I really didn’t want to wade into this debate. Not because I think it to be particularly incendiary, controversial, or divisive, but more for the opposite reason—that any such popularly trending ‘divisive’ issues, which are typically algorithmically contrived, full of manufactured outrage, simply bore me.
The fact is, there is always going to be that cycle between tradition and renewal.
Greek religion originated in fertility rites, as the young god was born in the spring, of the old god and the earth mother, but by the time of classical Greece, this cycle had given way to tradition and Zeus didn't give way to Dionysus. Which set the stage for Christianity, as the story of Jesus, of royal blood, crucified and risen, filled that need for renewal.
Yet by the time Rome adopted it as state religion, it too had started to calcify and the top down monotheism of the Jewish tribal god served to validate the Empire that was rising from the ashes of the Republic. The Big Guy Rules. With the pantheistic Trinity lost to obscurity.
So, yes, there is some monetized, bastardized effort by the bankers to reduce the world to their petri dish, as everything is reduced to financialization, but the end result isn't going to be anything near what they hope. When you cheat on the foundations of society to put more gold in the penthouse, eventually it does more than just trickle down. In the world to follow, it's more likely their goons will be lording over their various cartels, than the bankers, because the power of the bankers is running the financial system and that is the golden goose being cooked. The function of money and banking is as a circulation system, like blood and the circulation system equilibrate the body. The heart can't tell the hands and feet to go suck dirt, without killing itself as well.
So the real issue is, what can be learned and extracted from this coming contact with reality? There are real lessons to be learned, other than fear and greed.
Some is seed. The rest is fertilizer. Trial and error.
Some interesting points and observations, by you and the other authors you cite. I, too, am sick of the low hanging culture wars fruit and my only real thought on that subway incident was that if it had been, say, a drunk white Wall Street or "frat boy" bully threatening people (there are documented incidents over the years) who got choked out by a black ex marine, regardless of who had what criminal record and what type, the reaction would have been reversed on both sides of the so-called divide. That's just an objective observation with no judgment whatsoever. One side (the Fox News crowd) would have been incensed and wondering why the cops didn't initiate a city wide manhunt immediately and the MSDNC side would have been where the Fox News side is on this incident. One last thing before I move on - I know that guy had a "criminal record" but the cops in NYPD have been busting black dudes for nothing and overcharging people for years. If you can't afford a decent attorney, guess what - you cop a plea and suck it up while another "conviction" is added to your record. Not saying ALL of that guy's rap sheet is due to that, but certainly a lot of it. Said more on that than I really wanted to. Sorry.
I won't touch Dugin's opinions at this time. I would need to read more, in order to get more context.
But as to the American "melting pot" and the need for seafaring cultures to steal resources from other (often far-away) lands, keep in mind that the Europeans were able to do that precisely because they *did* have the raw materials to make steel, they had chanced upon Chinese gunpowder in the early days of sailing the globe, and the cold winter months gave them time to sit around figuring out ways to build even better ships that could take them all the way across the oceans and weapons that would give them tactical superiority over their victims. So it's really a matter of *what* "resources" and resources they went about stealing and during which period. Certainly Britain didn't have abundant oil, but the Scandinavian countries did hence the fact that they never bothered fucking with the Arabs of the Middle East or the Persians.
And the "melting pot" - You nailed it in several ways IMO, so I'll only focus on what we may disagree (if only slightly?) about. We hear about the "globalists" but going back to when the so-called melting pot (both the myth and the reality) really started it was the Gold Rush/Land Rush settlers/pioneers, the agriculture feudalists/capitalists of the South, and the industrial capitalists of the North that were initially responsible for the situation. Stealing Indian land without completely 'genociding' them was bound to mean co-existing with at least some American Indians while the Anglo-Saxons up north were bound to have to accept living amongst the masses of Poles, Italians, Spanish, etc. that they imported for factory labor and of course, the southern plantation owners and lower classes of whites were bound to have to eventually co-exist with former black slaves and their future relatives. So it wasn't always the "globalist" elites who were responsible for the multi-ethnic reality of North America. In that way, and because I'm from south/southwest Texas where there are Spanish-Indigenous mixed families who have owned land and ranched for generations, some before the first white society came, I am desensitized to the fact that: Guess what? We came here after they did and we stole their land and brought in slaves to work it. Tough shit for us and it's our responsibility to make this "multi-culturalism" thing work, even if it doesn't mean building all-black apartment buildings in rural West Virginia (where I also have family) for no particular reason other than politics. Joe Biden wasn't exactly a fan of bussing, IIRC, either. To put a kinder spin on it, there IS a way to make it work and it's our job to do so rather than descend into race or quasi-race/culture based civil war again.
