In this last decade, many in the West have been promoting a philosophy of multiculturalism, which not only renounces the culture they have inherited but also denies their own existence
At a press conference in Strasbourg in 2009, for example, then-President Barack Obama began by detracting from the unique character of the United States. “I believe in American exceptionalism, as I suspect that the British believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks in Greek exceptionalism.”
In addition, in 2010, Mona Ingeborg Sahlin, leader at that time of the Swedish Social Democratic Party, said at a meeting of the Turkish youth organization Euroturk:
I can not figure out what Swedish culture is. I think that’s what makes many Swedes jealous of immigrant groups. You have a culture, an identity, a history, something that brings you together. And what do we have? We have Midsummer’s Eve and such silly things.
In October 2015, Ingrid Lomfors, director of the “Forum for Living History”, an initiative of the Swedish government, told a group of officials: “There is no native Swedish culture”.
In November 2015, the recently invested Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, granted an interview to The New York Times, in which he said:
“There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada,” Trudeau said, concluding that he sees Canada as “the first post-national state.”
In December 2015, former Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, president of the European Council in 2009, was interviewed by TV4 shortly before he was no longer the leader of the Moderate Party, in which he rhetorically asked:
Is this country owned by those who lived here for four generations or those who invented borders? For me it is obvious that it should be the last thing, and that a society is stronger and better if it can be opened. […] The Swedes have no interest as an ethnic group. ”
Interestingly, these statements came from leaders of the United States, Sweden and Canada, countries with differentiated literature, music, art and cuisine, as well as different judicial and government systems. What the points of view of the five leaders have in common, however, is a postmodern ideology and the need for the vote of minorities and immigrants.
Postmodernism has two key elements: cultural relativism and postcolonialism. Cultural relativism – developed by American anthropologist Ruth Benedict, author of worldwide bestseller in 1934 entitled Patterns in Culture, and her mentor, the “father of American anthropology,” Franz Boas;He suggested that researchers should put aside their cultural values and biases, and maintain an open mind about the cultures of other peoples, in order to understand them. In the second half of the 20th century, anthropology theorists extended this to the field of ethics, arguing that the judgments that emanate from one culture could not be applied to others, thus treating all cultures as equally good and valuable. This point of view led in 1947 to the American Anthropological Society to reject the Declaration of the Rights of Man, which became the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, prepared in 1947 by the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations.
Postcolonialism holds that people from all over the planet got along very well with each other, comfortably and peacefully, until the Western imperialists invaded, divided, conquered, exploited and oppressed them. Unlike postmodernism, which considers that Western culture is not better than other cultures, postcolonialism considers that Western culture is inferior to other cultures.
Three factors seem to underlie this rejection of Western culture: guilt, globalization and demography. Many western societies – such as Britain, France, Belgium, Holland, Spain, Portugal and Italy – had empires in the south and east between the seventeenth and twentieth centuries. Today, however, the same countries that carried out those conquests of the past consider them malignant, and are also viewed negatively by non-colonialist countries, such as Sweden and Canada, itself a Western colony. Germany, a late and marginal imperial power, seems to be still burdened with guilt because of the Holocaust. Ironically, admitting countless migrants in Europe, as if they were the “new Jewish refugees” of this century, has caused the second flight of the Jews.
This fault does not end here. Western countries are rich, and in them the majority of citizens enjoy a comfortable standard of living, while immense populations in Africa and Asia live in poverty. Many Westerners therefore feel that a redemption is necessary, in the form of economic aid to the former colonies, and unrestricted entry of migrants and refugees from those areas to the Western countries.
Meanwhile, economic globalization has made Western countries have clients and investors all over the world, coming from a wide range of disparate cultures, but Western triumphalism is still considered unfit for productive commercial relations.
Regarding demography, in recent decades there has been an increase in the flow of populations, caused in part by the low birth rate in the West, where many countries are below the replacement rate. This, in turn, has underscored the need for labor to sustain, if it does not grow, economies. The result is that the population in all Western countries is an ethnic, religious and cultural mix. To welcome immigrants, and to help their integration, and in solidarity with their new societies, Western countries have encouraged a multicultural opening while minimizing the particularity of their own cultures.
This brings us to the elections: politicians from western democracies who aspire to be elected often detract from their own cultures to win the vote of immigrants and minorities. The more immigrants the communities are, the stronger the incentive to earn them. Some growing minority groups, such as Muslims in Europe, are now forming their own political parties to compete with traditional ones.
This union of postmodernism and electoral politics is having a terrible effect on societies that take pride in openness and diversity. Instead of enhancing Western culture through the enrichment provided by ethnic and religious groups in countries with a Judeo-Christian roots, multiculturalists have rejected their own Western culture. While they encourage the diversity of races, religions and cultural roots, they prohibit diversity of opinion, particularly that which does not fit the postmodern narrative that rejects that of the West. Nor do they seem willing to acknowledge that the West, even with its shortcomings, has provided more freedoms and prosperity to more people than ever before in history.
This biased view of the West is only possible if one obstinately refuses to see who were, historically, the true colonizers. How do you think practically the entire Middle East and North Africa became Muslim, through a democratic referendum? The Muslims invaded and transformed the Byzantine Christian Empire, today an increasingly Islamized Turkey; Greece; Middle East; North Africa; the Balkans; Hungary; the north of Cyprus; and Spain.
If Western civilization wants to survive this defamation, it would be convenient to remind people of their historical achievements: their humanism and morality derived from Judeo-Christian traditions; his enlightened thinking; its technological revolutions; the agricultural and industrial revolutions of the eighteenth century; and the twentieth-century digital revolution; its political evolution towards full democracy; the separation of the church and the justice of the State; his commitment to human rights and, above all, his gravely threatened freedom of expression. Throughout the world, all advanced societies have borrowed many traits from Western culture; They could hardly be called advanced if they had not done so. Much of what is good in the world is due solely to Western civilization. It is vital not to throw it away or lose it.