Since the 1930's, the ruling class here in the U.S., especially the old-money, northeastern establishment WASPs of New York, have been fascinated by Marxist Leninist totalitarianism. Although, at first they were horrified at the anarchist and communist bomb throwing and rioting antics as southern and eastern European immigrants used American society as a punching bag in their proxy war of revenge against the rulers of their home countries. It was the twisted emotional satisfaction of after being beaten up by a bigger kid, then going out and beating up another, smaller kid combined with a satanic preference for ruling in hell rather than serving in heaven. After all, the individual liberties and freedoms guaranteed by the constitution were easy for the Marxists to exploit.
Marxism was before the 1930's a dreadful anathema to this clique of staid, well-heeled blue blooded, heritage Americans who were accustomed to their inherited wealth and government positions. Although these elected and bureaucratic positions had limited powers, they were prestigious enough and provided a comfortable niche for the blue bloods. This all began to change in the aftermath of what historians are pleased to call "the gilded age", a sneering appellation to describe a time of unimaginable horror where any greasy prole with the intelligence, drive and determination could start up a business and become anything from moderately successful to a captain of industry. If not, then many other of the lower orders were becoming part of a burgeoning middle class whose children would have access to better education and themselves may join the nouveau riche. The unspeakable horror of the gilded age that would be later sold to the masses was that some proles got rich and worse, they flaunted their wealth! Honestly, is there no room for breeding and old world courtly manners? What if the bluebloods were driven to bankruptcy and even eventually pushed out of their government sinecures by those new hungry wolves! The real horror of the gilded age was for the old money WASP establishment that they would be toppled from their thrones by these new entrepreneurs.
Eventually, the blue bloods of the northeastern WASP establishment decided that the Soviet model of government with its top-down centrally managed and controlled economy with some modifications would offer the benefit of society under their control- including social mobility of who and how many get to rise up the social ranks. And under Franklin Delano Roosevelt's brain trust would offer academic design and control of the system so that means a scientific system which cannot fail. The problem with the Russian Soviets, in the new managerial planner's opinion, was that it was being run by a bunch of dumb Russian peasants, not by the super-smart elite cloud people of Harvard and Yale. Stalin and his men never even attended Dartmouth, for heaven sake! But in the hands of the right people...
In New York City of the 1930's where anarchists and communists were once despised, Democrat politicians were beginning to play footsie with communists and Marxists of every stripe. What better way to get the masses to support the party machine than to play the friend of the working man and promising to berate their bosses and make those evil rich people pay for the heinous crime of getting rich? Still, under no circumstances should the working man ever want to aspire to achieve more lest they become Satan incarnate by the evil and corrupting influence of even modest success. It is by far more moral and good to remain poor and oppressed. The lesson was victimhood is a blessed state to aspire to and achievement above one's station is evil and will be punished.
But there was something else the Democrat party machine learned from their communist buddies and that was using cultural Marxism to attack segments of the population and then divide and conquer the electorate. After 1965, this tactic was augmented by increasingly open immigration from all different cultures and ethnicities to a sanctuary city for illegal immigrants. The new immigrants legal and illegal were granted the holy sacrament of victimhood by virtue of coming from poorer countries which were oppressed by European and American colonialism. Then entire communities would never be able to unite to oppose the political and managerial establishment's schemes as each group would have its own unique interests, be assigned the status of angel victims (identity victim groups) or devil oppressors (the native New Yorkers) and they would have nothing more in common with each other than residing in the same geographical area. This was intended to ensure the electorate would be permanently divided and forever squabbling amongst themselves.
But our managerial overlords ever fearful of even an improbable servile insurrection can never stop finding new ways to further balkanize us and impose identity bean-counting in every corner of society. From The City: DOES YOUR COMMUNITY BOARD REFLECT YOU AND YOUR NEIGHBORS? FIND OUT. by Rachel Holliday Smith and Ann Choi with additional reporting by Clifford Michel, January 29, 2020
Even the local community council, a toy government created to promote the illusion of select people (picked by the Borough President) in the community having some influence in what their political and managerial betters plan is not free from divide and conquer. No matter how servile the slave foremen, one must keep the whip in full view.
Donald Cavaioli
Showing posts with label Multiculturalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Multiculturalism. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 29, 2020
Monday, December 23, 2019
Queens, New York: "The World's Borough" A Balkanized Collection of Competing Colonies
The Powers that Be, Our Glorious Rulers, Those Wise and Benevolent Little Fathers, those great big warm hearted, cosmopolitan progressive liberals, ever generous to a fault with other people's money (never their own, oh no, dah-link) cuckishly call Queens, NY "the World's Borough".