I had hoped you'd touch on Dagestan. A very fascinating part of the RF and home to many very talented MMA fighters. But you did correctly note that the USSR actually *did* make it work, and the glaring difference too. Namely, the myth of "rugged individualism" wasn't part of their.....CULTURE. But anyway, good post and I enjoyed reading it as well as apologize for taking up so much space in your comments. I'm happy to discuss/debate what I've said w/ anyone that's actually polite and respectful.
Shew, Simplicius - you make my head dance (on the spot because your war writings occupy most of the dance floor).
I've battled with culture, swung between its stupidity and its beauty.
The 5am call to mosque in my area has recently become more beautiful than mysterious, extra voices having been added to a bigger speaker. As I wrote in an open letter in a different place in a small town, I welcomed the much opposed new mosque, their right to exist as much as a church, so long as they (and the church) respected my right to atheism, rock music and voyeurism at women in scant bikinis.
In South Africa, I'm untethered from culture. English South Africans are 3% of the population. They called us 'soutpiele' (salty dicks) cause we were considered to have one leg in Durban and one leg in the England. My father was born in South Africa and only visited the UK when he was 70. I've never been.
But maybe I'm a 'Soutie' through disassociation i.e. I don't identify with the majority of South Africa which, for example, is into kwaito and evangelism. I don't understand babies killed for medicine. I can understand suburban neighbours slaughtering a cow in their back yard but I won't assimilate by doing it too.
I'm glad that I live in a mixed neighbourhood of Whites, Blacks and Indians. The street drunks, druggies and prostitutes assure that it's not the Rainbow Nation that Mandela promised us but it's damn good compared to gated communities for the rich and squatter camps for the poor.
I'm an empathetic South African so I try understand everything except dead babies and racism.
I've longed for the day when we're all Coloured (that being a totally accepted term here) but I'm sure that, if all our skins looked the same, we would find reason to hate.
The Ukrainians and Russians have, even though, to me, they look and act the same. As I wrote in an article earlier this week, "They’ll have gone to bed as Ukrainians facing Russian missiles, and awoken Russian facing Ukrainian missiles. Very Slavic."
Maybe South African pig farmers would fight cow farmers. And for them to substantiate their armies, they would create new cultures because that assists 'patrotism'. A soldier will risk their life with the insubstantial belief that they have something to protect whilst not realising that they think they're better than others. Culture relishes in itself and it kills. Is it overrated?
What is culture when an Asian child is adopted by an American, and grows up singing in a Texan accent, dancing to Britney Spears?
I share your doubt in melting pots. Culture is more likely to be a bikini visited by a fat man who will only return home to hotdogs and TV.
Is cultural debate politics for the sake of politics? If so, politics is for the few, a cultural elite.
Only the positive actions of people towards me and their community is what counts!
I am not particularly erudite (where did you gentlemen find the time?) and cannot hold a candle to those who comment here. But some of the things you say in the article have opened previously closed portions of my brain. I guess there is no hope for resolution in Ukraine.
May 19, 2023·edited May 19, 2023Liked by Simplicius
Really enjoyed your dissection of culture and where it comes from. Makes total sense. I’d add ‘history’ to that - as an American living in Ireland I can see how their history of being oppressed by the British has shaped their national identity (for good and bad). I also see the British culture’s yearning for ‘the good old days’ when the sun never set on the empire. I see the German people still burdened with guilt over the Nazi’s (of course most unaware of how that effort was financed by US and European Industrialists, including said Rothschild) together with their love of structure and efficiency. I see France’s love of cuisine fuelling great energy to combat any EU directives which might lead to the deterioration of food quality in the EU (no doubt pressure coming from US food companies - Americans you have no idea how awful the food it over there). And so on.
