During a fundraiser celebrating the beginning of Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month, President Biden referred to Japan, China, and Russia as “xenophobic.”
“You know, one of the reasons why our economy is growing is … because we welcome immigrants. Why is China stalling so bad economically? Why is Japan having trouble? Why is Russia? Because they’re xenophobic. They don’t want immigrants. Immigrants are what makes us strong!”
However, the idealistic notion of diversity as our “strength,” frequently championed by leftists, diverges from the harsh reality that diversity has never been a strength of nations.
In the book Who Are We? The Challenges to America’s National Identity, political scientist Samuel Huntington posited:
Would America be the America it is today if, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, it had been settled not by British Protestants but by French, Spanish, or Portuguese? The answer is no. It would not be America; it would be Quebec, Mexico, or Brazil.
And what about the West? Would the West remain what it was if it continued to accept immigrants from parts of the world hostile to its values and traditions? That answer is also no. The West would no longer be the West; eventually, it would look like a conglomeration of South America, Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, and parts of the Middle East. Sadly, this is the situation the West finds itself in today as Western nations have been significantly and deliberately transformed from their earlier identities due to unrelenting mass migration.
Traditionally, nations have been an amalgamation of communities and individuals bound together by the bonds of common ancestry, language, culture, and history within the confines of a specific territory. Today in contemporary America, shared culture, tradition, and history have been cast aside as if these previously shared values were inconsequential to a nation’s health and prosperity. And while the United States may still lay claim to a delimited geographic area, even this most fundamental attribute of a nation teeters on the brink of irrelevance, thanks to both legal immigration and the porous nature of our southern border — the erosion of which, by design, threatens the very meaning of citizenship itself.
The very notion of a nation enforcing its borders stands in stark opposition to the tenets of liberalism of both the right and left variety. In this paradigm, the United States, once defined by its distinctive identity and heritage, has been summarily supplanted by the concept of America as an idea, transforming the nation into little more than an economic opportunity zone and service provider for global migration — accessible to anyone who can reach its shores, regardless of the adverse effects on our culture, crime rates, or the financial consequences of depressed wages for the average American worker.
As such, this detachment between the American nation and its people in favor of the new religion of “multiculturalism” has had disastrous consequences for the United States, as present-day America clearly falls significantly short of meeting even the most basic definition of what it means to be a “nation.”
Although the complexities related to multiculturalism can be linked to and worsened by higher levels of immigration, it’s crucial to recognize that multiculturalism is a comprehensive ideology that believes Western nations are inherently racist and irredeemably wicked, and thus, mass migration can be seen as a form of Western penance administered by leftist clergy. This ideology has substantially affected the younger generations across the Western world, mainly by gaining complete control over academia.
Today’s Western student activists are the primary drivers of multiculturalism under the academic gospel of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” They enthusiastically embrace all cultures except their own and tend to focus primarily on identifying instances of racism and imperialism within the Western context, as recently exemplified by the “Free Palestine” college campus protests spreading across the country.
The threats from multiculturalism are not a new concern. Plato discussed the effects of multiculturalism and diversity within a given polity long ago and touched on three central reservations:
Homogeneity: Plato advocated for a harmonious society in which individuals had defined roles and duties. This suggests a preference for a unified culture and a significant emphasis on shared values and standards.
Assimilation: Plato’s envisioned state strongly emphasizes education and shaping citizens to adhere to the state’s values and laws. This might be seen as a process of cultural assimilation, wherein individuals are encouraged to embrace the prevailing cultural norms.
Foreign Influence: Plato feared the possible negative effect of foreign concepts and traditions on native culture. He may have endorsed measures aimed at restricting the adoption of external allegiances that might disrupt the stability of the state.
Long after Plato walked the Earth, Theodore Roosevelt addressed similar concerns about the United States in a 1915 speech on the subject of “Americanism.”
Roosevelt disapproved of the idea of “hyphenated Americanism,” which described individuals who identified with both their American nationality and their ethnic or ancestral backgrounds (e.g., German-Americans, Irish-Americans). He contended that genuine Americanism required unwavering loyalty to the United States, prioritizing allegiance to the nation over other affiliations. He believed the United States’ success, especially in the face of international pressures and challenges, hinged on the citizens’ elevated patriotism, where the commitment to the nation took precedence over individual rights and any prior foreign allegiances.
Today, Roosevelt’s vision of America is all but dead. The left, driven by disdain for America’s historical legacy, endeavors to obliterate it by inviting those into our country with no connection to our past and no inclination to embrace it. Even for those immigrants desiring assimilation, they must navigate an educational system completely hostile to such notions, one that stands in direct opposition to the principles of American identity.
In the eyes of our ruling elite, accepting unfettered immigration is an act of atonement for our nation’s perceived historical “sins” and also a form of punishment inflicted upon the very citizens they hold in contempt — the white “deplorables” who live in “flyover” country. Meanwhile, those in positions of privilege remain insulated from the consequences of cultural fragmentation as they sing their siren song of multiculturalism from high atop their ivory towers and within their gated communities.
America is not a mere abstract “idea” or a frivolous experiment, as nations do not dwell in the realm of abstraction. Diversity, when taken to the extreme levels seen across the West, has led to significant internal discord and strife, giving rise to populist and nationalist movements that rightfully find meaning in retaining the values and traditions that once made Western nations great. Within the United States, movements such as “America First” are a natural response to the unprecedented cultural transformations experienced over a very short time.
The ascent of the anti-cultural ideology of multiculturalism, coupled with relentless immigration and the subversion of America’s national borders, has already eroded the cherished ties of common ancestry, language, culture, and history that have defined the United States as a nation. Keeping our borders open while discarding the traditional virtues of nationhood is tantamount to national self-destruction, which has pushed America to the brink of cultural oblivion.
Comments are closed.