Well, isn't that special!
Yes, The World's Borough, that belongs to the world, not the native population, not the Americans who live here. We're marginalized as "racists" and "white supremacists" if we dare to complain about the third worldification, the separate communities of composed of an ethnic group operating as virtual colonies that want nothing whatsoever to do with each other. Different ethnic groups that absolutely refuse to assimilate because the white liberal cucks that control the place absolutely refuse to insist on assimilation let alone to merely encourage it. Whatever happens here is strictly the fault of the native population.
But who would want to assimilate into such a flaccid, unctuous native culture that not only allows itself to be used as a toilet for any and all foreigners but spends all its time trashing itself. If a culture has no pride in itself, refuses to assert itself in its own homeland, then it deserves to be treated like a toilet or a nickle whore. So I do not blame any immigrant group for their behavior as they are acting as normal people do, treating such nauseating obsequiousness as multiculturalism and the "World's Borough" with the contempt it deserves.
I will say this however: If multiculturalism, this citizen of the world cosmopolitanism, were accepted the same all over the world, I would have no problem with it as long as everyone else in the world gives reciprocity in it. It would be nice. However, the world is as it is, not how fantasy or conceit would imagine it.
Because that's not how we human beings are. Like it or not, we evolved from social animals living in tribes and so tribalism is written into our DNA and hardwired into our brains. We on average naturally prefer the company of others that share their race, language culture and religion and as it is natural to us, there is nothing morally wrong with it. There are exceptions to this of course but these are a very small minority that does not change the general rule. We belong to our respective tribes or nations and no other and have not the ability to change this by will alone.
These immigrant groups would never in their own homeland tolerate foreigners refusing to assimilate, acting as if they should be accepted as "natives" just because they dropped their bags there, giving the foreigners the money and resources of their people. Nor would they accept foreigners being elected to public office in their own countries as they're not so stupid as not to realize the foreigner would pass legislation that would benefit the foreign people's interests to the detriment of their own people.
Outside of Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand, nobody else accepts this sort of nonsense. A people's country is their homeland and their governments look after the interests of its people at home and abroad as it should be.
So there is no multicultural nirvana of people from all over the globe coming together to mix and mingle forming only one race- the human race, happily singing kumbaya together here in this whimsically imaginary World's Borough.
To illustrate the point of people looking out for the interests of their fellow ethnics, here is an article
from the Times Ledger/QNS: Queens lawmakers visit South Asian Food Pantry in Flushing by Carlotta Mohamed, December 18, 2019
The south Asian community is acting in the best interests of the south Asian people. It is highly doubtful the south Asian countries would give this in reciprocity to any Americans living there especially if it came out of the native people's own tax money. Nor would any self-respecting politician there rush over to symbolically give a photo-op fellatio to the Americans when convenient in residence in a sickening display of twats pandering for votes.
Once again, I cannot blame the south Asian community for supporting the interests of their own people because to do so is natural and normal. Blame lies squarely with the local Americans, the dysgenic, spiteful mutant natives, who are weak and decadent enough to extol betraying their own people's interests, let alone to tolerate it without a murmur of dissent. Rather, they wear their decadence, weakness and cowardice as a badge of pride euphemistically called "tolerance".
So it would be good to ask why do local politicians insist on this obvious failure of the promises of multiculturalism, ignoring how the balkanized ethnic colonies that have atomized the people of Queens into competing sub-groups all the while braying about being the "World's Borough".
The answer is simple: Divide and conquer. A borough or an entire city for that matter divided and sub-divided into a vast and dizzying array of identity, ethnic and special interest groups all competing for influence in the halls of power and as much public money or resources as they can get is in the best interests of our ruling class.
So this mass of groups will never be able to unite against the city power structure as they have no common bond of community, history or culture and thus no common interest. Instead they will all behave like a bucket of crabs simply pulling each other down pursuing their own interests while the political and bureaucratic elite does as they please virtually without opposition. Welcome to Hotel Queens, the World's Borough that if it belongs to the world, it belongs really to nobody. Least of all the native people of Queens.
Donald Cavaioli
Well, isn't that special!
Yes, The World's Borough, that belongs to the world, not the native population, not the Americans who live here. We're marginalized as "racists" and "white supremacists" if we dare to complain about the third worldification, the separate communities of composed of an ethnic group operating as virtual colonies that want nothing whatsoever to do with each other. Different ethnic groups that absolutely refuse to assimilate because the white liberal cucks that control the place absolutely refuse to insist on assimilation let alone to merely encourage it. Whatever happens here is strictly the fault of the native population.
