Why do people who shout the loudest about multiculturalism’s glories all seem to look, think, talk, and act the same? And if they truly believe that all cultures and races and genders are equal, why do they never shut the fuck up about how horrible and worthless straight white males are?
Usually under the excuse that something is “too white,” we hear that it needs to diversify, and, like, fucking PRONTO.
We don’t hear that hip-hop is too black.
We don’t hear that nail salons are too female.
We don’t hear that baseball is too Latin American.
We don’t hear that taco trucks are too Mexican.
We don’t hear that horse jockeys are too short.
We don’t hear that San Francisco is too gay or that Portland is too lesbian.
We don’t hear that China is too Chinese or that Africa is too black or that New York and Hollywood are too Jewish.
We only hear that things are too white, too male, or too hetero. And the moment that any white hetero male has the guts to make a peep about it, out you come tut-tutting and attempting to shame like some frigid postmenopausal nun.
Since the endless shrieking cant is that white males are a problem, you shouldn’t be surprised if white males begin to object. And if you keep shouting down and attempting to punish white males merely for questioning your true agenda and endlessly demonizing the very idea of white males’ existence, don’t start crying if you eventually create a backlash that blows your face off. Self-hatred is not attractive in anyone. Neither is abject submission to endless insults and demonizing. Have you noticed that the more that white males acquiesce to your endlessly holier-than-thou shame tactics, the more they get mocked? This is not an accident. This is because no one respects the self-loathing. It’s a natural animal instinct that if someone bends over, you fuck them.
If you have the remotest understanding of history beyond TV movies, you’d know about the Moors and Hannibal and Genghis Khan and Islamic invasions…in short, you’d know that white male Europeans were hardly the only aggressors.
Of the alleged oppressed groups, though they may give lip service to “diversity,” in practice they’re usually griping that any given profession or area isn’t black, Mexican, or gay ENOUGH. They don’t seem to want it MORE diverse; they simply want more power for their own group.
Don’t get me wrong, kemosabe. I actually like diversity, and not merely in the typically understood sense that it’s handy for sheltered upper-middle class zombie whites because it gives them a wide selection of restaurants in neighborhoods that most members of the other cultures that are ostensibly being “celebrated” could never afford to live in the first place. I like learning about other religions, other languages, other music, other philosophies, and other traditions. But cramming them all together into smaller and smaller spaces isn’t going to create diversity. It’ll create conflict, endless hierarchical bitching about “rights” and who wins the Gold Medal for oppression, and, worst of all—if anyone survives the conflict—it’ll create uniformity. It’ll actually destroy diversity.
Wiping out freedom of association will also wipe out diversity. If you only want to associate with people who are over seven feet tall, why the fuck should anyone else care? If an employer wants to hire only Filipino lesbians, why the frickety-frack is that anyone else’s business besides the employer’s? Yes, I realize it’s against the law to discriminate. On average, it’s also against the law not to work from January 1 to late April just to pay the government the lunch money that those bullies demand from you under threat of imprisonment. It also used to be against the law for women and blacks to vote. There are literally millions of stupid laws. I’m pretty sure it’s still illegal to eat pussy in several states. The law is not always right. The law is probably far more often used to oppress than it is to free the oppressed. The phrase “No one is above the law” implies that humans are beneath the law. The law doesn’t give rights, it only takes them away. The law, for the most part, exists to make lawyers rich.
A supposedly “tolerant” world is being created where, ironically, everyone’s nose is up everyone else’s ass. And more and more, you aren’t allowed to choose whose ass your nose goes up and whose nose goes up your ass. These choices aren’t being made by you; they’re being made for you.
It’s not diversity. It’s conformity. And it’s not multiculturalism. It’s the forced imposition of a monoculture for what I suspect are largely financial reasons by insanely greedy control freaks.
To truly honor diversity, you have to honor the wish of some individuals and groups to remain separate. But that doesn’t seem to be what this endless globalist onslaught is about. It’s about centralizing power. Multiculturalism appears necessary only to erase borders in the service of creating a global labor pool. It appears necessary only to create a global economy for a tiny handful of international financiers to plunder at the expense of the many.
Forcibly herding everyone together—the black sheep, the white sheep, the yellow sheep, and the pink sheep—without borders, without boundaries, and without tolerance for ideological dissent—is going to create only one culture, not a multiplicity of them. Instead of acknowledging and honoring differences, it’s going to erase them. Eventually, it will also eliminate genetic diversity. And that’s not a rainbow. It’s a cloudy, drizzly day.
I understand that technology is making the world smaller and smaller. I also suspect it’s making the world more and more similar. It’s actually killing diversity rather than preserving or “celebrating” it. It will, in the end, erase cultural diversity and give us a stultifyingly bland cultural uniformity. It will mean people of many skin colors and languages and sexual lifestyles will all shop together at McDonald’s and Home Depot.
It also appears to be a zero-sum game in the sense that the more racially, religiously, and sexually diverse a society you attempt to construct, the more you demand ideological conformity and the less you tolerate anyone who dares to entertain a different way of thinking…like, for example, daring to think that this bold and vibrant “diversity” that one must never question without ostracism, career death, physical threats or assaults—and in some European countries, even jail time, as sick and Orwellian as that is—might not exactly be this shimmeringly benign entity that it’s being peddled as. It is, in fact, only a new form of colonialism. And if it gets its way, it will be the final form of colonialism.
Busting up the Tower of Babel was the best idea the fictional biblical God ever had.