The Problem With Multiculturalism

Most conservative observers are of the opinion that multiculturalism as it has been understood and practiced is nothing short of a social and economic disaster. And it must be said they are largely, if not entirely, correct. The multicultural project in its contemporary form suffers from two grievous flaws: the filter is too wide, allowing into the country unskilled people who are poorly equipped to participate in a modern, technologically oriented economy and who consequently become a financial burden to the nation, disproportionately swelling the welfare rolls; and, no less critical, many of these immigrant groups import the hatreds, prejudices and conflicts of their countries of origin, sequester themselves with official approval into closed or aggressive enclaves, and often cause violence and disruption in the public life of their new home. (Rape and “grooming” statistics compiled in the U.K. give a dataset that leaves in no doubt the ethnic make-up of the great majority of offenders.)

Of course, in those cases where immigrant societies, while preserving their cultural habits and religious beliefs in the private sphere, make every effort to integrate into the public domain, to respect the laws, assumptions and folkways of their host, and to contribute to the economic vitality of their adopted country—in such cases, multiculturalism may be said to have succeeded. We are, after all, a country of immigrants. Nearly everyone has an ancestor who was not born here. But in every Western country, whether in North America, Europe or parts of Australasia, there is one immigrant group whose more radical members refuse to adapt to the heritage culture, insist on the supremacy of their ideas and customs, shamelessly milk the dole, create havoc and mayhem, and pose a serious threat to the security and wellbeing of the larger population.

Not long ago I spent an afternoon at Kingsmere Park, the historic estate of legendary Canadian prime minister, William Lyon Mackenzie King, near the capital city, Ottawa. It was filled with thousands of weekend visitors enjoying the vast landscaped gardens, rustic dwellings and architectural ruins erected by King, who was prone to eccentric visions of grandeur. I was, however, more impressed by the people than by the site itself. They represented a microcosm of the Canadian census, the changing and multi-hued face of the country, brown, black, white and every shade in between, some speaking languages I could not identify, others in languages that I could, and English in a bewildering variety of accents and intonations. Many were garbed in a panoply of exotic costumes. But they were Canadians, experiencing a piece of Canadian history, reading the pamphlets and brochures provided by the service personnel, pointing out objects of interest to their children, and participating in the festive atmosphere of the place.

I spent most of the afternoon strolling about Kingsmere fascinated by the prism of citizenship before me. But I did not see a single hijab, or burka, or abaya, or chador, or niqab, or shalwar. I did not hear a syllable of Arabic. So far as I could tell, or at any rate on that particular day, a certain ethnic cohort seemed to be entirely absent.

A month or so later I attended the November 11 Remembrance Day ceremony in Ottawa, a profoundly moving event that brought me to tears, as it did many others among a multitude so large it could not be reliably counted. The laying of wreaths, the war veterans parading by, some in wheelchairs, the busby-topped buglers, the multi-denominational speeches, the jets flying at low altitude, the 21-gun salute—all brought to mind the debt of gratitude we owed to our soldiers and relit the candle of patriotism, too often guttering or extinct, for one of the more decent and tolerant countries on the planet. Recalling my earlier experiment at Kingsmere, I began canvassing as much of the crowd as was feasible under the circumstances to determine its composition; and, as at the national site, it seemed no less chequered and comprehensive. I did note one woman in a hijab staring impassively at the proceedings, but apart from this anomaly, even after several hours, I was unable to detect a single one of her congeners. Again, a certain ethnic cohort appeared to be massively un-or under-represented.

The parallel memorial in Toronto, however, featured at least two Muslim women, who made their presence felt not by honoring Canada’s war dead and her living heroes but by disrupting the ceremony, screaming obscenities at the crowd. A scuffle then broke out among some of the participants although no arrests were made—probably because this would have been offensive to a certain ethnic group. Food for thought, although not especially appetizing fare.