But who would want to assimilate into such a flaccid, unctuous native culture that not only allows itself to be used as a toilet for any and all foreigners but spends all its time trashing itself. If a culture has no pride in itself, refuses to assert itself in its own homeland, then it deserves to be treated like a toilet or a nickle whore. So I do not blame any immigrant group for their behavior as they are acting as normal people do, treating such nauseating obsequiousness as multiculturalism and the "World's Borough" with the contempt it deserves.
I will say this however: If multiculturalism, this citizen of the world cosmopolitanism, were accepted the same all over the world, I would have no problem with it as long as everyone else in the world gives reciprocity in it. It would be nice. However, the world is as it is, not how fantasy or conceit would imagine it.
Because that's not how we human beings are. Like it or not, we evolved from social animals living in tribes and so tribalism is written into our DNA and hardwired into our brains. We on average naturally prefer the company of others that share their race, language culture and religion and as it is natural to us, there is nothing morally wrong with it. There are exceptions to this of course but these are a very small minority that does not change the general rule. We belong to our respective tribes or nations and no other and have not the ability to change this by will alone.
These immigrant groups would never in their own homeland tolerate foreigners refusing to assimilate, acting as if they should be accepted as "natives" just because they dropped their bags there, giving the foreigners the money and resources of their people. Nor would they accept foreigners being elected to public office in their own countries as they're not so stupid as not to realize the foreigner would pass legislation that would benefit the foreign people's interests to the detriment of their own people.
Outside of Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand, nobody else accepts this sort of nonsense. A people's country is their homeland and their governments look after the interests of its people at home and abroad as it should be.
So there is no multicultural nirvana of people from all over the globe coming together to mix and mingle forming only one race- the human race, happily singing kumbaya together here in this whimsically imaginary World's Borough.
To illustrate the point of people looking out for the interests of their fellow ethnics, here is an article
from the Times Ledger/QNS: Queens lawmakers visit South Asian Food Pantry in Flushing by Carlotta Mohamed, December 18, 2019
The south Asian community is acting in the best interests of the south Asian people. It is highly doubtful the south Asian countries would give this in reciprocity to any Americans living there especially if it came out of the native people's own tax money. Nor would any self-respecting politician there rush over to symbolically give a photo-op fellatio to the Americans when convenient in residence in a sickening display of twats pandering for votes.
Once again, I cannot blame the south Asian community for supporting the interests of their own people because to do so is natural and normal. Blame lies squarely with the local Americans, the dysgenic, spiteful mutant natives, who are weak and decadent enough to extol betraying their own people's interests, let alone to tolerate it without a murmur of dissent. Rather, they wear their decadence, weakness and cowardice as a badge of pride euphemistically called "tolerance".
So it would be good to ask why do local politicians insist on this obvious failure of the promises of multiculturalism, ignoring how the balkanized ethnic colonies that have atomized the people of Queens into competing sub-groups all the while braying about being the "World's Borough".
The answer is simple: Divide and conquer. A borough or an entire city for that matter divided and sub-divided into a vast and dizzying array of identity, ethnic and special interest groups all competing for influence in the halls of power and as much public money or resources as they can get is in the best interests of our ruling class.
So this mass of groups will never be able to unite against the city power structure as they have no common bond of community, history or culture and thus no common interest. Instead they will all behave like a bucket of crabs simply pulling each other down pursuing their own interests while the political and bureaucratic elite does as they please virtually without opposition. Welcome to Hotel Queens, the World's Borough that if it belongs to the world, it belongs really to nobody. Least of all the native people of Queens.
Donald Cavaioli
Saturday, August 24, 2019
The Not-American "Americans"
It's an interesting situation when people immigrate to the United States who not only refuse to assimilate to our culture and political system but apparently despise it, and seek to destroy it. One has to ask why such people who hate this country bother to come here in the first place or refuse to return to their homelands after finding us so distasteful. Worse still are the liberals who still insist upon calling people who are obviously our enemies who seek to do us harm, "Americans", make special note that they are "U.S. citizens" and residents of a particular town with equal status of natives. Why is it that the same liberals insist those who want to destroy our culture and nation must not only be granted entry into this country as an unquestionably inalienable right and all must refer to them as Americans?
