationalism” as inhibiting “the free flow of finance capital, technology and goods on a global scale.” A crucial aspect of nationalism is “differences in psychological and cultural attitudes, that complicate the task of homogenising the earth into an integrated unit ... Cultural nationalism is also a serious problem because it threatens the concept of the Global Shopping Center.”

Barnet and Muller cite A W Clausen of the Bank of America as stating that national, cultural and racial differences create “marketing problems”, lamenting that there is “no such thing as a uniform, global market.” Harry Heltzer, Chief Executive Officer of 3M stated that global corporations are a “powerful voice for world peace because their allegiance is not to any nation, tongue, race or creed but to one of the finer aspirations of mankind, that the people of the world may be united in common economic purpose.”

Global Cities

Since Barnet and Muller wrote their book, the internationalising and levelling tendency of global capitalism has become evident in New Zealand with our malls and the way our towns and cities now look much the same in whatever part of the country one may visit. Of course, the trends towards globalisation and the “global consumer culture” including the “global shopping mall” are even more evident throughout the Western world, with increasing encroachment on the former Eastern bloc and the Third World by global corporations.

In the 1970s Howard Perlmutter and Hasan Ozekhan of the Wharton School of Finance Worldwide Institutions Programme prepared a plan for a “global city”. Prof. Perlmutter is a consultant to global corporations. His plan was commissioned by the French Government planning agency on how best to make Paris a “global city.” Perlmutter predicted that cities would become “global cities” during the 1980s. For Paris this required “becoming less French” and undergoing “denationalisation.” This, he said, requires a “psycho-cultural change of image with respect to the traditional impression of ‘xenophobia’ that the French seem to exclude.” Perlmutter suggested that the best way of ridding France of its nationalism was to introduce multiculturalism. He advocated “the globalisation of cultural events” such as international rock festivals, as an antidote to “overly national and sometimes nationalistic culture.” Of course such modernist music has from the start been a means by which a ‘global culture’ can be imposed from above, whilst simultaneously making large profits, and breaking down cultural and ethnic barriers among the generations of youth, until everyone has become “detribalised”. In more recent years we have witnessed the phenomenon of the young, right down to toddlers, being targeted by corporate advertising as consumers in their own right.

This “global city” concept being discussed three decades ago is interesting for New Zealanders at the moment considering the current Government enactment that made Auckland a “super city” by centralising the various district council’s into a single entity. Such super-cities are panned for Wellington and elsewhere. A World Bank report for ‘reshaping geography’ according to global economic requirements has recently been issued which would appear to be a globalist blueprint for the increasing absorption of townships into the type of “super city” now being proposed for New Zealand, being undertaken under the demand for ‘economic efficiency’ and condemning any opposition as ‘parochial’.

Funding the Multicultural Revolutions Multicultural agendas throughout the world are the recipients of much largesse from the global corporations channelled through tax-empts foundations such as the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations.

The currency speculator George Soros, whose foundations and networks have been particularly active in fomenting ‘colour revolutions’ around the world under the auspices of his Open Society Institute, specialise in the subverting of traditional institutions and customs especially in the Middle Eastern and former Eastern bloc countries. Feminist issues are particularly high on the agenda. In the area of multiculturalism Soros set up the Emma Lazarus Fund to dispense funds for immigration lobbying.

Emma Lazarus was the 19th Century poet, novelist and critic, and an early proponent of Zionist colonisation of Palestine, whose words from her poetic tribute to the Statue of Liberty, The New Colossus, adorn the statue: “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” The Fund was set up by the Open Society Institute spanning 1996-1997 for the sole purpose of dispensing grants totalling $50,000,000 to pro-immigration lobbies and projects.

La Raza: How the Ford Foundation Created a New Ethnic Group.

