The Multicultural Lie

Pages: 1 2

A number of books have criticized multiculturalism, but even if you’ve already read a bunch of them, Salim Mansur’s Delectable Lie: A Liberal Repudiation of Multiculturalism is still very much worth your attention.  Mansur, a syndicated columnist who teaches political science at the University of Western Ontario and whose previous books include Islam’s Predicament: Perspectives of a Dissident Muslim, approaches multiculturalism from the distinctive viewpoint of a naturalized Canadian citizen who is also a secular Muslim born on the Indian subcontinent.  At once very knowledgeable about the history of multiculturalism and richly steeped in the long tradition of Western ideas about individual liberty (of which he rightly recognizes multiculturalism as a profound philosophical violation), Mansur is also a highly effective polemicist.  Although awash in learned references to thinkers ranging from Plato and Aristotle to Karl Popper and Friedrich Hayek, Mansur’s book is eminently accessible, and should be of interest to any reader who is concerned about the threat that multiculturalism poses to the Western heritage of freedom.

It’s significant that Mansur is Canadian, because Canada, as he puts it, was “the first major democracy to experiment with designing a society on the basis of multiculturalism.”  He recounts the origins of this policy, which took shape largely as a response to growing pressure for Quebec’s independence (or, at the very least, for radical revision of its position in the Canadian confederation).  This pressure led to Prime Minister Lester Pearson’s 1963 establishment of a Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, which in turn eventuated in the formulation of an official multicultural policy in 1968 by the government of Pierre Trudeau.  Thus began Canada’s shift from a liberal democratic society that supported individual rights to a nation that placed the rights of the group above those of the individual – a process that reached its culmination under Brian Mulroney, during whose prime ministership, Mansur maintains, “Canada became the first western liberal democracy to adopt multiculturalism as the defining characteristic of the country.”

Multiculturalism, Mansur reminds us, was born in a time when the nature of immigration to North America had changed radically.  A century ago, relocating from the Old World to the New was an expensive proposition; people left the lands of their birth “with some certainty of never returning”; they put the past behind them and began a new life, grateful to receive opportunities not offered to them back home.  Yet all that changed, changed utterly – and a big reason for the change, as Mansur shrewdly points out, was “the arrival of wide-body aircraft,” which ended up “blurr[ing] the difference between immigrants and migrant workers.”  All too many of today’s so-called immigrants to the West, after all, are not truly immigrants in the traditional sense but are, rather, people “situated in two countries…only a few short hours removed from their native lands.”  They don’t break their ties to the old country, don’t undergo a dramatic psychological adjustment of the sort that was once a natural part of the immigrant experience.  Nor do the countries to which they “immigrate” expect of them what they used to expect of newcomers from abroad: today’s “immigrants” can become citizens of a Western country even if they utterly despise its core values and spend much of their time back in the places they “immigrated” from.

If Mansur is so exasperated at “immigrants” who fail to embrace their new Western homelands, it is because he himself has a profound – and often eloquently articulated – appreciation for the West.  Indeed this book is, among other things, a love letter to Western civilization, a civilization unique for its emancipation of the individual from the “collectivist hold of tribe, caste, church, nation, class and any ideology that made of him a mere cog in a wheel.”  Mansur – who (admirably) despises collectivism, and has no wish to be a cog in any wheel – reminds us that the idea of individualism is alien to every other civilization on the planet, and that it was “only through prolonged and sustained contact with the West” that the idea took root in non-Western societies.

If Delectable Lie is a love letter to the West, it is especially a love letter to Canada from a refugee who witnessed “terror and savage killings” back in his native country and will forever be thankful to the Great White North for providing him with a refuge and “the opportunity to begin a new life.”  His Canadian identity is so important to Mansur, indeed, that he eventually “came to feel uncomfortable with the notion of being a hyphenated Canadian.”  For if his Indian identity was something he had “inherited at birth without any effort on my part,” his Canadian identity was the product of “choice and conscious effort.”  Being Canadian meant “embrac[ing] the West and freely assimilat[ing] its distinctive culture”; it meant “recogniz[ing], as I did with a mixture of awe and gratitude, that the West represents the idea of a civilization nurtured by the values of the Enlightenment….its politics shaped by the democratic impulse of revolutions against hereditary rule, its philosophy influenced by the development of the scientific method of controlled experiments and tests, its culture open and embracing of new ideas.”