An example of this curious situation can be found here in this article by QNS:
"Jamaica women admit to planning and distributing information about making explosives for terrorists attacks" by Emily Davenport on August 23, 2019
Two foreigners in this interesting situation who have pled guilty to planning a terrorist attack are pointedly referred to as "Jamaica" women and "U.S. citizens" as if the magic dirt of America conferred these titles upon them that none may gainsay. In fact, I might possibly be guilty of "racism" and "white supremacism" in noting the oxymoronic use of U.S. citizen and Jamaica women to describe two individuals who are obviously enemies of our nation and should be stripped of their citizenship and deported as undesirable aliens. After serving their prison sentences, of course.
Yet we're fighting these interminable wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ostensibly to fight terrorism "over there" so we don't have it happen over here and at the same time, allow a massive influx of people which harbors some terrorists among them to immigrate here.
But our progressive liberal overlords have decreed that anyone from anywhere in the world who wants to come to the U.S. must be granted entry as of right. And further, must be acknowledged as just as much a true American as any native born even if they not only refuse to assimilate but demand we Americans change our culture and language or adopt their non-Christian religions to suit the newcomers who prefer to live in balkanized ethnic enclaves. Is this not the very definition of colonialism and imperialism just as foreigners entering another country with hostile intent towards the native population an invasion?
What is an acceptable amount of casualties with our current immigration policies? How many dead and wounded do liberals feel is acceptable collateral damage in pursuit of cosmopolitan multiculturalism?
Now contrast this with the same liberals who react with holy outrage when India attempts to assimilate the Kashmir, the People's Republic of China suppresses Islam with the Uighurs or allows ethnic Chinese to emigrate into Tibet and alter Tibetan culture. Not to mention the situation in Hong Kong. Nor should we forget the past colonialism of the old European powers was absolutely the most horrific ever perpetrated in human history even if there were not hoards of white Europeans banging down the doors to gain entry to non-white colony countries.
Isn't ethnic diversity and immigration a good thing that must be celebrated? So diversity isn't always our strength? So some forms of imperialism and colonialism are good or bad depending only if Europe and north America are the recipients or perpetrators respectively.
But Americans must accept a massive influx of foreigners and change our culture to adapt to them so American nationalism is apparently forbidden by these hypocritical and supercilious luminaries.
Diversity and open borders immigration is only good for us and the official line is: "Nationalism for thee but not for me". And to notice this discrepancy is the new definition of racism.
Donald Cavaioli
An example of this curious situation can be found here in this article by QNS:
"Jamaica women admit to planning and distributing information about making explosives for terrorists attacks" by Emily Davenport on August 23, 2019
Two foreigners in this interesting situation who have pled guilty to planning a terrorist attack are pointedly referred to as "Jamaica" women and "U.S. citizens" as if the magic dirt of America conferred these titles upon them that none may gainsay. In fact, I might possibly be guilty of "racism" and "white supremacism" in noting the oxymoronic use of U.S. citizen and Jamaica women to describe two individuals who are obviously enemies of our nation and should be stripped of their citizenship and deported as undesirable aliens. After serving their prison sentences, of course.
Yet we're fighting these interminable wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ostensibly to fight terrorism "over there" so we don't have it happen over here and at the same time, allow a massive influx of people which harbors some terrorists among them to immigrate here.
But our progressive liberal overlords have decreed that anyone from anywhere in the world who wants to come to the U.S. must be granted entry as of right. And further, must be acknowledged as just as much a true American as any native born even if they not only refuse to assimilate but demand we Americans change our culture and language or adopt their non-Christian religions to suit the newcomers who prefer to live in balkanized ethnic enclaves. Is this not the very definition of colonialism and imperialism just as foreigners entering another country with hostile intent towards the native population an invasion?
What is an acceptable amount of casualties with our current immigration policies? How many dead and wounded do liberals feel is acceptable collateral damage in pursuit of cosmopolitan multiculturalism?
Now contrast this with the same liberals who react with holy outrage when India attempts to assimilate the Kashmir, the People's Republic of China suppresses Islam with the Uighurs or allows ethnic Chinese to emigrate into Tibet and alter Tibetan culture. Not to mention the situation in Hong Kong. Nor should we forget the past colonialism of the old European powers was absolutely the most horrific ever perpetrated in human history even if there were not hoards of white Europeans banging down the doors to gain entry to non-white colony countries.
Isn't ethnic diversity and immigration a good thing that must be celebrated? So diversity isn't always our strength? So some forms of imperialism and colonialism are good or bad depending only if Europe and north America are the recipients or perpetrators respectively.
But Americans must accept a massive influx of foreigners and change our culture to adapt to them so American nationalism is apparently forbidden by these hypocritical and supercilious luminaries.
