Wednesday, June 09, 2010

Off Topic: Religion and Multiculturalism

The young son of a family I know told me about the Indian kids in his school carrying knives; young Sikhs are allowed to carry their Kirpans to school in Canada. This awoke a hazy memory from long ago, where I was sure I had read that the kirpan had long since been replaced by a 'symbolic' knife in the form of a replica worn in place of the traditional weapon.

Sure enough, after some quick research, it emerged that this is indeed the case. While the kirpan is intended as a weapon, it's supposed purpose is to defend the weak. There have, of course, been cases in Canada of murders committed with kirpans. So why aren't they rather wearing the harmless replicas instead?

The answer is Multiculturalism, whereby in the name of "tradition", some problems that were solved long ago - or should have been - have become problems once again. The kirpan is a very good example of this. It was deemed impractical by many Sikhs to carry a knife about their person, particularly in countries where this violated the law. So they substituted a representation of the knife, to remain observant to both their faith and to the law of the land.

This is how religions evolve and change. If we look to Christianity we find similar patterns. Baptism was initially performed by full immersion, indeed many churches still baptise this way. But very early on in church history - some say because of conversions in Roman prisons - sprinkling with water was adopted as a symbolic representation of baptism (which means "to immerse"). Similarly, Communion was altered from a full meal to a sip of wine and piece of bread, a tradition that very few churches, if any, have challenged.

Religious rituals and symbols change over the years, they adapt to local customs and laws, and most manage to find some accommodation. Catholics, who give First Communion to young girls and boys, are faced with allowing children to consume alcohol, which many parents have difficulty with. They are not breaking the law as they are not selling the wine to minors, but the option is available to substitute either low-alcohol wine or grape juice. Many smaller churches offer grape juice to their congregants.

The doctrine of Multiculturalism has reversed this process. Sikhs are carrying knifes to school. Muslim women - many of whom have for years adopted a subtle headscarf in place of the burqa/niqab - are beginning to don more "traditional" garb, even though it is highly impractical. Indeed, the notion of pragmatism has all but gone out the window. Many religions - except Christianity of course, to whom the idea of symbolic representation is an accepted part of our faith - are following the rules of Multiculturalism to roll back areas of progress that have formed part of their traditions.

In fact, adherents of Islam seem to advocate some traditions above others when it comes to clothing. The Muslim Brotherhood dress their women in the jilbab, which, whatever its origins, only became popular in the 1970s in one country, Egypt. Now it is worn by women from many Islamic countries, even in Britain amongst women of Pakistani origin. The famous case involving Cherie Booth, wife of Tony Blair, involved a schoolgirl who insisted it was her right to wear a jilbab instead of a school uniform. Booth (sister of lunatic antisemite Lauren) successfully argued the case for the girl wearing a costume originating in a completely different tradition of Islam from her own.

It proves the point made by Mark Steyn when he said that under Multiculturalism, we're not obligated to actually know anything about other cultures as long as we feel warm and fuzzy towards them.

Radical traditions of Islam are busily rattling around within all the other traditions, amongst which we make no distinction. Most Westerners don't know the difference, and we're happy to allow those traditions to be taken over by extremist Islam, and Multiculturalists are cheering them on from the sidelines. Radical forms of Islam are busily undoing what little concessions to practicality Muslims have made over the centuries. Now, regionally specific forms of dress are made compulsory across the Islamic world, and we don't even notice.

The general rule with these changes is that they make the adherent as distinct (and hostile) as possible to host cultures. The jilbab is the prison of choice for many Muslims because it is so provocative to Westerners, and so completely at odds with Western notions of womens' equality. They have gone out of their way to force their traditions - which are really not traditions at all - down our throats, in defiance of centuries of religious pragmatism.

What about Jews? contrast the behaviour of Jews and that of Muslims. Having lived in Europe for centuries, Jews learned to assimilate whilst maintaining their distinct ethos, and adapted to their environments. Jewish dietary requirements are adhered to without imposition on society at large. In contrast, in many parts of Europe, when it's Ramadan, you had better not get caught eating a ham sandwich in public. A Jewish child will bring a kosher meal to school. A Muslim parent will insist everyone eats halal.

Religion, having been separated from the state and thus of society at large, is now happily following the dictates of Multiculturalism, whereby the most extreme, isolationist and fanciful elements of tradition can be wheeled out in the name of diversity. The exception is, of course, Christianity. Imagine were I to cite Luke 22.36-38 as a reason to send my son to school with a sword, arguing that Jesus commanded Christian to obtain one?

Christianity is the oldest assimilationist religion in Europe, and nobody would seriously argue that those elements should be removed. The more recent religions to arrive in the Western world are the ones from which least is demanded. Even legalising (and sanitising) some form of female genital mutilation was being considered in the USA and Australia, although thankfully this proved a bridge to far for Americans (see here).