Until the 1960s the problem of Mexican migration was economically based, and involved the demand for cheap labour by the giant agricultural combines in the USA. However, during the 1960s, with the rise of “identity politics”, “black power” and the well-funded “civil rights” movement, the Ford Foundation expanded its ethnic outreach to Mexican migrants. The aim was to begin a process of forming previously diverse nationalities into a unified “Hispanic” ethnic movement intended to further erode any vestiges of an American nationality, identity or culture. The Ford Foundation, through its grant-making strategies, formed a new “race” (La Raza) that threatens to secede parts of the USA to Mexico or at least declare a separatist Hispanic nation.

Until the creation of MALDEF (Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund) by the Ford Foundation, Mexican Americans regarded themselves as “whites” who aimed to completely assimilate into White America. Joseph Fallon , writes:

“The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the nation’s oldest and largest ‘‘Hispanic’’ organization, was established on February 17, 1929 ...  “From 1929 through the 1950s, LULAC was a middle-class, patriotic organization of U.S. citizens of Mexican descent whose activities centered primarily on education. Its agenda was traditional ‘‘Americanism’’ — Mexican-Americans must assimilate to the ‘‘Anglo’’ culture of the United States and acquire proficiency in the English language. It stressed ‘‘Mexican-Americans’’ were ‘‘Americans,’’ not ‘‘Mexicans.’’ An integral part of its activities was the promotion of U.S. citizenship and loyalty to the United States. LULAC rejected the idea the U.S. Southwest should be returned to Mexico and opposed establishment of Spanish-language enclaves in the United States. Because illegal aliens from Mexico were violating U.S. laws and posing an economic burden on Mexican-Americans by lowering wages, LULAC endorsed immigration control and supported President Eisenhower’s ‘‘Operation Wetback’’ which deported a million illegal aliens back to Mexico.”

This orientation among Mexican –Americans changed when the Ford Foundation promoted the formation of MALDEF, whose founder Peter Tijerina, had been an official of LULAC.

“MALDEF was a creation of the Ford Foundation in more ways than just funding. The Ford Foundation soon took control of virtually all important matters from where the headquarters should be located, to the appointment of its executive director, and the type of legal cases it should pursue.”

MALDEF was created to establish a separate identity for Latin American immigrants, which would undermine the cohesion of the USA by, of example, demanding legal status for the Spanish language on par with English.

In addition to largesse from the Foundations, MALDEF also receives funds from globalist corporations including AT&T;and IBM. Joseph Fallon writes:

“MALDEF obtains the funding to support its activities primarily from corporations in particular AT&T;and IBM, and philanthropic foundations. For the period 1991-1995, the total amount of ‘‘gifts, grants and contributions’’ to MALDEF was over $17 million. Between 1996 and 1998, MALDEF received over nine million dollars from just three foundations the vast majority, over six million dollars from the Ford Foundation, $1,200,000 from Carnegie Corporation, and another $1,525,000 from the Rockefeller Foundation. The National Council of La Raza was established in 1968 with support from the Ford Foundation and was originally called the Southwest Council of La Raza.”

Hence a new ethnicity was formed in the USA through the largesse of Ford, Rockefeller AT&T;and IBM, a new ethnicity which moreover has become a significant factor in the breaking down of an American national identity. It is relevant to conjecture as to what extent the creation of this Hispanic ethnicity will serve as a leeway for pushing the American Free Trade Agreement that includes Mexico, as one of many such regional economic groupings that, like the EU, and the projected Trilateralist Asia bloc, serve as a further step towards a global economic system where there is a free flow of labour, resources, money and goods unhindered by national, cultural and ethnic boundaries and traditions. The end product will not be the individual living in peace and harmony with everybody else across the world, but a rootless serf: Homo Economicus, the ‘interchangeable cog’ referred to by Chomsky.