The fact that Luton in the U.K. saw much greater abuse, the burning of poppies and the jeering at and taunting of British soldiers returning from Afghanistan, is no consolation. The point is, to put it bluntly, that such people should not have been welcomed into a democratic country with a history of sacrifice and traditions of loyalty that require respect. They are not genuine citizens but an obstreperous and unproductive fifth column that works against the viability of the country that has taken them in. And many seem to have all the time in the world to attend protests and demonstrations when other people are busy at their jobs—as I recently observed at a vehement pro-Hamas rally before the Israeli embassy—so that it seems clear they are the welfare beneficiaries of the very society they seek to subvert.

Here, once again, we are presented with the problem of multiculturalism as it is currently implemented: we have opened the gates to seditionists on the one hand and parasites on the other, two categories that frequently coalesce. We need not be as strictly exclusionary as, for example, Switzerland, where citizenship is difficult to obtain. (My aunt, who worked for the International Labor Organization in Geneva and has resided there for most of her life, waited for years before citizenship was finally granted.) But if we are to be candid and scorn the travesty of political correctness, we should admit that citizenship is a precious gift and that it needs to be earned and deserved.

This does not militate against any race, religion or ethnicity, and we know that there are peaceful, law-abiding, responsible and productive members of any and every immigrant group, without exception. Therefore, the argument I am making for a rational immigration policy is neither “racist” nor “xenophobic,” the favorite slanders of the liberal-left political class that has a vested interest in promoting indiscriminate multiculturalism. On the contrary, as philosopher Roger Scruton, in a speech reported by The Brussels Journal, has eloquently maintained, “the problem posed by the large-scale immigration of people who do not enter into our own…way of life” affirms the right “of indigenous communities to refuse admission to people who cannot or will not assimilate.” The host society’s failure to sift wisely among aspirants to citizenship leads inevitably to “inter-communal strife” and to the political and cultural trauma of “states that have been irreversibly changed through immigration”—changed by those who refuse allegiance “to a shared home and the people who have built it.”

The principle holds. Immigration policy in general should be louvered toward the proper criteria of admissibility: capacity to contribute to the life and prosperity of the nation, and willingness to integrate. Anything less produces costs in political dissidence, cultural upheaval and fiscal extortion we are increasingly unable to defray.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • Mary Sue

    I've seen muslim-garbed women in British Columbia. Something similar to a chador once or twice, at least. Some hijab.

    • AdinaK

      Multiculturalism is a fluffy sounding name engineered to evoke dreamy feelings, as in, one for all and all for one – a nirvana of melting pots. However, nothing could be farther from the truth. For once multiculti takes root, the west is simply incapable of holding onto its own roots, and that, dear readers, has always been the left's plan.

      For if a nation stands for everything, in effect, it stands for nothing. And the only winners are those who seek hegemony, either from the radical left – due to the chaos and the fallout of multiculti psychosis and swoop in as 'caretakers' – or the Islamists, who NEVER blend in, they just take over! The RED/GREEN alliance works for the same results, but will battle it out when the time is ripe.

      In a very real sense, a global war is upon us, mainly in part due to multiculti sickness –

      And America could lose this war, due to its fealty to the disease, instead of safeguarding American ethos/exceptionalism <a href="http://-” target=”_blank”>-

      And due to this willful delusion, Islamists are poised to take over MANY of America's power centers –

      Adina Kutnicki, Israel – <a href="” target=”_blank”>

      • Cassandra

        Adina, you are totally right. When I went back to my mother's country, Belgium, in 2002 I saw Belgium so changed. Brussels had soo mny veiled young women I could not belive it. But the probelm ws not so much the veils but the fact that most of the Muslims had taken over entire townships(commune) in Brussels and were creating all sorts of problems. "We want the public pools to have women and men days. We want to be able to have the day of the sheep. For that they took over the slaughter house in Anderlecht where Belgian butcher do not go anymore. They have now won the majority in two townships in Brussels. Their party "Islam" has now tow Islamic mayors who want to impose sharia in these two neighborhoods. If I had more time I could give you a lot more examples of the islamisation of Belgium. It makes me sick. The Belgian population is apathetic for the most. Because of the laws on civil liberties and freedom of religion they feel that the fight is not worthed. Belgium is lost but not America yet so I will fight here.