Multiculturalism is therefore not only a vehicle for the reintroduction of some of the most vile and barbaric practices of the premodern worlds from which they originate, it also actively prevents the integration of the adherents of those religions with the societies in which they are living. Furthermore, radicals and extremists amongst the latter are now free to undo centuries of assimilation and syncretism, creating a more fractious and atomised society, all in the name of "reform".

The uniformity and radicalism preached by extremist Muslims is dismissed by Western liberals as an aberration of the 'true' faith, and most hold out hope that Islam can be "reformed". But as Steyn has observed, maybe the radicalism is the reform. And he's right: Only arrogant liberals assume that Islamic reform would move in the direction liberals want it to.

Multiculturalism not only makes radical traditionalism possible. In failing to make any judgments whatsoever, we are actively encouraging the worst and most destructive elements of all religions.

21 Opinion(s):

Piet the Pirate said...

It started out looking like an article on multiculturalism, and ended up, as so many other articles on here do, as an Islam bashing session.
Is this blog run by jews? Sure looks like it.
And no, I´m not a Muslim before anyone asks.

Viking said...

Just point out where Islam (when not prefixed with 'radical' or 'extremist') is being 'bashed' or unfairly represented, rather than just claiming it is.

And, once again, none of us are Jews....

Piet the Pirate said...

Blogger Viking said...
Just point out where Islam (when not prefixed with 'radical' or 'extremist') is being 'bashed' or unfairly represented, rather than just claiming it is.
10 June 2010 04:22

"In contrast, in many parts of Europe, when it's Ramadan, you had better not get caught eating a ham sandwich in public"

What a lot of bullshit.
I rest my case.

Viking said...

I rest mine :)

Viking said...

Speaking of religion -

this morning Canadian TV news showed a video of a lady sangoma throwing bones..

She predicted that the winner of the World Cup would "come from overseas".


Piet the Pirate said...

LOL. Viking, those aren´t creditable sources. They are plain out and out anti Muslim sites, nothing more. I could give you exactly the same sort of stuff, only about jews, if I quoted the anti jewish sites.
It´s the same tactic used to discredit the right wing. Have you noticed there is no longer a political, right. It´s, radical right, extreme right, ultra right ad nausium.
I am really surprise you are so naive.

Lime Lite said...

@Piet - just what do you think multi-culturalism refers to? You need to admit that you just hate Jews and would rather live with Muslims. I'd repect your opinions more that way. I'd rather live with none, but if I didn't have a choice I'd chose Jews over Muslims anyday of the week.

eduard said...

On most of the foodstuff in the supermarket you are paying "kosher tax" imposed by the jews . The mark is on package alongside the mark which depicts "halaal". There are three or four different types of kosher tax insignia. So, all the "other" religions or whatever have their marks and all the suppliers fullfill their demands. Where is the Christian mark or are we so called "Christians" just happy with all the crap they feed us with? Christianity has just become a name which actually means nothing. The sheeple are so quick to call themselves "Christians".

VI said...

@Eduard. The drug dealers have a saying, "Don't get high on your own supply". You need to stay away from the magic mushrooms because you are talking tripe.

Anonymous said...

Piet the Pirate says this post is anti-Islam, which it is, and then goes on to question whether the blog is run by Jews. PTP doesn't say he hates Jews, but intimates that he doesn't trust pro-Jewish, anti-Islam propaganda. Lime Lite, who says he'd rather live without Jews or Muslims, then accuses Piet of hating Jews?

Etherman said...

@Piet the Pirate:
What's wrong with bashing Muslims anyway? I'm not a muslim, I don't like muslims, I don't live in a muslim country, I don't want any muslims near me, and I don't want to get any filthy Islam on me in the street, in the supermarket or when watching TV, unless it's some program on the History Channel describing quaint practises from the middle ages.

One of the sentiments in the piece is the idea that multiculturalism implies accepting everything else no matter how abhorrent it is, that we are somehow "good" if we "tolerate" anything that is not "Western". Well, you can shove tolerance up your ass and take it to Saudi Arabia, then fart it out and see what the sand monkeys do with your tolerance then.

One of the problems with liberals is that, to steal a common phrase, they are so open minded that their brains have literally fallen out and they are prepared to commit cultural suicide by embracing and supporting all other identities except their own. Grow a spine and stand up for your culture if you want it to persist - you cannot promote one culture without demoting another, and to try and make them all "equal" is impossible. The Muslims know this and laugh at you for it.

The problem with the majority (no, liberals are not the majority, just the loudest) is that they are just stupid sheeple who want to please everyone and are too spineless to reveal what they think in public.

Viking said...

Couldn't agree more, Etherman.

FishEagle said...