K R Bolton, is a Fellow of the Academy of Social & Political Research (http://www.academy-of-social-and-political-research.com). Published works include: Thinkers of the Right, England, 2003; “Russia and China: An Approaching Conflict?”, Washington: The Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies, Vol. 34, No. 2, Summer 2009; “Trotskyism and the anti-family agenda”, CKR, Sociology Dept., Moscow State University, October 2009, and Geopolitika, Moscow, November 2009. This article “Multiculturalism as a Process of Globalisation” originally appeared, footnoted and fully referenced, in the peer reviewed quarterly journal of the Academy of Social and Political Research, Ab Aeterno, No. 1, November 2009.

 



Comments:


1

Posted by danielj on Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:14 | #

Excellent essay.


2

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 27 Nov 2009 01:13 | #

In the 1970s Howard Perlmutter and Hasan Ozekhan of the Wharton School of Finance Worldwide Institutions Programme prepared a plan for a “global city.”  Prof. Perlmutter is a consultant to global corporations.  His plan was commissioned by the French Government planning agency on how best to make Paris a “global city.”  Perlmutter predicted that cities would become “global cities” during the 1980s.  For Paris this required “becoming less French” and undergoing “denationalisation.”  This, he said, requires a “psycho-cultural change of image with respect to the traditional impression of ‘xenophobia’ that the French seem to exclude [exude?].”  Perlmutter suggested that the best way of ridding France of its nationalism was to introduce multiculturalism.  He advocated “the globalisation of cultural events” such as international rock festivals, as an antidote to “overly national and sometimes nationalistic culture.”  Of course such modernist music has from the start been a means by which a ‘global culture’ can be imposed from above, whilst simultaneously making large profits, and breaking down cultural and ethnic barriers among the generations of youth, until everyone has become “detribalised.”  In more recent years we have witnessed the phenomenon of the young, right down to toddlers, being targeted by corporate advertising as consumers in their own right.  (—from the log entry)

The Occidental Quarterly Online happens to have a very good piece up at the moment by Hervé Ryssen which sheds additional light on the motivations behind a significant portion of those pushing the above sort of crap hardest (that portion to which the excerpt’s Howard Perlmutter, judging by his name, belongs):

http://www.toqonline.com/2009/11/herve-ryssen-part-3/ .

(The English Wiki edition doesn’t have a bio of Hervé Ryssen; here’s the one in the French Wiki edition:

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hervé_Ryssen .)


3

Posted by Al Ross on Fri, 27 Nov 2009 06:05 | #

A fine piece of work. I have always resented the Jewess Emma Lazarus’s Statue of Liberty tripe which gives the impression that the USA is advertising itself as a garbage dump for the Third World’s anthropoid refuse.

An interesting account of the arrival of Europeans at Ellis Island’s predecessor, Castle Gardens, is provided by the veteran New York journalist and amateur historian, Jimmy Breslin in his book, ‘Table Talk’:

“Throughout all of the immigration to America, virtually no one - from Irish maid and farmer to German brewery worker to Jewish seamstress from Poland - debarked at New York in anything less than frills and flowers. These were not huddled masses in torn clothes; they were men in shirts and ties and women in holiday finery, who understood the show of dignity”.


4

Posted by Bill on Fri, 27 Nov 2009 17:00 | #

MEP Nigel Farage sticks it to European parliament.


http://www.refuseresist.net/2009/11/26/mep-reprimanded-for-exposing-eu-dictatorship/EP


5

Posted by Bill on Fri, 27 Nov 2009 17:10 | #

Above @ 040.00pm

Sorry link failed let’s try   http://www.thegreenarrow.co.uk/


6

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:49 | #

That was another great statement by Nigel Farage, Bill, a great, great statement.  Thanks for linking that.

Yes I know Farage and UKIP are intended by the Establishment to play the role of safety valve for the letting off of steam pent-up in an effort to keep the whole thing from blowing sky-high while still never demanding any truly fundamental concessions from the other side, I realize that.  And I do remember how Farage verbally trashed the BNP.  Yet he is a good man as far as he goes, and one must admire and appreciate his intelligent, valiant efforts in the EU to speak the truth and express outrage on the subjects the UKIP does permit itself to be thoroughly honest about.  (Naturally, as goes without saying, I prefer Nick Griffin MEP and Andrew Brons MEP to any representative of UKIP in that Parliament.)