        • al hanamay

          Angela Merkel summarized it "Multi culturalism has utterly failed"..and it's because the ideal of the minorities adopting the majority culture may be impossible..They protest…and to that extent the southern bigots were not the misfits we were told they were.They feared for the future of the country……………………..The networks do their thing by pointing to the ones ..who do…acculturate..but the truth remains ……………."How many people does it take to start a riot,to poison a water supply,to hijack an airplane?…The so called bigots are showing cognizance that ,while Democracy is an admirable ideal,it's also..A VERY FRAGILE FORM OF GOVT–VERY VULNERABLE TO FOREIGN INFILTRATION

      • Mary Sue

        The idiot responsible for "Multiculturalism" in Canada was one Pierre Elliot Trudeau, a communist in Liberal's clothing. He was the one that said "The Government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation" and yet his legacy is that the ascendance of a culture that most definitely DOES think the Government has business in the bedrooms of the nation may take over.

        • Stern

          and unfortunately, there is still a huge segment of the population that still worships his memory and looks prepared to anoint his son as the leader of the Liberals, the party PET once headed. Lord help us.

          • Mary Sue

            and little Justin is every bit the commie his dear old dad is, and his brother Alexander is even worse. This all comes from hanging out with Castro as children with his dad like they were BFFs.

      • Stern

        David Horowitz, please ask AdinaK to write a regular column.

        • Mary Sue


  • objectivefactsmatter

    "But in every Western country, whether in North America, Europe or parts of Australasia, there is one immigrant group whose more radical members refuse to adapt to the heritage culture, insist on the supremacy of their ideas and customs, shamelessly milk the dole, create havoc and mayhem, and pose a serious threat to the security and wellbeing of the larger population."

    Which one would that be?

    • jacob


  • @Kenrick66

    The only Muslims who should be allowed into any Western nation are delusional "moderate" Muslims who sincerely believe Islam can be recast into a non-belligerent creed. This would entail scrubbing the creed of its intrinsic violent and totalitarian elements, which would mean killing Islam. It would mean whittling the Koran and Hadith and other Islamic texts down to a few pages of outright gibberish, akin to the precepts of any random and obscure California-style religious cult. It would mean reducing Islam to a dogma of fruits and nuts. Once these "moderate" Muslims realized that, they would fade into the background with embarrassed looks and a carton of eggs on their faces.

    • jacob

      Every time I read or hear the words "MODERATE MUSLIMS" , it comes to my mind the Muslims
      dancing and giving out candy as show of joy at the streets of Queens, N.York on 9/11, while
      people were jumping to their deaths from the WTC windows….

      Is anyone going to tell me ALL of them were terrorists er…"insurgents" (OBAMA dixit) or mostly "MODERATES "……???????????

      However, coming to this subject, is there anybody willing to sort them out ?????

      I don't believe there is any….!!!!!!

      • Bill

        I've never heard that Muslims celebrated and handed out candy in Queens, NY. I remember there being footage from Palestine of maybe a dozen idiots.

        Do you have any proof for this claim. Let's try to avoid slurping propaganda Jacob. I can't imagine this is true since the follow up story would have been about the beating deaths of many Muslims in Queens…

  • @Kenrick66

    But the Muslims who are rushing into Western nations like mobs breaking down the doors of Wal-Marts on Black Fridays come here as fifth columnists, as this column points out. They literally want their cake and to eat it, too. That is, they want to preserve their primitive culture under the protection of Western laws, but also to eat the Western culture, too, and to burp in our faces every time a government makes a concession to accommodate their creed and ideology. Multiculturalism is fine with such Muslims, as long as their culture ultimately triumphs.

