More On Multiculturalism and Diversity

Once more, we see a university professor either exhibiting deficient reading comprehension, or deliberately misunderstanding.

He sez, "First, of course, the questioner botches the term “Southerner.” Let’s be honest: she means white Southerners of northwest European descent."

Well, no... Southerner blacks apparently enjoy living in the South, enjoy their Southern friends and neighbors, indeed love Southern food -- much of it is even called "soul food" which is "a variety of cuisine popular in African-American culture," per Wikipedia -- love Southern music and entertainment, and are largely protestant Christians; and, in fact, black churches are important cultural centers for Southern blacks. Other groups down here apparently feel the same, so it is Simpson who is injecting his racial prejudices into the subject, not I.

But let's be honest -- when putting down Southerners and the South (for example, in threads following South-bashing articles in the media) white Southerners of northwest European descent are who the multiculturals are bashing. No cultural elitist is gonna bash a Southern black for loving barbecue.

"Second," he sez, "note that diversity has shifted from race to region, and assumes that “Southerner,” whatever that is, is an ethnicity. So much for intellectual rigor and consistency."

The original shift wasn't from race to region, but from "diversity" to the progressive doctrine of multiculturalism (this was clearly, clearly stated, btw), and the South is certainly a distinct culture, or subculture, of the US. What this mindset of Simpson's illustrates is the nature of multicultural doctrine to accept or reject things on whim.

"No one has argued that a person who accepts diversity is “better” than a person who rejects it in their everyday life."

No one? Certainly they have. That's one or the major purposes of the doctrine of multiculturalism -- to judge people for that, and many other things.

"...I don’t think dining choices are a meaningful marker of diversity..."

Take it up with Patrick Young. I was responding to his, " I can ... enjoy dinner at a variety of Korean restaurants ... go to two first class Italian restaurants, a real Mexican restaurant, a Salvadoran pupuseria, two Chinese restaurants, a Turkish restaurant, a bagel shop, a Korean grocer, and a Latin Market stuffed with vegetables and baked goods that you won't find at a Piggly Wiggly..."

Oh, that deficient, inferior Piggly Wiggly!  Absolutely sucks, doesn't it?

I would also mention you don't have to go to New York City for ethnic cuisine. In Pensacola you can find food or cuisine that is -- Southern/Soul, American, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Thai, Indian, Brazilian, Vietnamese, Filipino, Mexican, Caribbean, Greek, Turkish,Tapas, Italian, Middle Eastern, French, Cajun, Creole, Indonesian, Arabic, German, Mediterranean, Cajun, Creole, Scandanavian, Cuban, and Russian....

We don't have deficient, inferior Piggly Wiggly in Pensacola, but we do have deficient, inferior Winn-Dixie, which is even worse by multicultural standards for having that evil word, Dixie, in its name.

"However, I don’t ponder much about superior or inferior cultures; I leave that to Nazis and white supremacists like Flagger favorite Matthew Heimbach."

Actually, what Simpson individually ponders isn't the subject. It isn't even important.  The subject is multicultural doctrine and the progressives who are foisting it off on America; they are the ones who proclaim superior and inferior cultures. (What Simpson ponders, and does, is lie about the Virginia Flaggers. His oft-spewed "Flagger favorite Matthew Heimbach" is a baldfaced lie saturated with extreme malice.)

Once again, assassinating his brain to take a personal dig at me, Simpson deliberately misunderstands my comment that the greatest cause for the weakening of America is "internal moral rot, which is also largely the handiwork of the left and is accomplished mostly by the popular culture, centered around turning children against church and other religious traditions of previous generations."

I'm sure he realizes "children" in this instance means "posterity" or the younger generation, not individual kids.  And since religious practice is associated with decreased non-marital sex, the progressive elites (who see religion as detrimental and want to neutralize its influence, if not wipe it out altogether) calculate that increased non-marital sex will result in less religious practice in teens. You don't have to have kids to know this.

I've erected no strawmen. What I'm objecting to is found in the doctrine of multiculturalism as promoted by leftist cultural elites. Do I really have to explain to a college professor that individuals are not a culture -- or even a subculture? Perhaps I should re-post this, in all caps, and type real slow, for the college professors among my readership:

I THINK THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN (A) INDIVIDUAL PREFERENCE FOR VARIED ETHNIC CUISINE, ETC., AND (B) THE DOCTRINE OF MULTICULTURALISM....AND THE EFFORTS MADE BY POLITICAL AND EDUCATIONAL ELITES BASED ON THAT DOCTRINE TO WEAKEN, DILUTE AND EVENTUALLY ERADICATE OUR CULTURE.

Speaking of hostility to religion among multicultural doctrinaires, though ...steeping the culture in sex to alienate teens from religion is not the only tool or weapon in the multicultural arsenal.  Here's another one...

First-grade teacher seizes Christian kid’s candy canes, says ‘Jesus is not allowed in school’ 

Gotta get rid of that evil Christianity in schools, don'tcha know....