Diversity and open borders immigration is only good for us and the official line is: "Nationalism for thee but not for me". And to notice this discrepancy is the new definition of racism.
Donald Cavaioli
Wednesday, April 10, 2019
The Travesty of Hotel Queens
From: QNS - All the World's a Fare: NYC's largest and most diverse food festival comes to Queens
If I had a drinking game where I had to take a shot of whiskey every time I see the word "diversity" in any article written by some party-lining, liberal hack, or any other generic out-of-towner hipster, I'd have alcohol poisoning after the second paragraph. This article by Joe DiStefano didn't let me down.
Besides the usual out-of-towner squeeing like a giddy schoolgirl over the ethnic food and diversity which suburbanites love seeing in my hometown but never in theirs, Joe manages to eliminate our native identity while re-writing our history. First of all, "the world's borough"? Another word for the drinking game. We, those of us who were born here and even have generations of our ancestors buried here no longer have an identity of our own nor any claim on our home. We belong to the world now, occupied territory, whored out by our Manhattan-centric political establishment to anyone from the far flung reaches of the planet who wants to plant their own national flag in us. We don't even have our town names from which we identify ourselves anymore but we're just Queens.
Yes we belong to the world now as a series of unassimilated colonies waving their own national flags. For the white out-of-towners, it's like a third world theme park where they can come and gawk at the various exotic colonists. Ethnic cleansing of the local people and culture never sounded so cool and twee and the food? Oh, the food is just to die for! Fuck the people whose ancestors actually built the place and made it their home.
Then there is the World's Fair grounds. And no, Joe, the neither the Unisphere nor the 1964-1965 World's Fair, something we locals are proud of, was never about "diversity". You made that bit of nonsense up. Besides, the colonists neither know nor care about either the 1939-40 or 1964-65 Fairs. Read one of the plaques around the Unisphere sometimes if you're really interested in what it symbolizes.
Now there's the theme of the article itself: The World's Fare, an unoriginal title as this is what the food court in the Queens Center mall has been called since it opened in 1973, however I digress. What strikes me about this article is that if this is such a quintessential Queens event, why are there so few born and bred locals featured in it? Since looks like practically everybody is from somewhere else, how does this say anything about Queens other than muh diversity and muh ethnic food?
Overall, this is just more hyperventilated civic nationalist rubbish as detailed in previous posts here (specifically the last two paragraphs) and here.
Yes, welcome to Hotel Queens with guests from around the country and around the world having nothing more in common with each other than we are all staying in the same hotel. The guests are here for their own reasons, do not care about the concerns or problems of the other guests and generally treat the Hotel Queens and its employees, the native residents, with ill-disguised contempt.
Donald Cavaioli
If I had a drinking game where I had to take a shot of whiskey every time I see the word "diversity" in any article written by some party-lining, liberal hack, or any other generic out-of-towner hipster, I'd have alcohol poisoning after the second paragraph. This article by Joe DiStefano didn't let me down.
Besides the usual out-of-towner squeeing like a giddy schoolgirl over the ethnic food and diversity which suburbanites love seeing in my hometown but never in theirs, Joe manages to eliminate our native identity while re-writing our history. First of all, "the world's borough"? Another word for the drinking game. We, those of us who were born here and even have generations of our ancestors buried here no longer have an identity of our own nor any claim on our home. We belong to the world now, occupied territory, whored out by our Manhattan-centric political establishment to anyone from the far flung reaches of the planet who wants to plant their own national flag in us. We don't even have our town names from which we identify ourselves anymore but we're just Queens.
Yes we belong to the world now as a series of unassimilated colonies waving their own national flags. For the white out-of-towners, it's like a third world theme park where they can come and gawk at the various exotic colonists. Ethnic cleansing of the local people and culture never sounded so cool and twee and the food? Oh, the food is just to die for! Fuck the people whose ancestors actually built the place and made it their home.
Then there is the World's Fair grounds. And no, Joe, the neither the Unisphere nor the 1964-1965 World's Fair, something we locals are proud of, was never about "diversity". You made that bit of nonsense up. Besides, the colonists neither know nor care about either the 1939-40 or 1964-65 Fairs. Read one of the plaques around the Unisphere sometimes if you're really interested in what it symbolizes.
Now there's the theme of the article itself: The World's Fare, an unoriginal title as this is what the food court in the Queens Center mall has been called since it opened in 1973, however I digress. What strikes me about this article is that if this is such a quintessential Queens event, why are there so few born and bred locals featured in it? Since looks like practically everybody is from somewhere else, how does this say anything about Queens other than muh diversity and muh ethnic food?