I think the risk in the merging/melting of culture is the end result is a watered down version that is neither satisfying, meaningful nor impressive - to visualise what I mean - it’s like when you mix all the colours in palate together and get brown/grey sludge colour. As a counter argument, perhaps that’s exactly what is happening in the US - too many seem to have no purpose or meaning or group with which to identify so they chose ‘causes’ which are cult-like.
I also wonder, given Kalergi’s mixed breed, how much that influenced his ‘vision’ for a mass dilution of race across cultures. It’s like transgendered people’s persistent quest for validation by encouraging (or rather insisting) and recruiting others to their way of thinking/life and their cancellation of those who question that reality.
A mishmash of superficial pishposh of the worst kind, including your mention of utterly ridiculous (quasi and full-on racist) crap such as the "Cold Winters" theory.
I'd debunk it, point by point, but it'd take hours. I'll just say three things:
1) You've obviously never been to Chechnya in your entire life.
2) There are plenty of subway systems in Africa, including places like Addis Ababa (population: 5.6 million people), where the riders are all black, and the trains are clean, safe, and comfortable.
3) The country of Ecuador literally means "Equator" in Spanish, and the sun is burning hot there all year long. But surprise! The locals don't have more melanin in their skin than a Xhosa person from South Africa, which has bitterly cold winters.
Stacey Abrams will be at the Bilderberg meeting this weekend w/Chrystia Freeland and Henry Evil Kissinger. Quite the melting pot for the Elites.
I never made it to Sweden, but if I were to make it there I want to see blond blue-eyed Swedish people, same if I were to make it to Switzerland. I saw a documentary where all the Swiss are now brown. Personally I despise the forced globalization, stick to your own geography, make your own crib, welcome to visit, but go home. Perhaps that is the part of my Appalachian blood speaking.
Firstly, thanks - you've again made me grab a dictionary because there was a word unknown to me: 'gauster'. So at least I learned something new ...
Regarding your premise that 'culture' is determined by environment .... well, up to a point. What is lacking though is what I'd call the temporal dimension, in other words: history. It's the history experienced by people which is transmitted to the next generation(s) and which thus form the vital part of 'culture', i.e. Tradition.
It's for that reason that those powers, wanting to create their global 'melting pot', are and have been destroying traditions especially in western countries, even unto the re-writing of history, a subject no longer taught properly in schools or at universities. This is so pernicious because we cannot plan for a future when we don't know where we came from because the 'where we came from' is either denigrated or replaced by 'modern', 'progressive' shibboleths coming from Hollywood in the widest sense. It is so pernicious because we are deprived of the context in which traditions arose: without historical context asking 'why' becomes futile.
Most cultures of the great Nations geographically have been around for a thousand years or more. The culture of the USA was established less than 300 years ago with our Constitution which established a base line for developing our own culture. It worked great for a while as we grew as a Nation, but around the turn of the 20th century we began to deviate from this base line and have squandered its principles. As we entered the back half of the century things went from bad to worse with the decline in education a direct result of consolidated schools, affirmative action, promotions not based on merit all combining to promote excessive corruption and a lack of accountability. Until we correct our education issues our own culture will continue to be destroyed.
You're quite correct to identify geography as a crucial ingredient to culture. However, that isn't the whole story; the genetic profile also matters, with culture being formed in the interaction. A people moving to a new location will become a new ethnos, even without interbreeding with alien groups; but a different people moving to that same location will not become the same, or even necessarily all that similar, to earlier inhabitants.
As to multiculturalism, this is very obviously a lie. There is no integration, nor can there be, outside of the market or the airport lounge. Insofar as integration has been "successful", it has only been by converting ever more space into placeless transit points: anonymous, heavily surveiled, tightly regulated. That takes enormous energy. As the energy necessary to maintain the livability of such spaces declines - due to overall economic contraction, the concentration of the remaining economic power in fewer hands, and the drawing down of unmonetized social capital - such spaces rapidly decay to the lowest cultural level of the constituent groups.
