In thinking about diversity and immigration, the idea of establishing of immigration quotas based on a desire for diversity is insane.
Look at what has happened with the migration from numerous Muslim nations and their impact on European nations. Immigrants from Muslim nations do everything possible to have Sharia law implemented to supplant the legal framework that has worked (more or less well) for centuries.
Nation states, modern nation states, are based on a shared culture. This does not mean culture in the sense of opera, ballet or poetry and literature.
A national culture exists when the people within each of those cultures can understand decisions that political leaders make because those decisions are based on understandings that are inherent to that culture and their shared history, traditions, and common beliefs.
The British have a shared culture. British culture is not the same culture as the French, who have their own shared culture. The Spanish, the Germans, the Italians, the Greeks, Scandinavians or Russians each have their own shared culture. But each of these individual cultures share many similarities. So many, in fact, that they can be said to share a common, overall culture. In fact, all those independent European nation-states were once referred to, collectively, as Christendom, and they shared a common set of values, a common cultural outlook.
That same common culture shared by European nations was carried with them into the New World. Canada, the United States, Mexico and all the Central American and South American nations are also part of that common cultural heritage, as are Australia and New Zealand.
Islam is not solely a religion, but it is also a culture. It is an over-riding culture that supersedes any culture that may have developed in an individual nation-state. Simply observing the dress codes imposed on women throughout the Muslim world should show that in stark clarity.
Claiming that Iran, Iraq, Syria, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Libya, for example, are independent nation-states may be accurate in terms of their representation in the United Nations, but they are not culturally different from one another. Sharia law dominates all those nations. Women are treated as second class citizens in all those nations, as well as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and every other of the 57 members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). The OIC states that it is “the collective voice of the Muslim world” and works to “safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world.” The OIC sees itself, and all Muslim nations, as separate from the rest of the world. They see two worlds. A Muslim world, and a world of unbelievers.
With 57 member states, concentrated in the Middle East, Northern Africa and Southeast Asia, the OIC is the largest international organization in the world outside the United Nations. The OIC represents not only the religious views of the citizens of these nations but their cultural identity.
Muslim cultural identity is monolithic and isolationist. Muslims immigrating to Europe don’t want to become European, they want Europe to become Muslim. When the people of a nation-state do not share a common cultural bond, there is chaos and something approaching revolution. These immigrants seem to be not so much as people seeking freedom or a better place for themselves and their families as much as they seem to be the leading edge of an invading army.
- Key: Green: OIC Member States
- Red: OIC Observer States
- Blue: OIC Membership Attempts
- Orange: Suspended Members (Syria)
And this outcome is not limited to the situation of Muslims who have immigrated to Europe. Look at what’s happening within the United States. Whenever a minority refuses to join the dominant culture’s shared belief system, there are inevitably consequences, many of which are violent and most of which involve flouting the law. Why are the laws flouted and ignored? Because the immigrant or minority culture refuses to accept a law, or even a custom, that would differ from that of their native culture.
Islam has a common culture regardless of the nation-state from which migrants originate. Saying that Saudi Arabia, Iran or Iraq are different nations may very well be true, but they share a common culture. Their borders were established by the European powers who thought of them as nations, not just as parts of a shared culture. That view was a given in the European mind when they drew the lines on a scrap of paper dividing the Middle East into separate nations. It was a given in the minds of Europeans that each group had a shared culture, but that it was unique to each sub-group.
Islamic nations have a shared culture so that people in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Somalia and the rest can all accept the concept of honor killings. They all accept the idea that a woman who is raped is the guilty party, not the rapist. That slavery is acceptable. That women should always be covered. These are all shared values. There’s not much in the way of diversity within their culture. Disagreement with these values can, depending on the religious leader on hand at the moment, be classed as apostasy, and apostasy in their culture carries a death sentence.
Islamic immigrants know that our desire for harmony in our culture requires compromise. Yet they use that desire against us. They demand that their cultural values dominate. And because we are inundated with propaganda telling us that “diversity” is good, we are expected to acquiesce to their demands. They make those demands telling us, and gullible courts, that these demands are required by their religious beliefs. So we give in to those demands, because in our culture, religious pluralism has always been accepted, albeit historically with some reluctance.
In a microcosm, their behavior is like having a visitor to the home of someone who smokes demand that the home owner not only put out their cigarette, but that they should throw all their cigarettes out, and apologize for the unforgivable sin of smoking in their presence. They never seem to consider leaving. Yet that would be the most adult way to approach such an impasse. But we are told that giving in to such an outrageous demand fosters the opportunity to get to know the visitor, and that getting to know them and their views is beneficial because it promotes diversity.
And who, you might ask, are the idiots trying to sell this “diversity” mantra and force us to accept it? Why the most culturally isolated and diversity challenged group in the world – academics. Can anyone picture a college faculty lounge with equal numbers of liberals and conservatives? Disagreement with what the liberal/Progressive majority believes can cost a person promotions, grants, their degree or even their jobs. The only thing that’s missing from this hotbed of diversity promotion is that there are no formal fatwas being issued by the local equivalent to an imam.
As a side note, the most populous Muslim nation in the OIC is Indonesia. That’s the place where our President was raised during his formative years. Can there be any doubt where he developed his sense that cultural diversity was important and how it should be imposed upon all the citizens of the United States?
How’s that for irony?