Overall, this is just more hyperventilated civic nationalist rubbish as detailed in previous posts here (specifically the last two paragraphs) and here.
Yes, welcome to Hotel Queens with guests from around the country and around the world having nothing more in common with each other than we are all staying in the same hotel. The guests are here for their own reasons, do not care about the concerns or problems of the other guests and generally treat the Hotel Queens and its employees, the native residents, with ill-disguised contempt.
Donald Cavaioli
Monday, January 21, 2019
The Nation of Immigrants/Civic Nationalism Fallacy
Acting Globally:
The vast majority of people who subscribe to the utopian ideal of the citizen of the world cosmopolitanism are white liberals in North America, Australia and Europe whereas the vast majority of the rest of the world still believe in blood and soil nationalism. This is something any reader from New York City can see for themselves with the recent non-European immigrants who tend to live in their own ethnic enclaves, some of which like Flushing resemble virtual colonies after ethnic cleansing. These are examples of imperialism.
This balkanization cannot be due to racism or housing discrimination which is today not only outlawed and actively pursued and punished but because people generally prefer to live among others like themselves. A people who share a common history, language, culture and customs is in fact the definition of nation and people tend to prefer their own nation over others, if not be overtly patriotic.
The racism charge is commonly used to lay the blame for the earlier generations of immigrants from the 19th and early 20th century living in their respective ethnic ghettos. Although, in light of these current observations, it would be possible to say that the earlier "Ellis Island" immigrants lived in ethnic ghettos more by choice in preference of living among their own people who shared a common language, culture and customs than from native discrimination. Whereas they may have suffered some forms of discrimination in the past, still the racism charge could be handy today for deflecting native criticism of not fully assimilating back then and justifying retaining a hyphenated American identity today. For when an immigrant does not fully jettison their old language and culture in favor of the new country's, they do not really assimilate to the new culture and never truly joins the American nation. This hesitancy to fully assimilate can even be seen in the descendants of the "Ellis Island" immigrants, many of whom still honor their ancestor's old country ways and further describe themselves as hyphenated Americans. Changing one's way of life to a new way of life is not always as easy as it sounds even generations later. Immigrants will find it difficult or will be resistant to assimilating into the culture of the new country and learning the new language (if that is the case) if there are ethnic enclaves of their own people where they may live and there is no encouragement or impetus for assimilation from the natives or local government. It is very difficult to leave behind a lifetime's worth of experience and the familiar old country ways practiced for many generations that have been successful for that particular people and is to them, the best way to do things.
This doesn't mean all immigrants or their descendants do not completely assimilate and cannot cooperate with other ethnic groups but that the ones who do are the outliers, not the average. The impact of the outlier on the overall community is limited if not ineffectual.
The civic nationalist is one who believes in the nation of immigrants meme, a meme which was not ever mentioned in American history before the early 20th century (the melting pot meme was from a 1908 play of the same name) and was not in popular vogue until the advent of the Hart-Celler immigration act of 1965. The civic nationalist erroneously believes in the universality of liberal democracy, religious freedom, freedom of speech, individual liberty and property rights contained in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. In fact, the rise of the nation of immigrants meme is an example of how immigrants have already altered the culture and very history of the U.S. to suit their own interests by retconning the centrality of immigration with hyphenated, not completely assimilated Americans to the very soul of America.
Whereas the civic nationalist believes that anyone who takes up residency in the U.S. can be or is in fact automatically an American by virtue of just being here, he is completely wrong as he eschews the definition and concept of nation. The definition of a nation is a people who share a common history, culture, customs and religion. It is impossible, therefore, for there to be a nation of immigrants from many different cultures as it defies the meaning of the word. The concept of nation cannot be conflated with mere residency or only as the concept of government.
Different people of different nations who live under a common government is really the definition of an empire and what does history teach us about the fate of empires.
We should then carefully consider if the path of empire is really one we want to follow and if allowing the aforementioned imperialism to flourish in our own country is really a good thing.
Furthermore, the ideals of the Enlightenment upon which our republic was founded were formed and took shape in Christian western Europe. Other peoples, not of European origin or necessarily Christians, who have no history of liberal democracy may understand the concept on a purely abstract, intellectual level but may not fully accept it, assimilate it and truly live it as it is a way wholly outside their experience. Recall what I observed how people will tend to think their own native ways that have been practiced in their own homelands for centuries are the best. Why would they completely accept the foreign concepts and foreign ways of western liberal democracy as they would feel that their own ways have always worked well enough for them. Some may even reject the ideals of western liberal democracy for whatever reason even if they have lived in the U.S. for any appreciable amount of time and are well read on the subject. In any case, why, then would they not try to alter the cultural and political landscape here to align more with their own ways of doing things.