  • Asher

    The culture of Islam breeds unhappy, violent people, whos goals are destruction. Its bred in them from childhood. They have never known peace, and they don't want others to have peace either…its an ideology of total insanity!

  • jacob

    So, the mighty UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, to whom the world OWES in at least 90% the
    demise of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, is unable to deal with this plague ????
    Have all of us in this country been emasculated by the Muslims, leftists, liberals and pseudo-
    intellectuals in our midst ????
    Are we going to wait for the other shoe to fall in order to take action ???
    I guess the people we sent to Congress should make it their TOP priority to deal with this
    situation , whether this "administration" likes it or not or else,declare their "principles" won't
    allow them to and go home…..
    There must be somewhere people with COJONES not hampered by asinine Political Correctness,
    which will end up burying us all, to take their places….
    Has the building of the super-mosque of Murfreesboro, Tennessee been stopped or it continues
    under the appeal to a court of law ???

  • jacob

    And as to the method used by Muslims to raise hell with signs and hiding their identities by wrapping
    head and faces the way shown in the picture I, who would use Political Correctness for toilet paper,
    would have sharpshooters in the law enforcement detail sent to watch over the event, to shoot at their heads…

    I guarantee it would be the end to one hell of a lot of crap…
    But, as the proverb states, for some reason the LORD gave no horns to jackasses.

  • clarespark

    Multiculturalism has been expanding since the early 20th century. It was originally a Progressive initiative, then was opportunistically taken over by Communists, who betrayed their own theoretical emphasis on class struggle to hop on board. I have many blogs on these matters: see…. "Index to black power blogs." I saw the dreadful consequences of this policy when I was program director of a Pacifica radio station, so I particularly recommend the blogs with Pacifica in the title. My opposition to this policy got me purged.

  • Ghostwriter

    We should be more careful who we let come to America. I don't want this country to become what Europe's turning into.

    • bluffcreek1967

      ALL immigration should stop! We have too many Americans out of work, and far too many immigrants already here who haven't even assimilated (and probably never will). In the past, when we were a saner nation, we allowed in immigrants for short periods of time and then stopped it so as to allow those same immigrants to assimilate. But not now! It's full speed ahead and we are only now starting to realize what a terrible mistake that was!

  • Lost_Lenore

    We in the US have another group of immigrants to deal with. They come in large numbers. Many of them do very well here. And many of them do not. Regardless, almost all of them consider their language and culture and ways to be better than ours. They think they need to do us the favor of bringing the hegemony of their language and culture to us and that this will greatly improve us. Of course, anyone can observe what goes on in the coutries of origin and at the very least, seriously question this notion. But anyone who does this publically can be sure to be called a racist and a bigot.

  • Thomas Wells

    What a quaint concept-thinking that people who come to your country want to become citizens.

    • bluffcreek1967

      No, they want a first-world paycheck while still retaining their third-world culture and identity.

  • Ethan

    It is a law of physics – to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Multiculturalism came up in Canada in the 1970s, just as I was entering adulthood. By the time I was 30, I'd earned a black belt and was licensed to own weaponry, which I have collected and mastered ever since. If it does come down to having to shoot my way through a no-go zone to get home, I will. So will my four siblings, my kids, my nieces and nephews and my wife. Knowing how to defend yourself is RULE NO. 1. Always be ready for the worst-case scenario. In my life, I've learned that the worst-case scenario is all too often the one we end up with.

    • Georgina

      Growing up in England in the 1970s, I also went armed in London at night. However, I have been reliably informed that women in London today are unable to arm themselves with so much as a pepper spray, let alone a scout knife – as they risk being arrested.

      Between arrest and rape, I would always choose arrest, but we are again experiencing the 'victim-is-guilty' mentality being taught in schools.