7

Posted by Bill on Fri, 27 Nov 2009 20:12 | #

Fred above 5.49pm.

Yes it did occur to me afterwards this could have been a charade (tag match) to steal BNP’s thunder.

But the look on Barrosso’‘s face didn’t seem to be saying it was a put up job.  Who knows?


Whilst I’m here.  On yesterday’s news it took the BBC the whole of 20 seconds to inform us that a further 590 thousand immigrants had landed here during 2008.  This news was sugar coated by the BBC by telling us that thousands of Poles had returned home due to the recession.

But the latter told us (deduction) that the 590,000 who came here were almost all third world enrichers.  Which they singularly omit to point out of course.

They also failed to tell us this 590,000 will demographically morph into 2-3 million plus within the next ten years.

In addition, there is always a substantial number of Brits leaving the country each year.

This figure of (around 600,000 per year) is fairly constant, but I never hear any explanation why this is so.  It seems obvious that the 600,000 per year is the allocation planned and directed by the UN to Britain.  (Through EU)

The forecasters tell us that the population will reach 70 million in 20 years or so,  How come they are so certain of these facts?  The tipping point will have long gone by then.

The BBC are rubbing their hands in anticipation.

Britain is still slumbering peacefully.


8

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:36 | #

”On yesterday’s news it took the BBC the whole of 20 seconds to inform us that a further 590 thousand immigrants had landed here during 2008, [apparently] almost all third world enrichers.  Which they singularly omit to point out of course.  They also failed to tell us this 590,000 will demographically morph into 2-3 million plus within the next ten years.  In addition, there is always a substantial number of Brits leaving the country each year.

“This figure of (around 600,000 per year) is fairly constant, but I never hear any explanation why this is so.  It seems obvious that the 600,000 per year is the allocation planned and directed by the UN to Britain.  (Through EU)

“The forecasters tell us that the population will reach 70 million in 20 years or so, How come they are so certain of these facts? 

(—Bill)

They’re so certain of them, Bill, because it’s all planned and forced.  None of it is happening by accident, or by any unstoppable force of nature, or by the desire or permission of the people being phased out. 

Look at this new article, up over at The Occidental Quarterly Online:

http://www.toqonline.com/2009/11/herve-ryssen-part-3/ .

In it, Danny Cohn-Bendit, this pig in human disguise (poor disguise at that — look at the photo), assistant mayor of Frankfurt Germany (many will remember him as Jewish communist “Danny the Red” from his 1960s student days), says,

Daniel Cohn-Bendit, former leader of May ’68 and assistant mayor of Frankfurt, says:  “In Frankfurt am Mainz the population is more than 25% foreign but one can say that Frankfurt would not crumble if the percentage from abroad one day reached one the third of the whole” (Xénophobies, 1998, p. 14). [...] Cohn-Bendit ensures us straightforwardly that “to stop racism, it would be best to further increase the number from abroad”! [...] This is perfectly in sync with the socialist Jacques Attali writing about Germany’s aging population:  “It is indeed necessary that the naturalized foreign population reach a third of the entire population, and half that of the cities” (Dictionnaire du XXIe siècle, 1998).  <u>One could, of course, encourage the German birthrate</u> [i.e., take steps to increase the German-race birthrate instead of importing non-whites into Germany hand-over-fist —the German-race birthrate could be “encouraged” by lifting governmental and social pressures well-known to force white birthrates down, pressures which are routinely adjusted up and down by governments the same way inflationary pressures are].  But Jacques Attali does not consider that, because only a multiracial society guarantees the realization of the planetarian project.  For France, Attali suggests the same solution:  “It will also have to pursue the means to rejuvenate its population, to accept the entrance of a great number from abroad” (L’Homme nomade, 2003, p. 436</u>).

