Here is where Vox Day perpetuates further confusion about the problem of multiculturalism. The problem with multiculturalism is not that it will overwhelm traditional Western culture through some sort of historical process reminiscent of the sacking of Rome.
As social movements, Marxism, multiculturalism, feminism, gay rights, and the rest of the abstract fanaticisms are hollow and meaningless. They don’t support life, because they don’t come from anything grounded in real life. They are, however, full of clever slogans that can draw the credulous out of their real lives into fantasy worlds of magical thinking.
I’ll grant the reality of certain situations that cause people to turn to these fantasies. Many kinds of systematized work in industry and agriculture are difficult, dangerous, and tedious, and the bosses don’t really care if you are comfortable or if you take home a living wage. Cultures come and go, and history shows that no culture stays strong and undefiled for long. Women shouldn’t put up with stupid or abusive men. People who keep their sexual lives to themselves are entitled to equitable treatment in organizational and public life. However, none of these generic statements of fairness have anything to do with fanatical ideologies.
One characteristic of a fanatical ideology is that it is incompatible with reality. There is a wonderful passage in Santayana’s Dialogues in Limbo where he shows the preposterous results if philosophers were to speculate on how to feed a baby. Similarly, Marxism (like neoconservatism) is incompatible with any traditional culture, because it denies some basic needs for nourishment that have traditionally been provided unreflectively by folk culture. The only difference between the Marxists and the progressive humanists is that Enlightenment humanism doesn’t call for violent overthrow of the old order. However, it consistently denigrates all forms of traditionalism.
One way to undermine Western culture is to take advantage of the latent insecurity of classical liberalism and ask the naive to value all traditional cultures equally. This might be a workable management approach for a cynical Roman procurator, but it runs counter to the interests of the average person.
Now then, consider a conservative black evangelical Christian, a Central American Roman Catholic, an orthodox Jew, a traditional Hindu, an Arab Muslim, or a paganistic South Sea islander who takes their cultural heritage very seriously. Each is from a group that has been championed at one time by WASPish progressive multiculturalists. How do you think any of these people feels about class equality, women’s liberation, and gay pride? How about the overthrow of the old order and the imposition of a new, rational, scientific way of life based on global free trade and ecumenical, non-judgmental religious practices?
It’s pure nonsense. The utopian coalition of liberal interests in a multicultural melange of identities is a complete fiction. The only thing such people have in common is that their traditional practices are reviled as barbaric by the middle-class, white, Anglo-Saxon, culturally Protestant progressive humanist. This is because the liberal fanatic has already rejected his own heritage, his own authentic identity based on historical, geographical, and social realities. He then turns on anyone who is authentically grounded and attempts to propagandize them with progressive slogans.
Although the sparring partner of the progressive humanist is the neoconservative, they are not really in opposition; rather, they are more of a slapstick comedy team, like the Three Stooges or Beavis and Butthead. The neoconservative is, by definition, not authentically grounded; he has simply appropriated the facade of a conservative tradition for marketing purposes. The agenda of global imperialism, free trade, and intrusive federal regulation is completely antithetical to the nurturing of traditional American culture.
The real tragedy is seen in the eyes of the sincere conservative who feels the need to proselytize others with the neoconservative heresy. Even without doing that, he might accept the progressive propaganda at face value and beat against an effigy of multiculturalism. Even if the right blow to the middle yields a shower of candy on the ground, a fanatic goes on to mindlessly smash the papier-mache head.