What the civic nationalist really fails or refuses to recognize is that when immigrants of any particular nationality increase their population to a significant enough size, they will elect their own people to office who will then act in the best interest of their fellow countrymen and then try to alter the cultural landscape around them to be more suitable to themselves. This inevitably leads to a situation where these different ethnic groups cannot cooperate with other groups as they have different interests, different norms of behavior and so there will be no sense of an overall community. If anything, these different groups will conflict with each other over which group will wield the most power, redistribute the most public wealth to their own people and control which culture(s) will dominate the community. Violent civil conflict as a result is also a possibility.
Despite all this, the civic nationalist still clings to the mystic belief that anyone from anywhere in the world can become a true, pocket Constitution carrying, tricorn hat wearing American by virtue of the transformative powers of our unique American magic dirt.
Thinking locally:
Here in Queens our managerial apparatchiks and their lickspittals like to boast about our being the most diverse borough in New York city with some 138 languages or 800 spoken here depending on your source. If we can't even agree on a common language as the subject of English as our official language is strictly forbidden, or a common culture as the state's ruling party's globalist multiculturalism forbids our native culture holding sway, then how could we agree on anything and what do we have in common if we're so globally diverse? How can we be a cohesive community under these circumstances?
The answer is no. We can't be a community and this is to the benefit of our Democrat overlords one party county, city and state. First, as all the various ethnic and identity groups have nothing in common with each other, we as a community can never form any sizeable or effective opposition to the various plots and plans our rulers of which we may not want. And as many of these newcomer groups, hail from third world, strong man dictatorships, they would see nothing wrong with having a one party dictatorship here. If it works for them back home so why not here too and why should they care if rest of us do not want it or how it will affect us if it favors them?
Second, we have a good percentage of transient residents who really don't care about this borough as they are just passing through. Like many of the newcomers who plan on staying for a long while, the transients really do not see this as their home so why should they give a shit about what happens here and whether it's a good thing for us or not. They have their own home towns or home countries they really care most about. This is just a place they stay for their respective benefits so the history and native culture of Queens and her towns means nothing to them. This also applies to native-born white middle Americans who flock here to play at being "edgy and urban" while trying all the while to force their suburban "Joneses" lifestyle and pop-culture liberal progressivism on us. However I digress.
Really, we're more like a borough-sized, long-term residency hotel with guests from around the country and around the world having nothing more in common with each other than we are all staying in the same hotel. The guests are here for their own reasons, do not care about the concerns or problems of the other guests and generally treat the hotel Queens and its employees, the native residents, with ill-disguised contempt.
Donald Cavaioli
The vast majority of people who subscribe to the utopian ideal of the citizen of the world cosmopolitanism are white liberals in North America, Australia and Europe whereas the vast majority of the rest of the world still believe in blood and soil nationalism. This is something any reader from New York City can see for themselves with the recent non-European immigrants who tend to live in their own ethnic enclaves, some of which like Flushing resemble virtual colonies after ethnic cleansing. These are examples of imperialism.
This balkanization cannot be due to racism or housing discrimination which is today not only outlawed and actively pursued and punished but because people generally prefer to live among others like themselves. A people who share a common history, language, culture and customs is in fact the definition of nation and people tend to prefer their own nation over others, if not be overtly patriotic.
The racism charge is commonly used to lay the blame for the earlier generations of immigrants from the 19th and early 20th century living in their respective ethnic ghettos. Although, in light of these current observations, it would be possible to say that the earlier "Ellis Island" immigrants lived in ethnic ghettos more by choice in preference of living among their own people who shared a common language, culture and customs than from native discrimination. Whereas they may have suffered some forms of discrimination in the past, still the racism charge could be handy today for deflecting native criticism of not fully assimilating back then and justifying retaining a hyphenated American identity today. For when an immigrant does not fully jettison their old language and culture in favor of the new country's, they do not really assimilate to the new culture and never truly joins the American nation. This hesitancy to fully assimilate can even be seen in the descendants of the "Ellis Island" immigrants, many of whom still honor their ancestor's old country ways and further describe themselves as hyphenated Americans. Changing one's way of life to a new way of life is not always as easy as it sounds even generations later. Immigrants will find it difficult or will be resistant to assimilating into the culture of the new country and learning the new language (if that is the case) if there are ethnic enclaves of their own people where they may live and there is no encouragement or impetus for assimilation from the natives or local government. It is very difficult to leave behind a lifetime's worth of experience and the familiar old country ways practiced for many generations that have been successful for that particular people and is to them, the best way to do things.