It’s all proceding according to plan.


9

Posted by Armor on Sat, 28 Nov 2009 09:12 | #

They also failed to tell us this 590,000 will demographically morph into 2-3 million plus within the next ten years.
In addition, there is always a substantial number of Brits leaving the country each year. (—Bill)

Brits leaving the country is a consequence of third-world immigration, but a more serious consequence is that fewer white babies will be born in the future.
Some newspapers will compare inward and outward migration rates at instant T, so we can calculate the race-replacement rate. But I think it is more important to compare the third-world immigration rate at year Y, with the white birth rate and the number of Brits fleeing Britain at year Y+10.

[i.e., take steps to increase the German-race birthrate instead of importing non-whites into Germany hand-over-fist —the German-race birthrate could be “encouraged” by lifting governmental and social pressures well-known to force white birthrates down, pressures which are routinely adjusted up and down by governments the same way inflationary pressures are] (—Fred Scrooby)

Taking those steps would be very easy. Obviously, the first step is to stop immigration and send the Turks back to Turkey.


10

Posted by GenoType on Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:17 | #

Both capitalism and Marxism are globalist, and both are reductionist in seeing economic factors as the primary determinants of human behaviour and history.

Reductionism isn’t a bad word.  Even if we accept the position that economic factors are important determinants of human behavior and history, there are biological reasons for this – reasons which will vary within and between human groups irrespective of economics, culture, and geography. 

irrational nationalism

Biology is a deeper reduction than economics.  Physics is deeper still. 

Half-assed analogy:  Economics, culture, and geography are the symbols and substances used to make a sign.  Biology is the material beneath the paint. 

Why not make reductionism our friend?



12

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 30 Nov 2009 00:37 | #

Excellent and prophetic 1994 interview with Sir James Goldsmith linked just above by Wolf.  Just watched it and I’ve stored the link for future reference.


13

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 08 Dec 2009 02:18 | #

When the (fill in the blank) _______ achieve hegemony over college curricula in your country the following are the sorts of things that end up being taught to your kids:

The University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Extension offers two strikingly dissimilar courses on race in America.

The first is “The Jewish People and America.”  In gushing language befitting a public relations puff piece the university writes:

”Learn about the extraordinary relationship between a wandering people and a golden land.  Discover the lessons it teaches us about the evolution of the Jewish people from hopeful immigrants seeking a haven to esteemed citizens who found a home.  This program documents remarkable achievement in the face of obstacles and ingenuity in creating opportunity in a new land.  This story about Jewish hopes and the realities of the American promise provides penetrating insight into how an immigrant people forged liberating New World Jewish identities across the American landscape in commerce, arts and culture, sciences, law, higher education, medicine, entertainment, and more.”

The second is “Understanding Whiteness in American History and Culture:  Deconstructing White Privilege for the Reconstruction of an Anti-Racist White Identity.”  Here the approach is quite different:

”Eurocentric American history often masks the saliency of how the formation of Whiteness ultimately supports mechanisms of race and racism.  This course outlines the historical development of Whiteness and critically analyzes the sociological results that stem from its birth.  The course provides a historical framework of the birth of Whiteness; explores Whiteness (namely, White Supremacy and White Privilege) and how they impact people of color and uphold racial hierarchy to engage in a REconstruction of anti-racist white racial identity.”

It is perhaps not surprising that a lawsuit, according to conservative gadfly Andrew Jones, charged this university with first amendment and civil rights violations and fostering an anti-white environment.  “White students [at UCLA] are denigrated on a daily basis,” Jones declared in a televised appearance on Hannity & Colmes (Fox News Channel, September 8, 2006).  The university’s catalogue bears him out.