      • Mary Sue

        Yeah, and in Canada it's illegal to carry mace, and you can only carry pepper spray against dogs and bears.

        They don't arrest you for having a knife, yet…

  • bluffcreek1967

    White, civilized Western nations are committing racial and cultural suicide right before our very eyes by actively inviting a mass of third-world immigrants (mostly Muslims) into their countries. The majority of them will not assimilate, and they ungrateful and resentful of the White man’s generosity toward them. Whites have forgotten that they too have an identity and unique culture. Sadly, as a result of multiculturalism and political-correctness, Whites are guilt-ridden and timid about doing things for their own racial self interests. We have been racially emasculated.

    Listen: Multiculturalism is wrong for the reasons provided in the article. However, it’s more so because it undermines Whites and their culture. It leads to White displacement or dispossession in their own countries! No one demands this of other races or cultures, but somehow Whites are expected to give up their unique identity and do so with a smile on their face!

    • Lost_Lenore

      What I was trying to say in my previous post is that in the US the problem is not only Muslims . . . .

      • bluffcreek1967

        Yes, I agree and your post was helpful and insightful.

    • Sammy k

      What is the unique identity of white people. I have a
      white mother and a black father. What is my fate and others like

  • WilliamJamesWard

    Good article but twenty years late. There is no living with the Muslims and no assimilation
    for them as their Islamist teachings elivate them to a status that does not recognise any
    other belief system and demands submission of all others. So it is with these people and
    once in they grow and grow until they act and destroy, just how crazy are Americans,
    Canadians and all other Western Nations to allow their own eventual but certain doom
    by tolerating this perverse situation to exist. With no solution coming from a traitorous
    government class understand this, war within is inevitable in the future and not so very
    far into the future……………………………William

    • bluffcreek1967

      I agree. It appears more each day that a violent showdown will occur between Islam and the West. Muslims are unwilling to permanently tone down their religious and fanatical totalitarianism and Western nations will be forced (albeit reluctantly) to fight back. Even if Western governments refuse to fight Islamic aggression, a great number of Whites individually will – and we will see the spread of various guerilla militias and movements to defend our people.

      • WilliamJamesWard

        It is bizzare to consider that all of this has been considered throughout the last
        fourteen hundred years. The Crusaders knew what they were doing and had
        just cause to end the continuous attacks of Islam and depredations of their
        lands. Falsehood in history paints the Crusaders as vile mauraders which was
        not true, more like peoples that had had enough of the blood thirsty desert

  • jmz

    multiculturalism in america/ mass immigration goes against the founders ideal of america. its not that they hated other cultures but they understood the massive problems with letting people with different views on how to run things into America. the more 'diverse' a country is the less unified it can ever be

  • bluffcreek1967

    The entire 'diversity' concept as understood and promoted by Leftists is wrong and utterly destructive to civilized, White Western nations. It's not good for any society when everyone speaks a different language. A multiplicity of languages spoken, in contrast to one official national language, only helps to further separate people from each another. It's not good when a nation is balkanized, and separated by multiple races and cultures. A nation that is racially homogeneous has a greater chance of unity and harmony than one that's divided by competing ethnicities. This is, of course, 'heresy' to modern, left-leaning Whites. But during a much saner and wiser period of American history, this was common sense. We knew it was true intuitively. In fact, at the time these were rather simple and obvious truths. Yet today, such concepts are considered 'radical' and 'racist' because Leftist idealogy has so deeply indoctrinated our thinking that we can longer sense reality.

    • Lost_Lenore

      All too true!!

    • Sammy K

      What is the unique identity of white people. I have a white mother and black dad. How do you deal with interracial dating and marriage. I love multiculturalism.

  • Len_Powder

    "…so that it seems clear they are the welfare beneficiaries of the very society they seek to subvert."

    "…we have opened the gates to seditionists on the one hand and parasites on the other…"

    "Anything less produces costs in political dissidence, cultural upheaval and fiscal extortion we are increasingly unable to defray."