Perhaps Kalergi really believed that his Practical Idealism would lead to a utopia, but if so we see the results around us. Perhaps his idealism was entirely cynical, and he and his many followers in the elite understood quite well what the results must be ... in either case, we see the results around us. Either way, his ideas have been tested by reality and found wanting - they are not in the least bit practical, to say nothing of leading to aesthetic and spiritual bankruptcy.
May 19, 2023·edited May 20, 2023Liked by Simplicius
"But in the U.S., the federal government has been outright pushing for forced, arbitrary, and artificial integration under the contrived premise of the ‘American melting pot’."
I take issue with that statement. The concept of the American melting pot was an observation, not a contrived premise. Up until the Great Society, the American melting pot existed in much the same way Russia's "federalized ‘autonomous regions’." America's notable exclusion was the black culture, which was actively barred from full participation in the American Dream.
America's push for forced integration didn't begin until the 1970s, when busing was implemented as the preferred method of integrating America's schools. By that time the melting pot concept was already a thing. In the 1950s American grammar school kids were introduced to the melting pot concept as the voluntary acceptance of American culture by its immigrant citizenry. In the 50s everybody acknowledged, even celebrated, that their forbears came from somewhere else, and that they were happy and proud to be American.
One tactic in the destruction of the American Culture is to denigrate the melting pot concept by claiming that it existed only as a contrivance whose purpose is to paper over a predominance of injustice in American society. That is a lie. 1950s Melting Pot America was the kindest and most just of any nation in the world. Admittedly there were exceptions.
The solution has always been to enforce the law. Lynchings were real and horrifying, but there were laws against murder. Were they enforced? No. I won't go through litany of non-enforcements endured by Black America.
1970s busing was done with good intentions, but the mindset that conceived it has evolved. The destruction of the American culture is now the preferred solution to injustice in America. The open border with Mexico is another part of the attack.
So, if you dare to suggest that promoting the concept of the American melting pot could be a solution rather than the problem, get ready to be called a white supremacist. Those attacking the American culture are no longer fighting injustice. They are on a quest for more power. That's it.
The fact is, there is always going to be that cycle between tradition and renewal.
Greek religion originated in fertility rites, as the young god was born in the spring, of the old god and the earth mother, but by the time of classical Greece, this cycle had given way to tradition and Zeus didn't give way to Dionysus. Which set the stage for Christianity, as the story of Jesus, of royal blood, crucified and risen, filled that need for renewal.
Yet by the time Rome adopted it as state religion, it too had started to calcify and the top down monotheism of the Jewish tribal god served to validate the Empire that was rising from the ashes of the Republic. The Big Guy Rules. With the pantheistic Trinity lost to obscurity.
So, yes, there is some monetized, bastardized effort by the bankers to reduce the world to their petri dish, as everything is reduced to financialization, but the end result isn't going to be anything near what they hope. When you cheat on the foundations of society to put more gold in the penthouse, eventually it does more than just trickle down. In the world to follow, it's more likely their goons will be lording over their various cartels, than the bankers, because the power of the bankers is running the financial system and that is the golden goose being cooked. The function of money and banking is as a circulation system, like blood and the circulation system equilibrate the body. The heart can't tell the hands and feet to go suck dirt, without killing itself as well.
So the real issue is, what can be learned and extracted from this coming contact with reality? There are real lessons to be learned, other than fear and greed.
Some is seed. The rest is fertilizer. Trial and error.
When the going gets tough, downshift.
Darkest before dawn.
Some interesting points and observations, by you and the other authors you cite. I, too, am sick of the low hanging culture wars fruit and my only real thought on that subway incident was that if it had been, say, a drunk white Wall Street or "frat boy" bully threatening people (there are documented incidents over the years) who got choked out by a black ex marine, regardless of who had what criminal record and what type, the reaction would have been reversed on both sides of the so-called divide. That's just an objective observation with no judgment whatsoever. One side (the Fox News crowd) would have been incensed and wondering why the cops didn't initiate a city wide manhunt immediately and the MSDNC side would have been where the Fox News side is on this incident. One last thing before I move on - I know that guy had a "criminal record" but the cops in NYPD have been busting black dudes for nothing and overcharging people for years. If you can't afford a decent attorney, guess what - you cop a plea and suck it up while another "conviction" is added to your record. Not saying ALL of that guy's rap sheet is due to that, but certainly a lot of it. Said more on that than I really wanted to. Sorry.
