Thursday, 27 January 2011


'Multiculturalism' is a much abused word. Broadly, when used as a pejorative by those of the Daily Mail tendency, usually in phrases such as "the failed experiment in multiculturalism" which means "I don't like wogs". When used enthusiastically by the loony left in phrases such as "Celebrating multiculturalism", it means "White people are evil". The dictionary definition is "the policy of maintaining a diversity of ethnic cultures within a community". In practice, it's often for or against "the muslims".

Maybe it could be a libertarian idea? I like the fact that Britain is home to people whose family origins are all over our formerly vast empire. People liked the mother country sufficiently to settle here, and despite New Labour's best efforts, this country remains a better place to live than Somalia, Afghanistan or France. This is good. Now as a libertarian, I couldn't give a tinker's cuss about what people say, do, or think, so long as they leave me and my friends alone, and refrain from sponging off my taxes, so I enthusiastically endorse the dictionary definition of multiculturalism. The point of libertarianism is that individuals should be free to live as they choose, with the above caveats. And as most people display "in-group preference", there is a tendency for ethnic and cultural groups to concentrate into discreete areas of towns. Jews in Golders Green, Bangladeshis in Whitechapel and dick-heads in Hoxton, using London as an example. So long as this is not enforced either legally or informally in any serious way, this is just natural. A side effect of such assortive residency leads naturally to the easier maintenance of cultural norms such as ringlets, beards or stupid, identical haircuts with a spiky hairspray mohecan and a job in
"media"a mobile phone shop - and bingo!: Different areas have recognisably different people in them. We're "Multicultural".

The "hoxton fin"

Consider this, when you start using the word "multicultural": Are you actually disapproving of the actions and culture of people you don't know, facing different challenges and problems to you, about whom you know little? Are you hoping that "multiculturalism" might act as a wedge, to change the country you live in to one you might approve of (but probably won't)? Or does "multiculturalism" mean "live, and let live"? If so, Amen! Right on, brother, we're onto something.


Anonymous said...

All I will say is anyone who supports "multiculturalism" should try living in a minority dominated area.

If they havent done so there opinion is worthless.

(Note I have not actually expressed a good or bad judgement).

Jackart said...

That's the point, if you don't like an area, move! You are, after all, free.

And Yes. I have. Lambeth.

Anonymous said...

Good luck convincing people with that argument.

cradams said...

Great post. Shame it attracted such a wanky comment.

Anonymous said...

Cradams, grow up.

This is a nice country, and I don't like that parts of it are being turned into shittystan because of mass middle eastern people moving into an area and taking it as there own.

I don't blame them, and I don't dislike them for it.

But how exactly does it benifit us, and what is in any way desirable about it?

My comment may seem "wanky" to your immature eyes, but it's pretty accurate.

You won't convince anyone who doesnt already think your way with such an argument as "if you don't like it move".

Anonymous said...

I like your post Jackart. I believe that there are two types of multiculturalism. One is where different groups of people live together in the same geographical area but get along as best they can. This I call 'organic multiculturalism'. The other type and the type that I belive is more damaging to society is the enforced legalistic multiculturalism as seen promoted by Labour. This state enforced multiculturalism is by its nature authoritarian. I couldn't give a toss what people believe as I think everyone's money is the same colour.

Anonymous said...

And how exactly did labour "enforce" multiculturalism.

Oh, don't get me wrong. All the diversity officers and various laws where bloody silly, but I don't see that they actually did anything other than create headlines.

Labours real damage was allowing unchecked immigration to happen en masse.

Free movement of people is the one aspect of libertarianism I am uncomftable with.

Too many places in the world are full of ill educated dick heads.

We have enough of our own thanks.

Anonymous said...

I think Labour created an environment where not asking awkward questions of each other (because asking awkward questions about each other is one way we learn about one another) to avoid giving offence becaume the norm.

I think the presence of state funded diversity officers etc did enforce this environment.

cradams said...


The 'anon' who responded to me with the wonderfully ironic jibe about growing up. One of the laziest and most fallacious arguments that one consistently comes up against is the old "if you haven't experienced x then your opinion on x is worthless".

Nonsense, of course.

And as for your second comment: I'm not sure where to start. Clearly it evidences a nasty prejudice ("Shittystan") and then tries to temper that by saying what amounts to a mild "some of my best friends..."

I have no interest in convincing someone who is starting from a position that you are starting from.

You can cut it as many ways as you like, but your views in those two comments amount to: "they move in en masse and turn it to Shittystan" and "if that hasn't happened to you then your opinion is worthless".

