Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Why Transnational Multiculturalism is a Totalitarian Ideology

The Fjordman Report

The noted blogger Fjordman is filing this report via Gates of Vienna.
For a complete Fjordman blogography, see The Fjordman Files. There is also a multi-index listing here.

Jonas Gahr StøreNorwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre recently participated in a conference with editors and journalists from all over the world on how to “report diversity” in a non-offensive manner, with Arab News from Saudi Arabia as one of the moderators. The Cartoon Jihad the year before had prompted Indonesia and Norway to join forces and promote a Global Inter-Media Dialogue. In June 2007 this was held in Oslo.

Agnes Callamard from free speech NGO Article 19 voiced her concern that it could prove difficult to implement the ideal of equal representation and visibility of all groups in society if we do not control what is presented in the media. Diversity — ethnic, cultural and religious — has to permeate the media if we are to succeed in promoting the Multicultural society. Article 19 is supposedly a human rights organization with a specific focus on the defense of freedom of expression. Callamard, its Executive Director, has according to their website “evolved a distinguished career in human rights and humanitarian work,” formerly worked for fellow “human rights” NGO Amnesty International, has been published widely in the field of human rights and holds a Ph.D. in Political Science.

Doudou DièneKeynote speaker at the conference, Dr. Doudou Diène, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance, urged the media to actively participate in the creation of a Multicultural society, and expressed concerns that the democratic process could lead to immigration-restrictive parties gaining influence, and claimed that this has already happened in Switzerland and Denmark. Diène said that it is a dangerous development when increasing numbers of intellectuals in the West now believe that some cultures are better than others.

According to the journalist Jens Tomas Anfindsen, this is yet another sign that Europe is moving in the direction of totalitarianism. When the facts on the ground can no longer frankly and honestly be reported by the media, one is basically left with two options: Do something with the undesirable facts, or pretend reality is different from what it is. The first option is necessary in order to preserve freedom. The second option is the road to dictatorship and totalitarian rule. Anfindsen thinks “there are already clear signs that large portions of mainstream media in Norway have been working according to UN instructions” long before his conference. In Britain, leading figures of the BBC have proudly announced that they actively promote Multiculturalism. They don’t even need the UN to tell them that.

Norway and the Umma

Also in 2007, Minister of Justice Knut Storberget said that the Norwegian Constitution Day, May 17th, is for “everybody,” and that it’s appropriate to demonstrate this by displaying a multitude of flags and cultures. It is now permitted to celebrate it by waving the flag of the United Nations, and there are calls for translating the Norwegian national anthem into Urdu, just as there have been calls for translating the German national anthem to Turkish. Norwegians are supposed to celebrate their independence by singing their national anthem in Urdu, by wearing the national costume of Ghana and by waving the flag of the UN, an organization that is actively trying to curtail their freedoms and subvert their independence. This would be the equivalent of Americans celebrating the Fourth of July by waving the UN flag and by singing the Star-Spangled Banner in Arabic.
- - - - - - - - - -
UNCCPNikita Khrushchev, leader of the Soviet Union after Stalin, said to a Western audience that “We will bury you!” He was an honest enemy. But school curricula can sometimes destroy a nation more efficiently than tanks, just as an enemy that does not openly state his end goals can sometimes be more dangerous than an honest enemy because it is more difficult to mobilize against him. The next Communism will not come from an open enemy armed with nuclear intercontinental missiles, it will come from a multitude of groups and ideas that may appear less threatening, but put together their impact could be disastrous. Multiculturalism, transnational progressivism, unlimited mass migration, NGOs, the UN, international law and anti-Western school curricula combined could create a situation where Western nations are no longer allowed to define their own laws, keep their cultures or defend their own countries. This threat comes from people who do not say “We will bury you,” they hide behind kind words about diversity and tolerance.