I won't touch Dugin's opinions at this time. I would need to read more, in order to get more context.
But as to the American "melting pot" and the need for seafaring cultures to steal resources from other (often far-away) lands, keep in mind that the Europeans were able to do that precisely because they *did* have the raw materials to make steel, they had chanced upon Chinese gunpowder in the early days of sailing the globe, and the cold winter months gave them time to sit around figuring out ways to build even better ships that could take them all the way across the oceans and weapons that would give them tactical superiority over their victims. So it's really a matter of *what* "resources" and resources they went about stealing and during which period. Certainly Britain didn't have abundant oil, but the Scandinavian countries did hence the fact that they never bothered fucking with the Arabs of the Middle East or the Persians.
And the "melting pot" - You nailed it in several ways IMO, so I'll only focus on what we may disagree (if only slightly?) about. We hear about the "globalists" but going back to when the so-called melting pot (both the myth and the reality) really started it was the Gold Rush/Land Rush settlers/pioneers, the agriculture feudalists/capitalists of the South, and the industrial capitalists of the North that were initially responsible for the situation. Stealing Indian land without completely 'genociding' them was bound to mean co-existing with at least some American Indians while the Anglo-Saxons up north were bound to have to accept living amongst the masses of Poles, Italians, Spanish, etc. that they imported for factory labor and of course, the southern plantation owners and lower classes of whites were bound to have to eventually co-exist with former black slaves and their future relatives. So it wasn't always the "globalist" elites who were responsible for the multi-ethnic reality of North America. In that way, and because I'm from south/southwest Texas where there are Spanish-Indigenous mixed families who have owned land and ranched for generations, some before the first white society came, I am desensitized to the fact that: Guess what? We came here after they did and we stole their land and brought in slaves to work it. Tough shit for us and it's our responsibility to make this "multi-culturalism" thing work, even if it doesn't mean building all-black apartment buildings in rural West Virginia (where I also have family) for no particular reason other than politics. Joe Biden wasn't exactly a fan of bussing, IIRC, either. To put a kinder spin on it, there IS a way to make it work and it's our job to do so rather than descend into race or quasi-race/culture based civil war again.
I had hoped you'd touch on Dagestan. A very fascinating part of the RF and home to many very talented MMA fighters. But you did correctly note that the USSR actually *did* make it work, and the glaring difference too. Namely, the myth of "rugged individualism" wasn't part of their.....CULTURE. But anyway, good post and I enjoyed reading it as well as apologize for taking up so much space in your comments. I'm happy to discuss/debate what I've said w/ anyone that's actually polite and respectful.
Shew, Simplicius - you make my head dance (on the spot because your war writings occupy most of the dance floor).
I've battled with culture, swung between its stupidity and its beauty.
The 5am call to mosque in my area has recently become more beautiful than mysterious, extra voices having been added to a bigger speaker. As I wrote in an open letter in a different place in a small town, I welcomed the much opposed new mosque, their right to exist as much as a church, so long as they (and the church) respected my right to atheism, rock music and voyeurism at women in scant bikinis.
In South Africa, I'm untethered from culture. English South Africans are 3% of the population. They called us 'soutpiele' (salty dicks) cause we were considered to have one leg in Durban and one leg in the England. My father was born in South Africa and only visited the UK when he was 70. I've never been.
But maybe I'm a 'Soutie' through disassociation i.e. I don't identify with the majority of South Africa which, for example, is into kwaito and evangelism. I don't understand babies killed for medicine. I can understand suburban neighbours slaughtering a cow in their back yard but I won't assimilate by doing it too.
I'm glad that I live in a mixed neighbourhood of Whites, Blacks and Indians. The street drunks, druggies and prostitutes assure that it's not the Rainbow Nation that Mandela promised us but it's damn good compared to gated communities for the rich and squatter camps for the poor.
I'm an empathetic South African so I try understand everything except dead babies and racism.