    Who is it that's inviting these 'seditionists' into the country? Politicians are doing so, despite the strong objections of their constituents. They have something to gain even though their countries are being shattered. Get rid of the politicians who support multiculturalism and you solve the problem of multiculturalism. But that's not likely to happen anytime soon, so strap on your seat belt.

  • @Kenrick66

    Most politicians are members of the new oligarchy, living high on the hog with their government salaries and fringe benefits (including their own health care, exempted from Obamacare) at taxpayer expense, residing in secure, gated communities or the like, completely insulated from having to live as they command their constituents to live (e.g., nowhere near Muslim, black or Latino no-go areas), legally and practically indemnified from the consequences of their actions and legislation, and accountable to no one, not even to their supporters. They make a career of "doing the right thing," utterly clueless and indifferent to the consequences of doing it. Their attitude: "Deal with it. I don’t have to. Tough."

  • Ghostwriter

    I disagree with the racial tone of comments like bluffcreek1967. Not every non-white is a threat to whites. Let's stick to the facts and bring racial invective to an already tense situation.

    • bluffcreek1967

      I never suggested that “every non-white is a threat to whites.” In the same way, not every Muslim is a threat to White, Western nations. But when third-world immigrants and Muslims increase in numbers within Western nations, it NEVER results in anything good for the White populations and their culture in those nations. Time and space don’t permit to list them all.

      We must stop bring alarmed or ‘concerned’ when Whites speak openly about race issues or for expressing their desire to defend and promote their own racial interests. No other race or ethnicity on the planet is shy about expressing pride and admiration for their race or culture – and neither should Whites.

  • kafirman

    I was in agreement with Solway up until he wrote, "This does not militate against any race, religion or ethnicity, and we know that there are peaceful, law-abiding, responsible and productive members of any and every immigrant group, without exception."

    Below are some references that the "holy" koran makes toward non-Muslim women sex slaves:
    Quran, 4:3: If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.

    Quran, 4:24: Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess: Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you.

    4:25 (Picktall) And whoso is not able to afford to marry free, believing women, let them marry from the believing maids whom your right hands possess. Allah knoweth best (concerning) your faith. Ye (proceed) one from another; so wed them by permission of their folk, and give unto them their portions in kindness, they being honest, not debauched nor of loose conduct. And if when they are honorably married they commit lewdness they shall incur the half of the punishment (prescribed) for free women (in that case). This is for him among you who feareth to commit sin. But to have patience would be better for you. Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

    4:36 (Picktall) And serve Allah. Ascribe no thing as partner unto Him. (Show) kindness unto parents, and unto near kindred, and orphans, and the needy, and into the neighbor who is of kin (unto you) and the neighbor who is not of kin and the fellow traveller and the wayfarer and (the slaves) whom your right hands possess. Lo! Allah loveth not such as are proud and boastful,

    16:71 (Picktall) And Allah hath favored some of you above others in provision. Now those who are more favored will by no means hand over their provision to those (slaves) whom their right hands possess, so that they may be equal with them in respect thereof. Is it then the grace of Allah that they deny?

    23:6 (Picktall) Save from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy,

    30:28 (Picktall) He coineth for you a similitude of yourselves. Have ye, from among those whom your right hands possess, partners in the wealth We have bestowed upon you, equal with you in respect thereof, so that ye fear them as ye fear each other (that ye ascribe unto Us partners out of that which We created)? Thus We display the revelations for people who have sense.

    Quran, 33:50: O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee.

    33:52 (Picktall) It is not allowed thee to take (other) women henceforth nor that thou shouldst change them for other wives even though their beauty pleased thee, save those whom thy right hand possesseth. And Allah is Watcher over all things.