Moving sentiments; stirring words.  In Mansur’s view, it is a matter of deep moral urgency that a new immigrant to the West completely and sincerely embrace his new national identity.  Mansur meditates sensitively and at length on the importance of being a citizen, noting that “while other cultures have borrowed this idea, it is only in the West that citizenship is vested in a free individual with rights and responsibilities,” and lamenting that Western passports are now so freely handed out to “immigrants” who have little or no emotional attachment to their new countries and no real concept of the deeper meanings – and obligations – attached to the idea of citizenship.  In the Western world, as Mansur sees it, one’s identity as citizen is, or should be, paramount; and one of the deleterious aspects of multiculturalism is that it “works to weaken or dissolve citizenship identity by suggesting that the cultural identities which immigrants bring with them deserve to be recognized and treated with equal respect.”  This destructive tendency, he urges, must be countered as fervently as possible: “the principle of citizenship with its rights and responsibilities needs to be reaffirmed and protected.  People need to be reminded repeatedly what it means to be a citizen in a modern secular state.”

Pages: 1 2

  • "gunner"

    "multiculturalism" doomed the roman empire, they let the barbarians move into the empire and more followed behind until finally rome fell, and was sacked and pillaged by more barbarians. it took a few hundred years, but things and events move faster now.

  • winoceros

    I respect this man and his effort. But for the love of Pete will someone please tell me what a "secular Muslim" is?

    • StephenD

      wino, by all accounts (of other "Muslims") there is no such thing. Therefore, he is NOT a Muslim.

      • winoceros

        Thank you both…I understand what a cultural muslim is….a muslim who is completely or nearly completely nonadherant who shows up for ramadan meals with the family.

        For a woman, it's doing the above until she is married, when she then somehow must become much more devout (why is that?) or be killed out of shame.

        For a man, it's doing the above and then staying well away from the rest of the extended family before uncle Ahmed gets any idea about just how much BS he thinks Islam is anyway.

        But a secular Muslim? No such thing.

    • Steeloak

      A secular muslim is, by the tenents of the faith, an apostate. The punishment for that is death. I hope he has good security, because he is one fatwa away from being a target.

  • StephenD

    How long until we see Multiculturalism as the principle that defines our liberties? I'm recalling the Ft. Hood massacre and the response from the General who said something to the effect of "the 13 lives lost and the many wounded is tragic but even WORSE would be if our diversity was affected."

    When I heard this red flags flew in my head but what can we do about it? Has the American psyche already succumbed to the idea that the collective breakdown of our differences, under the guise of celebrating them, actually turns to remove all of them and relegate us "to the masses?"

    Who is served by such an abrupt change in the basic tenants of our Republic? Communists and Islamists; Tyrants all.

    • Steeloak

      Generals are bound and gagged by political correctness. The best ones find ways to do their job anyway, the worst ones embrace it as a career enhancing move. They are the "Perfumed Princes" that the late Col. David Hackworth often disparaged.

      • winoceros

        By the way, I want to acknowledge your low rating is brought on by daring to stand up to the Paulbots on a Paul-content post here at Frontpage.

        They would be the first to deny that Islam has any designs on the quashing of individual liberties. If we just don't "occupy" their lands, they won't hate us.

        I don't suppose it ever occurred to them why that "part of the world" is so "volatile" and has been for centuries. They lament the centuries of invasion and war in the region, and America's involvement, but never ask what caused the U.S. and others to bother to fight with the locals of that place in the first place. No recognition whatsoever of the Gates of Vienna and Martel and Sicily and Cyprus and India and Russia and China being the first victims of the jihad, long before America was born.


  • Ghostwriter

    I've often seen Indians where I live,and I'm talking about the ones from India,not the Native Americans. It's ironic. This guy from India emigrated to Canada and became a Canadian citizen. I've heard of Canadians who live in America and some of them become American citizens. That's life for you.