Those aren't arguments against multiculturalism. That's just a rant. Or, in other words, the comments were wanky.

Anonymous said...

I live in a country where people wait decades to come and often times give up the wait and come anyway, illegally. I do not disapprove in anyway the differences in culture, in fact I think it adds to the richness of our country. I am a live and let live person and I'm interested in people. I like to learn about their customs, holidays, beliefs etc. I like to read various opinions on blogs, etc.

Where I loathe multiculturalism in when people immigrate to another country and then want that country to adjust to their ways by limiting the culture of the mother country. That is a big problem.

Anonymous said...

The adjoining issue to multiculturalism is "tolerance" - which in reality mean tolerate others intolerance.

I for one hate the burka with a visceral passion as its nothing more than a device for female subjugation. Amazing that feminists (Harman et al) refuse to make this simple observation.

This is due to Victimhood poker (look it up) - where muslim trumps female...

Labours equality - some are defnitely more equal than others...

Anonymous said...

**One of the laziest and most fallacious arguments that one consistently comes up against is the old "if you haven't experienced x then your opinion on x is worthless". Nonsense, of course. **

No it’s not nonsense. It’s very easy to hark about the wonders of multiculturalism when you live in the better parts of the country, something many politicians do. It’s very easy to brush the problems away as minor when you don’t have to live near them.

**And as for your second comment: I'm not sure where to start. Clearly it evidences a nasty prejudice ("Shittystan") and then tries to temper that by saying what amounts to a mild "some of my best friends..."**

I don’t temper it with anything of the sort, I simply said that I don’t blame them or hate them for wanting to come here.

We already have issues with some parts of our own population, we will just call them the chavs if you want to be brisk.

A lot of these poor countries are full of such people, they are shit countries with low education and morals. This isn’t because the people are inferior, but just because their countries are less developed than ours.

These places are the shittystans. The places where political corruption is more rife than anything we have here (well except tower hamlets cough), where the people have backward views (witchcraft, and stoning women for example, female circumcision).

And you are seriously trying to maintain that large numbers of these people coming to the country is beneficial to us, that having closed communities of such people is good.

Like I said, good luck with that one.

**I have no interest in convincing someone who is starting from a position that you are starting from. **

I.e A very large portion of the population, go preach to the choir then if it makes you feel warm and fuzzy.

B.K. said...


Good lord, you're a bright fellow. And JackArt, I've loved your most recent posts, darling.


Andrew Zalotocky said...

Anonymous at 2:42pm asks what harm is done by the "diversity officers" and "bloody silly" laws. The answer is that in practice they increase social division.

The bureaucrats and silly laws lump people into simple categories such as "black", "asian" or "Muslim". They encourage people to see themselves in those terms, and promote the idea that these things are more important than what we have in common. By putting so much emphasis on ethnic and religious identity they encourage people to see themselves as belonging to separate and rival communities.

So official multiculturalism is a classic example of how government intervention can end up achieving the opposite of what was intended. Instead of promoting harmony and mutual respect it actually promotes identity politics.

Kenan Malik has argued that "Muslim" identity in Britain is largely a creation of official multiculturalism. I'd suggest that it is the ultimate progenitor of the EDL too.

The Gray Monk said...

Interesting, as usual the UK political classes are still trying to sell a failed social engineering concept. At least the German Chancellor has been honest - Multi-Kulti ist Tot." The message is simple, immigrants are welcome - but they will live in accordance with Germany's culture and rules and not turn this country in whichever -stan they left.

The Romano-Brits failed to understand this in 450 - 500 AD and the Germanic immigrants who took over did, until now.

Klatuu o embu├žado said...

«I like the fact that Britain is home to people whose family origins are all over our formerly vast empire.»

Your formerly vast empire, and ours, are now a huge problem...

The White Man's Burden, etc:


Anonymous said...

It is really pretty simple. Assimilate or stay where the life style and culture you want are dominant. What's wrong with authentic British culture?


Anonymous said...

I have noticed that in many cases thise who support multiculturalism are the exact same people who call those who celebrate being English racist for celebrating St.George's Day. Does anyone else think that says something about what multiculturalism really is about?

Not to mention cultural relativism which basically turns people in cultural sensitive cowards. Or the fact that it's only British people who have an obligation to tolerate other cultures and not the other way round.

Multiculturalism isn't about celebrating different cultures. It's about undermining western culture.

There was an error in this gadget