I've longed for the day when we're all Coloured (that being a totally accepted term here) but I'm sure that, if all our skins looked the same, we would find reason to hate.
The Ukrainians and Russians have, even though, to me, they look and act the same. As I wrote in an article earlier this week, "They’ll have gone to bed as Ukrainians facing Russian missiles, and awoken Russian facing Ukrainian missiles. Very Slavic."
Maybe South African pig farmers would fight cow farmers. And for them to substantiate their armies, they would create new cultures because that assists 'patrotism'. A soldier will risk their life with the insubstantial belief that they have something to protect whilst not realising that they think they're better than others. Culture relishes in itself and it kills. Is it overrated?
What is culture when an Asian child is adopted by an American, and grows up singing in a Texan accent, dancing to Britney Spears?
I share your doubt in melting pots. Culture is more likely to be a bikini visited by a fat man who will only return home to hotdogs and TV.
Is cultural debate politics for the sake of politics? If so, politics is for the few, a cultural elite.
Only the positive actions of people towards me and their community is what counts!
I am not particularly erudite (where did you gentlemen find the time?) and cannot hold a candle to those who comment here. But some of the things you say in the article have opened previously closed portions of my brain. I guess there is no hope for resolution in Ukraine.
What do you mean !?
Here's me thinking culture (smal 'c) is about meanings...
Someone said "Culture is what we have until something better comes along."
Really enjoyed your dissection of culture and where it comes from. Makes total sense. I’d add ‘history’ to that - as an American living in Ireland I can see how their history of being oppressed by the British has shaped their national identity (for good and bad). I also see the British culture’s yearning for ‘the good old days’ when the sun never set on the empire. I see the German people still burdened with guilt over the Nazi’s (of course most unaware of how that effort was financed by US and European Industrialists, including said Rothschild) together with their love of structure and efficiency. I see France’s love of cuisine fuelling great energy to combat any EU directives which might lead to the deterioration of food quality in the EU (no doubt pressure coming from US food companies - Americans you have no idea how awful the food it over there). And so on.
I think the risk in the merging/melting of culture is the end result is a watered down version that is neither satisfying, meaningful nor impressive - to visualise what I mean - it’s like when you mix all the colours in palate together and get brown/grey sludge colour. As a counter argument, perhaps that’s exactly what is happening in the US - too many seem to have no purpose or meaning or group with which to identify so they chose ‘causes’ which are cult-like.
I also wonder, given Kalergi’s mixed breed, how much that influenced his ‘vision’ for a mass dilution of race across cultures. It’s like transgendered people’s persistent quest for validation by encouraging (or rather insisting) and recruiting others to their way of thinking/life and their cancellation of those who question that reality.
A mishmash of superficial pishposh of the worst kind, including your mention of utterly ridiculous (quasi and full-on racist) crap such as the "Cold Winters" theory.
I'd debunk it, point by point, but it'd take hours. I'll just say three things:
1) You've obviously never been to Chechnya in your entire life.
2) There are plenty of subway systems in Africa, including places like Addis Ababa (population: 5.6 million people), where the riders are all black, and the trains are clean, safe, and comfortable.
3) The country of Ecuador literally means "Equator" in Spanish, and the sun is burning hot there all year long. But surprise! The locals don't have more melanin in their skin than a Xhosa person from South Africa, which has bitterly cold winters.
My advice? Stay in your lane.
Stacey Abrams will be at the Bilderberg meeting this weekend w/Chrystia Freeland and Henry Evil Kissinger. Quite the melting pot for the Elites.
I never made it to Sweden, but if I were to make it there I want to see blond blue-eyed Swedish people, same if I were to make it to Switzerland. I saw a documentary where all the Swiss are now brown. Personally I despise the forced globalization, stick to your own geography, make your own crib, welcome to visit, but go home. Perhaps that is the part of my Appalachian blood speaking.
I just want a city in the west to eat a nuke before the end of the decade.
Firstly, thanks - you've again made me grab a dictionary because there was a word unknown to me: 'gauster'. So at least I learned something new ...