    70:30 (Picktall) Save with their wives and those whom their right hands possess, for thus they are not blameworthy;

    If the US has a zero-tolerance policy toward trafficking in human persons, then it should deny 501(c)3 status to Islamic organizations. The Koran fights against natural law and so employs this euphemism, "right hand possessions." Were the Koran to call said sex slaves "sex slaves," there would not be many Muslims and the multiculturalists could not stomach the celebration of Islam.

  • archemdis

    I guess so should the First Nations People have been more careful of whites immigrating to their country. It would seem that the only people that should be allowed to immigrate wherever and whenever they chose are white Judeo Christians yes? Every race and creed out to get the goodie two shoes, hard working productive "Real Canadians" Get serious! Get your head out of the ground and see things the way they really are. Be racist if you must, but at least own it!

  • Sammy K

    There are roughly 35 million black Americans living in the U.S. 40% of them are Muslim. They speak English, enjoy American holidays and inter marry. This is not your grandfather's USA and it will never be that way EVER!!!!

  • Shocked!

    Wow, it’s no wonder you have no comments on this racist article. First of all, claiming to be neither “racist” nor “xenophobic, while looking for burqas, chadors, niqabs, etc. IS racist and xenophobic. Also, stereotyping every immigrant as a person on dole, while the white Canadians work hard is also racist!

    And you would do well to remember that the British settlers did NOT assimilate to the Native Indian culture. They did much worse, which was come in, massacre the entire population of the Natives, and institute their own foreign culture, while keeping absolutely nothing of the Native culture intact. The only people who should be ashamed in this world is the white man, right from the British to the Americans who have colonized, robbed other lands, start wars to obtain oil and resources, and then blame the brown/black man for their woes. Look within your own culture my Canadian friend – we all share this Earth equally, and simply saying this land is yours does not make it so, especially when it was snatched from someone else. At those Afghanis and other chador people never robbed land at the rate your British ancestors did.

    • adplatt126

      And the natives did what? Sat around and begged to be slaughtered? Hardly. The natives had the same agenda in mind, namely the annihilation of the enemy. Often they were the aggressors in fact. So they lost and whites won? That’s nothing for whites to be ashamed about (least of all whites multiple generations removed who had no hand in the events). Because whites were more organized, produced better weaponry, used more clever tactics, this is something to be ashamed of? Quite the contrary really. That’s nature. The rest of your screed is sheer Marxist balderdash. Your whole argument devolves to mush when analyzed sensibly. Are you saying no one has the democratic right to establish a government and decide immigration policy for themselves or their people because at some point in history their land may have been stolen? Or does this rule just apply to white people? After all, this truth applies to virtually all nations. No one should be allowed to decide national policy because we’re all descended from thieves and murderers? Virtually all nations were established by conquest (if you go back in time far enough). Your notion and its implications are absurd and just stupid through and through. Africans and Middle Easterners should be kept out of the country because they’re just problems, pure and simple. No other explanation need be given. Their contributions are minimal and their costs are tremendous. No rational, successful and prosperous society would let them in. No matter what inane, false egalitarian twist you put on it, this is reality. Take your anti-white racism and the view that whites have no right to decide and determine their own destiny elsewhere, like to a Black Panther site or something. Westerners are talking about something serious. People like you have Egypts and Malis to create (utopias). Get busy.

    • New World Ebola

      The English never genocided anyone. If that was their plan, there would be no Indians alive today…. but look there’s more than 1.5 billion and they’re doing even better than Britain… and still getting free money from Britain.

      You are using events in history as justification for white genocide… it’s YOU who is the real racist. “Anti racist” = Anti White.

  • New World Ebola

    We’re always told by the mainstream media about the positives of multiculturalism, without ever being told about the negatives. This type of proposal would never be accepted in any business venture. Why haven’t the native Europeans ever been given a referendum on immigration? Immigration has been forced by the political class, and by the UN definition amounts to ethnic cleansing and genocide of Europeans through sheer demographic displacement and the ensuing miscegenation, rape, murder, subversion and white flight.