This doesn't mean all immigrants or their descendants do not completely assimilate and cannot cooperate with other ethnic groups but that the ones who do are the outliers, not the average. The impact of the outlier on the overall community is limited if not ineffectual.
Whereas the civic nationalist believes that anyone who takes up residency in the U.S. can be or is in fact automatically an American by virtue of just being here, he is completely wrong as he eschews the definition and concept of nation. The definition of a nation is a people who share a common history, culture, customs and religion. It is impossible, therefore, for there to be a nation of immigrants from many different cultures as it defies the meaning of the word. The concept of nation cannot be conflated with mere residency or only as the concept of government.
Different people of different nations who live under a common government is really the definition of an empire and what does history teach us about the fate of empires.
We should then carefully consider if the path of empire is really one we want to follow and if allowing the aforementioned imperialism to flourish in our own country is really a good thing.
Furthermore, the ideals of the Enlightenment upon which our republic was founded were formed and took shape in Christian western Europe. Other peoples, not of European origin or necessarily Christians, who have no history of liberal democracy may understand the concept on a purely abstract, intellectual level but may not fully accept it, assimilate it and truly live it as it is a way wholly outside their experience. Recall what I observed how people will tend to think their own native ways that have been practiced in their own homelands for centuries are the best. Why would they completely accept the foreign concepts and foreign ways of western liberal democracy as they would feel that their own ways have always worked well enough for them. Some may even reject the ideals of western liberal democracy for whatever reason even if they have lived in the U.S. for any appreciable amount of time and are well read on the subject. In any case, why, then would they not try to alter the cultural and political landscape here to align more with their own ways of doing things.
What the civic nationalist really fails or refuses to recognize is that when immigrants of any particular nationality increase their population to a significant enough size, they will elect their own people to office who will then act in the best interest of their fellow countrymen and then try to alter the cultural landscape around them to be more suitable to themselves. This inevitably leads to a situation where these different ethnic groups cannot cooperate with other groups as they have different interests, different norms of behavior and so there will be no sense of an overall community. If anything, these different groups will conflict with each other over which group will wield the most power, redistribute the most public wealth to their own people and control which culture(s) will dominate the community. Violent civil conflict as a result is also a possibility.
Despite all this, the civic nationalist still clings to the mystic belief that anyone from anywhere in the world can become a true, pocket Constitution carrying, tricorn hat wearing American by virtue of the transformative powers of our unique American magic dirt.
Thinking locally:
Here in Queens our managerial apparatchiks and their lickspittals like to boast about our being the most diverse borough in New York city with some 138 languages or 800 spoken here depending on your source. If we can't even agree on a common language as the subject of English as our official language is strictly forbidden, or a common culture as the state's ruling party's globalist multiculturalism forbids our native culture holding sway, then how could we agree on anything and what do we have in common if we're so globally diverse? How can we be a cohesive community under these circumstances?
The answer is no. We can't be a community and this is to the benefit of our Democrat overlords one party county, city and state. First, as all the various ethnic and identity groups have nothing in common with each other, we as a community can never form any sizeable or effective opposition to the various plots and plans our rulers of which we may not want. And as many of these newcomer groups, hail from third world, strong man dictatorships, they would see nothing wrong with having a one party dictatorship here. If it works for them back home so why not here too and why should they care if rest of us do not want it or how it will affect us if it favors them?
Second, we have a good percentage of transient residents who really don't care about this borough as they are just passing through. Like many of the newcomers who plan on staying for a long while, the transients really do not see this as their home so why should they give a shit about what happens here and whether it's a good thing for us or not. They have their own home towns or home countries they really care most about. This is just a place they stay for their respective benefits so the history and native culture of Queens and her towns means nothing to them. This also applies to native-born white middle Americans who flock here to play at being "edgy and urban" while trying all the while to force their suburban "Joneses" lifestyle and pop-culture liberal progressivism on us. However I digress.
Really, we're more like a borough-sized, long-term residency hotel with guests from around the country and around the world having nothing more in common with each other than we are all staying in the same hotel. The guests are here for their own reasons, do not care about the concerns or problems of the other guests and generally treat the hotel Queens and its employees, the native residents, with ill-disguised contempt.
Donald Cavaioli
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)