Regarding your premise that 'culture' is determined by environment .... well, up to a point. What is lacking though is what I'd call the temporal dimension, in other words: history. It's the history experienced by people which is transmitted to the next generation(s) and which thus form the vital part of 'culture', i.e. Tradition.
It's for that reason that those powers, wanting to create their global 'melting pot', are and have been destroying traditions especially in western countries, even unto the re-writing of history, a subject no longer taught properly in schools or at universities. This is so pernicious because we cannot plan for a future when we don't know where we came from because the 'where we came from' is either denigrated or replaced by 'modern', 'progressive' shibboleths coming from Hollywood in the widest sense. It is so pernicious because we are deprived of the context in which traditions arose: without historical context asking 'why' becomes futile.
Most cultures of the great Nations geographically have been around for a thousand years or more. The culture of the USA was established less than 300 years ago with our Constitution which established a base line for developing our own culture. It worked great for a while as we grew as a Nation, but around the turn of the 20th century we began to deviate from this base line and have squandered its principles. As we entered the back half of the century things went from bad to worse with the decline in education a direct result of consolidated schools, affirmative action, promotions not based on merit all combining to promote excessive corruption and a lack of accountability. Until we correct our education issues our own culture will continue to be destroyed.
Tower of Babel redux. History just keeps repeating itself. God is sovereign and no schemes of man will ever change that.
Excellent synthesis.
You're quite correct to identify geography as a crucial ingredient to culture. However, that isn't the whole story; the genetic profile also matters, with culture being formed in the interaction. A people moving to a new location will become a new ethnos, even without interbreeding with alien groups; but a different people moving to that same location will not become the same, or even necessarily all that similar, to earlier inhabitants.
As to multiculturalism, this is very obviously a lie. There is no integration, nor can there be, outside of the market or the airport lounge. Insofar as integration has been "successful", it has only been by converting ever more space into placeless transit points: anonymous, heavily surveiled, tightly regulated. That takes enormous energy. As the energy necessary to maintain the livability of such spaces declines - due to overall economic contraction, the concentration of the remaining economic power in fewer hands, and the drawing down of unmonetized social capital - such spaces rapidly decay to the lowest cultural level of the constituent groups.
Perhaps Kalergi really believed that his Practical Idealism would lead to a utopia, but if so we see the results around us. Perhaps his idealism was entirely cynical, and he and his many followers in the elite understood quite well what the results must be ... in either case, we see the results around us. Either way, his ideas have been tested by reality and found wanting - they are not in the least bit practical, to say nothing of leading to aesthetic and spiritual bankruptcy.
"But in the U.S., the federal government has been outright pushing for forced, arbitrary, and artificial integration under the contrived premise of the ‘American melting pot’."
I take issue with that statement. The concept of the American melting pot was an observation, not a contrived premise. Up until the Great Society, the American melting pot existed in much the same way Russia's "federalized ‘autonomous regions’." America's notable exclusion was the black culture, which was actively barred from full participation in the American Dream.
America's push for forced integration didn't begin until the 1970s, when busing was implemented as the preferred method of integrating America's schools. By that time the melting pot concept was already a thing. In the 1950s American grammar school kids were introduced to the melting pot concept as the voluntary acceptance of American culture by its immigrant citizenry. In the 50s everybody acknowledged, even celebrated, that their forbears came from somewhere else, and that they were happy and proud to be American.
One tactic in the destruction of the American Culture is to denigrate the melting pot concept by claiming that it existed only as a contrivance whose purpose is to paper over a predominance of injustice in American society. That is a lie. 1950s Melting Pot America was the kindest and most just of any nation in the world. Admittedly there were exceptions.
The solution has always been to enforce the law. Lynchings were real and horrifying, but there were laws against murder. Were they enforced? No. I won't go through litany of non-enforcements endured by Black America.
1970s busing was done with good intentions, but the mindset that conceived it has evolved. The destruction of the American culture is now the preferred solution to injustice in America. The open border with Mexico is another part of the attack.
So, if you dare to suggest that promoting the concept of the American melting pot could be a solution rather than the problem, get ready to be called a white supremacist. Those attacking the American culture are no longer fighting injustice. They are on a quest for more power. That's it.