Multiculturalism is a disaster. It the policy in its entirety needs to be discontinued in its entirety. What they should be in favor of, is support of a multi-ethnic society (if that is what the population desires, not enforced by fiat). Up until now, the US’s multi-ethnic society, where everyone places importance on being an American first, and pay homage in their own way (or not) to the culture they, or their forefathers left, has worked well enough.
Multiculturalism highlights and re-enforces the differences between the various peoples in society, and by default, challenges the host cultures of Europe. Americanism is the host culture in America, just as much as being French, German, Finnish or Dutch is to those countries in question. The country begins to divide itself then eventually dissolve when the host culture is no longer deemed important enough to sustain.
Perhaps that was the design behind multiculturalism in Europe to begin with, it fits the Brussels model, upon which the EU is built.
NOTE: Only in a statist (big government) political environment is multiculturalism the preferred method in dealing with society as a whole.
Opposing Sharia Law Is a Defence of the Rights of Muslims
How can we be a multicultural society if we do not accommodate sharia law? That is one of the most common questions I am asked when travelling the UK as spokesperson of the anti-sharia ‘One Law for All’ campaign (www.onelawforall.org.uk). It accompanies ‘why are you picking on a vulnerable minority?’ and cries of ‘Islamophobe’ and even ‘racist’.
This is not unreasonable; it is right that people stand up and say so if they think a minority is being picked on, it is right that racism be held in check, and it is right that we accommodate people’s beliefs provided they do not impede on the rights of others – the problem is, none of this applies here, because the sharia law I’m talking about is itself is racist and imperialist, it severely compromises human rights, and it is sharia that helps make life miserable for minorities in Britain (particularly female ones).
So, how can we be multicultural if we do not accommodate sharia? The first point to make is that sharia law does not tolerate multiculturalism. It does not tolerate dissent or difference or individual rights. Take for example Saudi Arabia, a country with a declared sharia-based constitution, and a country where apostasy, blasphemy, and ‘witchcraft’ carry the death penalty. Under Pakistan’s sharia laws the same applies – death for blasphemy. It is widespread across the sharia-controlled world; as is the brutal treatment of women.
Due to colonial guilt, we in Europe are loath to ‘tell other people what to do’ so we stay away from making judgments on the practices of cultures and religions we deem alien to ourselves. But what if those practices are against the law? What if they are violent, misogynistic, homophobic and brutal? This is leaves us in an uncomfortable place. As a society, we reject violence and misogyny and homophobia, but we also reject racism and imperialism and on these matters, we are convinced that we have met with a clash and we must now choose between rejecting misogynist violence or rejecting racism. This is not the choice of course; the opposite is true.