EUCCPMarxists have been regrouping since their previous efforts failed, just as Muslims have been exploiting our inattention and complacency after the Cold War to infiltrate our society. I know Churchill viewed WW2 as a continuation of WW1. It is now less than a generation since the downfall of Communism in the East, yet another totalitarian ideology based on propaganda and media censorship is now raising its ugly head in the West. Is this just a coincidence, or is it possible that future generations will deem these two struggles to be somehow related? Did the downfall of the Soviet Union led to Communism being abandoned, or did it mutate into new forms? If so, will the downfall of the European Union, the EUSSR, lead to the collapse of Multiculturalism, or will the totalitarian ideology mutate once more?

I just watched massive and sometimes violent demonstrations against a summit of the Group of Eight (G8), involving the leaders of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, Britain and the United States. The demonstrators were presented as “anti-globalists,” but I’m not sure whether that label is accurate because these individuals are not against all forms of globalization. They actively desire the globalization of migration and legislation, and they are at best indifferent towards the globalization of sharia. The only “globalization” they are against is the globalization of capital. They are against capitalism, not globalization. That being said, they did at least prove that Europeans still know how to demonstrate. It’s sad, however, that Europeans appear to be more agitated over and willing to demonstrate against capitalism than against the Islamization of their continent.

If we assume that this emerging ideology of transnational Multiculturalism is a totalitarian ideology, we should remember that most totalitarian ideologies have a Villain Class, a group of evil oppressors that can be blamed for all the ills of society. If the ruling ideology falls somewhat short of producing the Perfect Society it has promised, this will be followed by even more passionate attacks on the Villain Class, be that the Jews, the capitalists, the bourgeoisie, etc. The Villain Class of Multiculturalism seems to be Western culture and persons who happen to be born with a white skin. Any problems will automatically be blamed on “white racism,” which will ensue more suppression of free speech for whites.

Ariel Sharon, CannibalOne of the hallmarks of a Villain Class is that its members can be verbally abused with impunity, and that they are increasingly physically harassed or even killed while the state seems in no rush to protect them from these assaults. The Villain Class is subject to public scorn and has de facto or even de jure less legal protection than other groups. They have their property and their culture stripped away from them, and any attempts to protest the policies or ideologies that are causing this will be met with even more repression.

Consider the case of Sweden. Swedish radical feminist Joanna Rytel wrote an article called “I Will Never Give Birth to a White Man,” for a major Swedish daily, Aftonbladet, stating things such as “no white men, please… I just puke on them.” After receiving a complaint because of this, Swedish state prosecutor Göran Lambertz explained why this didn’t qualify as racism: “The purpose behind the law against incitement of ethnic hatred was to ensure legal protection for minority groups of different compositions and followers of different religions. Cases where people express themselves in a critical or derogatory way about men of ethnic Swedish background were not intended to be included in this law.”

MalmöThe wave of robberies the city of Malmö has witnessed is part of a “war against Swedes.” This is the explanation openly given by robbers with immigrant background. At the same time, more natives are leaving Sweden than at any time since the 19th century. But in the 19th century, Swedes left Sweden because of poverty. They now leave because of persecution, because their country and their culture is systematically being taken away from them. Yet the Swedish state is doing next to nothing to protect the native population against this violence. On the contrary, it continues the policies that created these problems in the first place and bans opposition to this undertaking as “racism.”

Doesn’t this mean that the Swedish state and its cultural elites are indirectly responsible for driving their own people away from their homes? I think it does, and I think future generations will view this policy as an example of pure evil. I also think they will find it difficult to understand how the Villain Class could in this case be the majority population, not a minority. There are several reasons for this, but I find it hard to believe whether this would have been possible without the incessant ridicule and demonization of whites and their culture that has now become an established part of the mainstream ideology.


BillT said...

The authoritarian impulse is powerfully active in the left on both sides of the Atlantic. The growing sensitivity to everything foreign lacks any moral judgment, thus nullifying common sense.

Not a good situation, when one's opponents value death and will stop at nothing to spread their values.

Ypp said...