[ http://www.toqonline.com/2009/12/comeuppances/ ]


14

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 08 Dec 2009 02:41 | #

Everywhere one looks, one sees that when Jewish intellectuals, Jewish academics, Jewish journalists, Jewish politicians, Jewish millionaires and billionaires, Jewish Hollywood producers/directors/screen writers, Jewish museum directors, Jewish artists, art collectors and art dealers, Jewish writers/novelists/playwrights, Jewish CEOs, the Jewish man-in-the-street (did I leave any Jews out?) attack “whites” they do not intend Jews as included under “whites” or as coming under attack from these verbal assaults whatsoever.  Jews are in no way included or meant.  All those “whites-are-the-cancer-of-history” type attacks are meant exclusively for Eurogoys.  Once one understands that, it’s but a short step to grasp that all the Jews are doing is attacking what they see as their tribal enemy, Eurochristians, using the Jewish code word “whites” to designate the targeted group so that the true tribal nature of the attack flies under the radar.  Hell, attacking your tribal enemy is easy — anybody can do it.  The amazing, absolutely breathtaking brass involved when the Jews do it lies in the way they pretend, as they do it, that it’s something elevated, something soul-searchingly honest, something self-abnegating-for-the-common-good-of-mankind, something “moral.”  No, it’s nothing elevated or moral or any of the rest, it’s merely age-old garden-variety crass tribal warfare, as crass as it comes.  Europeans reading this comment who live in countries lacking large numbers of Jews are under heavy Jewish control nonetheless, so they need to know about this too:  they’re under heavy Jewish influence via the U.S. government, most of which is heavily influenced by Jews, and certain branches of which (policy toward Israel of course; also, zero tolerance for resistance anywhere in the Eurosphere to multiculturalism and open borders) are outright Jewish fiefdoms handed down from Jew to Jew no matter what change of government takes place or who gets elected president.  You comrades in Europe are being influenced by gravity from planets you cannot see.


15

Posted by Fred on Fri, 08 Apr 2011 20:06 | #

This article demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of multiculturalism. You have mobilised bits of some bastardised form of multiculturalism and used it for your own political purposes.


16

Posted by Lurker on Sat, 09 Apr 2011 00:01 | #

This article demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of multiculturalism. You have mobilised bits of some bastardised form of multiculturalism and used it for your own political purposes. - Fred

Dont be coy Fred, enlighten us about multiculturalism, we need to know the fundamentals.

You can explain can’t you?



Post a comment:


Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me


Next entry: In a black cab, episode two
Previous entry: Laboratory of the States Platform

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Immigration

Islamist Threat

Anti-white Media Networks

Audio/Video

Crime

Economics

Education

General

Historical Re-Evaluation

Controlled Opposition

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Europeans in Africa

Of Note

Comments

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:36. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:50. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Thu, 28 Mar 2024 10:26. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Thu, 28 Mar 2024 05:37. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Tue, 26 Mar 2024 15:07. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Tue, 26 Mar 2024 11:00. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Tue, 26 Mar 2024 05:02. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Mon, 25 Mar 2024 11:39. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Mon, 25 Mar 2024 09:56. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Mon, 25 Mar 2024 07:51. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Mon, 25 Mar 2024 07:46. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Mon, 25 Mar 2024 07:41. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:25. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:42. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:01. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:20. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:51. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:45. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:26. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:56. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:55. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:07. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:12. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:51. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:38. (View)

Guessedworker commented in entry 'Moscow's Bataclan' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 10:01. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Sat, 23 Mar 2024 05:13. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Fri, 22 Mar 2024 23:51. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Thu, 21 Mar 2024 11:14. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Thu, 21 Mar 2024 05:14. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Tue, 19 Mar 2024 11:42. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Tue, 19 Mar 2024 11:01. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Tue, 19 Mar 2024 10:41. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Tue, 19 Mar 2024 10:21. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Tue, 19 Mar 2024 09:50. (View)

affection-tone