Well said Etherman

Piet the Pirate said...

Etherman said..
Blah blah blah...I haven´t a clue what I´m talking about...blah blah blah.

Now, my friend (I´m calling you that because your heart is obviously in the right place, even if your brains are situated a bit lower down), let me state quite categorically, I am not a multiculturalist, a muslim lover, or a liberal, impressions you appear to have gained from my last few posts.
On the contrary.
Anyone who knows me from my numerous posts on here, and other accentually white, right wing blogs, will confirm that I am none of these things. What I am is a supporter of my race, the white Aryan/European race, of which I am a part. I am not anti anything. Not anti jew, muslim, black or anything else, bur rather I am pro white. Now that you know where my loyalties lie, allow me to elaborate.
It is my opinion, rightly or wrongly, that the international jew is the greatest threat to the continued existence of my race on this planet. When I say jew, I´m not referring to old Hymie who runs the tailor shop down the road, or the jewboy who flogs used cars off his little used car lot. No, I´m referring to the international jew, that hard core group of mostly zionist jews who have, by their lies, deception, and plain old fashioned scheming and conniving, gained control of us through our financial institutions and the electronic and print media, and who now shape the minds of our people with their PC shit and liberal/commie values. It is they who shout about us having to accept multiculturalism and multi racial societies, because it´s in their best interests. It´s their safety net. However, the moment someone sees through their deceit and lies and wants to attack them , they scream blue murder calling the enlightened one a Nazi, a racist and an anti semite, and the world, which has been so conditioned by these vipers, stands up and joins in their condemnation. Their propaganda raised an army of white men who destroyed a white nationalist movement which was our last hope of finally being free of these blood sucking vipers.
Have you noticed that their country is kept racially pure? Have you noticed it´s kept religiously separate? Have you noticed how, if they are criticised they fall back on the good old religious freedom rule? Religious freedom for everyone but not muslims it seems.
So, when I see these creatures being threatened in their country, gained, not by their own courage and fighting ability, but with the help of stupid white men and a book they wrote which claims that some mythical guy in the sky gave it to them, then I must confess, I have zero sympathy for them.
Of course, like you, I want nothing to do with the muslim dogs, but it´s not my problem if some pissed off bastard somewhere in the desert wants to drop an atom bomb on their heads, and I truly resent it being made my problem by the very ones who created it in the first place. This whole anti Islamic thing is just another jewish con job. Get rid of the influence of the international jew and we can then go about dealing with the threat to our civilization that the sand kaffirs pose, but as long as the international jew is calling the tune, multiculturalism, multiracial societies, and PC bullshit will be the weights around our necks that will eventually destroy us.
I´ll never forget what my dear old dad, who spent 6 years fighting against our people, once told me. He said, “ I was young and impressionable son, and I fell for their shit. Don´t ever make the same mistake”.
I won´t Dad, don´t worry.

Exzanian said...

PTP said: "I am not anti anything. Not anti jew...."
I beg to differ old son...I had to delete one of your comments a couple of days ago that started like this:
"FUCK YOU! Not only do jews stink......blah blah blah blah"
Piet, go play marbles on the R21 boet, you ain't fooling nobody...

Anonymous said...

Good post Piet. You're quite spot on about who are the guilty ones.

BUT why don't we just call them
"the bankers"

This way we don't offend anyone.

Piet the Pirate said...

Blogger Exzanian said...
PTP said: "I am not anti anything. Not anti jew...."
I beg to differ old son...I had to delete one of your comments a couple of days ago that started like this:
"FUCK YOU! Not only do jews stink......blah blah blah blah"
Piet, go play marbles on the R21 boet, you ain't fooling nobody...
11 June 2010 04:00

OK. I was a bit out of order with a few of my comments in that post (can´t acually recall what I wrote), but I had had a hard day and I was more than a little drunk. So, shoot me. LOL.

Jim Beam said...


Let me flip the coin and give me your ideas on this then. Maybe it is not the Jews but the Catholics. Afterall you need to have all this sin, porn, divorce, abortion, broken marriages, gay rights so that when the antichrist comes he will tell us what we have known for a long time - that we are right and those are sins. Suddenly we all accept him as the new messiah?

Born to be wild said...

@Jim Beam:

This might explain a few things.

VI said...

Let's talk multiculturalism. A South African associate, in Canada, was doing his basic military training and used the harmless term "Chief". He was addressing another South African. It isn't an offensive term in South Africa, and is part of our culture. An Indian (as in Red Indian) was in earshot, and took offence. Needless to say, my associate was punished. It seems tolerance for other cultures only applies when they are non-white.

FishEagle said...

@VI, what happened to being treated equally?? It's ok for the Indian to be ignorant about the Saffa but not the other way around. Classic liberal double standards. CLASSIC