Russian tsar, Ivan Fourth the Terrible, created the centralized state and cancelled any democratic institutions in Russia. For that, he had a special army, which he mobilized of turkish peoples that lived to the East of Russia. Their name was "oprichniks". It seems to me that Western elites, in order to control the West and if possible all the world, need some population that they can rely on and mobilize to defend their interests. Since they cannot rely on Western gentiles, they import minorities and feed them and give them preferential treatment. They probably believe they can rely on them. Few seem to have argued against that plan, untill it became clear that those new "oprichniks" were not going to defend the interests of their beneficators.

mikej said...

Once again, Fjordman might as well be talking about America. There are already clear signs that large portions of mainstream media in the United States have been working according to UN instructions.

Our leftist press routinely suppresses information about race when criminals are non-white. In some cases, such as the story of two men whose argument about the height of the late singer James Brown led to a gunfight, the motive might be merely economic. After all, when blacks engage in this sort of behavior, it really isn't news.

In other cases, however, the press seems to suppress reports of heinous crimes committed by blacks against whites. The Wichita Massacre and the recent torture/murders of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom in Knoxville are prime examples. When white scumbag convicts murdered black scumbag convict James Byrd in Jasper, TX, however, our leftist press hovered like flies on a dung heap.

Anyone who hasn't long since given up on mainstream television is aware of the campaign to normalize homosexuality. TV homosexuals are always wise, kind, and giving, rather like TV blacks. Even in movies, Hollywood attempts to canonize leftists. The bias against heterosexual, conservative whites is plain to see.

In my humble opinion, those who have adopted a prejudice against their own people suffer from a severe mental disorder, perhaps genetic, and cannot be reformed by peaceful means.

Haiduk said...

Shattering, really. Regarding the analysis however I wouldn't see Western culture and white skin as aim. What we observe is just the result of the wide-spread believe in salvation of laws (human rights) which turns continuously and smoothly into an enslavement of laws (sharia).

The value system of Germanys preliminary constitution "Grundgesetz" actually bases directly on UN human rights with the outcome that anyone can demand nearly anything even if this contradicts 100% traditional sense of justice.

Btw. anyone knowing Doudou Diènes confession? I wouldn't be surprised if he is a muhammedan, since he stems from Senegal where 94% are muhammedans according to CIA factbook.

Whiskey said...

I think YPP is on to something very big here. Very powerful.

The elites cannot hold power because they work actively against their own people. Thus import a guard, a Janissary group, that they view cannot inherit and thus pose no threats (the Janissaries were barred by the Ottomans from passing on their positions to their children).

Unfortunately, as Alaric showed the Romans, a servant with arms may soon become the master.

And that would be our guide. The fall of the Roman empire as the elites became profoundly hostile to the people, and rather than lead the people in their defense (the ordinary, normal role of elites even communist ones) have chosen to have foreigners fight to maintain their position.

That anti-white attitude by the Swedish woman is btw typical for many Swedish, German, and other nordic women, feeling guilty about being white. It was expressed in a NYT article about wealthy white NYC women seeking IVF past age 40, and without bothering with men (because they sought partner after partner, Sex and the City style).

But I don't think Fjordman that Communism explains it. After all the Communist elite in the East is well known. THEY did not import masses of slave soldiers as has been done in the West. You would not see Honecker, or Brezhnev doing such a thing. Why in the West?

I don't think the answer is communism or multiculturalism. I think that's the frosting on the cake, but not the cake. I think the real reason is more Roman. The elites lack courage and faith in their own heritage, loathe and fear the people and will not lead them, and choose instead a slave army.

Whiskey said...

I'll add this: "no white men, please… I just puke on them."

Is a guaranteed disaster. What are the white men to do then, just become gay or commit suicide?

No. Very likely they will either emigrate and leave Swedish women to their own devices, or they will become angry as men without the ability to form families do (look at the jihadis, trapped by polygamy which excludes most of them from marriage and family).

Feminists as usual create their own enemies. A more deliberate attempt to create their own Freikorps could not be imagined. Will these men ever support women's rights? Certainly not. Since feminism made them losers.

WHEN not if they come to power (angry young white men deprived of female companionship, who can achieve only by fighting, gee where have I seen that before) you'll see Kinder Kuche and Kirche. God save us.

Profitsbeard said...

"Multiculturalism" is a machiavellian ruse used by the more cunning predators to sucker those more naive into confused submission for as long as it takes for the more serious and rapacious to overwhelm and destroy the duped.

Divide and conquer was its old name.

Whiskey said...

Yes Profits but WHY?

Honecker, Brezhnev, Jaruzelski all posed as defenders of the Nation. The People. None of THEM were Multicultural.

Can you imagine immigrant's rights rallies in Moscow under Brezhnev?

Something is radically different here.

Paul Weston said...

Whiskey 199 wonders why our elites conspire against us, as opposed to Soviet elites of the past.

The Communist revolution was physical, they held power immediately. Although misguided in their economic outlook, they attempted to do the best for their countries.

Our revolution is still in process. Although the Left control the institutions, they do not yet have total power. They think such power can only arise after social unrest and disorder, which can only be bought about by deliberately destroying society.

In order to achieve his dream of a social utopia, Marx stated the neccessity of of "The total annihialation of all opposition, the downfall of all existing societies, all economies and all societies."

"Then" he wrote, "I shall stride through the wreckage a creator!"

The Communists used the workers as political pawns, to be later discarded and controlled.

The Western Left, realised long ago that our workers were too affluent to use as political pawns.

Hence mass immigration and the diversive ideology of Multiculturalism which can only result in civil unrest, as was always the intention.

The various races and religions in the West are ethnic political pawns, imported to facilitate absolute Leftist power.

E. REX said...

There is a popular idea that white people are the first cause of all the world's major problems. This is a perverse arrogance, and it is widely held by a large section of the Western world.

"One of the hallmarks of a Villain Class is that its members can be verbally abused with impunity" That being the case, I will give it a go myself. I have seen photos of Joanna Rytel and she is more than an ugly personality. She said,“I Will Never Give Birth to a White Man”. So she's threatening not to have sex with us? Oh what a loss!

Another point perhaps not fully appreciated by Scandinavians. Scandinavia is unique. When I was a young boy growing up in country Australia I poured over my World Book encyclopedia at places way up north, like Sweden. How fascinating they seemed. The people and the way of life, so different from my own experience. Unique.

Years later I had the opportunity to travel. I fell in love with Sweden.

In a few weeks I will be going back again. Sweden now worries me. I am concerned about it's future. My wife's family in Sweden joke that they will be speaking Arabic in the future. But there is no passion to change this course.

It is a real tragedy that Europeans don't seem to appreciate their wonders. Their countries, their culture, their people. So unique and worth preserving.

David M said...

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 06/13/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention.

Jimmy the Dhimmi said...

Michael Rosenburg, columnist for the Detroit Free Press, recently said that the purpose of modern journalism was to “afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted; then, after the afflicted become comfortable, afflict them again. This should provide an endless supply of news stories.”

NotClauswitz said...

Good grief, multiculturalism brings nothing but anguish.

Ypp said...

"increasing numbers of intellectuals in the West now believe that some cultures are better than others"

I believe, defending our culture only on the basis that it is more advanced than other cultures is a dangerous strategy. Clearly, we can believe it, but it is not easy to prove, and it also justifies "humanitarian interventions". A better approach is to defend our culture because it is OUR culture. Just accept that we have this right.

As for the lady who does not want white men, she probably needs somebody with a strong will to domesticate her. Unfortunately, current western men are not showing that attitude. Hope it is temporary.

Captain USpace said...

Good piece, scary form of insanity this is...

absurd thought -
God of the Universe feels
barbaric cultures are best

absurd thought -
God of the Universe thinks
women are inferior

the Left should sacrifice them
to not offend religions

Darrin Hodges said...

"expressed concerns that the democratic process could lead to immigration-restrictive parties gaining influence"

I have no words.

Darrin Hodges said...

"Do something with the undesirable facts, or pretend reality is different from what it is. The first option is necessary in order to preserve freedom. The second option is the road to dictatorship and totalitarian rule."

Which leads to anarcho-tyranny.