The Myth of Multiculturalism
How to Destroy a Culture with Identity Manipulation
Every culture on the face of the earth has its identifying traits and it is those identifying traits that make it a culture. If you change those identity traits you change the existing culture and if you change enough of those distinctive traits, you actually destroy the culture by turning it into something other than the culture you started with.
There are a number of threats to true multiculturalism today. One of them is radical individualism, which is tied to the philosophy of liberalism, and the second one is globalization, which is coming from, or has its roots in, global capitalism. Both in turn have led to increased centralized planning, in order for large multinational companies to gobble up the world’s capital. This centralized planning has led to increasingly larger government. This bigger government believes that it can manipulate numerous societies to create a one-world empire and culture. The problem with all of this, is that its’ promoters fail to see that the individual gets their identity and sense of selfhood from their culture. Their cultures are based not on their similarities with other cultures, but on their differences. If you remove the differences, you take away the very soul of the individuals who make up those cultures. When a people lose their identity or sense a threat to their identity they wills suffer an existential emptiness brought about by the loss of that distinct uniqueness and identity. Over time, this loss of identity will in turn lead to social unrest.
True multiculturalism is the world the way it is with all its different cultures, its borders and its nations. The expression ‘multiculturalism’ as used today is a ‘melting pot’, which is the very opposite of multiculturalism. The corrupt use of this word represents the globalists last effort to destroy true multiculturalism and to replace it with uniformity (political correctness). The world with all of its diversity is simply the way it has to be in order for it to be truly multicultural. In fact, it seems that it has evolved that way, which means that it is natural, and you cannot fool mother nature for very long without experiencing her wrath. However, modern man, especially those of the west and on the left, seem to believe that they can change human nature. Some even go so far as to say that man has no nature thereby expressing the blank slate theory of human nature. Nevertheless even they have created a new culture, or cult, which could be called the ‘culture of nobody or nothing’. A cult that is already causing havoc in the west.
The way to have real multiculturalism is simply to leave things alone, to leave them the way they were created by nature and the Creator, which seems to be extremely hard for the Western intellectual myth makers who think of themselves as the saviors of the world. These intellectuals, since the time of the enlightenment, have been spewing out their nonsense with lesser men gobbling up their vomit.
One of the best arguments against the myth of multiculturalism is the very country that people use for an example of multiculturalism, that is the USA. America is referred to as a melting pot. Even the metaphor itself is a contradiction to multiculturalism. The metaphor points to many cultures becoming something other than any one of them, as they melt together: The many become one. However, the premise that they become one if they melt together itself, is questionable. If you have a subculture which refuses to meld in, it will become the source of many social problems that can weaken a culture. And if a culture that resists assimilation gets large enough, it will actually become the culture. The parasite consumes its host.
It has been said that Rome united the world through its multiculturalism. However, it also divided the world. It is a known fact that when Rome invaded other nations, they would remove its ruling class and many of the lesser classes and bring in foreign immigrants. They knew that this would weaken the culture and help prevent rebellion. I’m sure you’ve heard the statement that “diversity is our strength,” well; Rome had diversity and diversity did not save it from decay and complete collapse. We could gather from this that our national leaders today are either ignorant of this, or they are attempting to control the masses and weaken them him by dividing them, and pitting them against each other. Either way these leaders are pathetic.
The latest way for the left to reject the truth is to call it a conspiracy. Then they simply pass off all evidence as a far right conspiracy. Once the label is applied they cease their inquiry into the evidence. However, the following video should give them pause for it is evident that Kennedy believed in a conspiracy against the country that was going on in secret and in high places. After viewing the video and giving it some thought, take a look at George Soros and his army of useful idiots that are undermining our country. He has given $100 million to the DNC and has funded millions more to them through his shadow organizations. Watch the video on him after Kennedy’s on lyleduell.me. Hit below link.
The Cornerstone of Liberalism
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! John 8:43-45 NIV.
The foundation of Liberalism is made up of many stones. However, the cornerstone of the philosophy is the autonomy of the individual. What do we mean by the autonomy of the individual? It simply means that the individual is self-governing and to some degree is self-directed.
It may surprise you to hear that the Bible has quite a bit to say about this doctrine of the autonomy of the individual. In the story found in the book of Genesis, God created man free to make a choice and he also warned man that if he made the wrong choice there would be consequences. The choices were to governor one’s self and be independent of God (autonomous) or to choose to be self – denying and allow God to govern one’s life.
If we look at the liberal faith through the lens of the story. Liberalism is nothing more than an organized rebellion against God. Like Adam in the story liberals do not believe God, of course in our age it’s not a matter of believing God, but rather not believing IN God. However, no matter how you word it, it’s the same old story. Man , wanting to be independent and free from the authority of God. In the story Satan deceived man in two ways. He first convinced man that God’s word was not true and then that God did not mean what he said. Both of his arguments were attacks on the truth of God’s word. Based on what I’ve all already said, it only follows that the liberal faith would be attacking God’s word today and even setting themselves up as the judges of God and his Word. Well, that exactly what we find.
It is the liberal faith that has embraced relativism (the denial that there is any absolute truth) and has led the attack on scripture and on the living word who is Jesus Christ. In fact, liberals and their siblings despise any authority, but especially anything or anyone that represents the authority of God. Like their father they hate God and everything that pertains to the true God. Like their father they know how to subvert language and appear as angles of light to naïve and gullible men. The apostle Paul says of them “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness” 2 Cor. 11:14-15. Still to this day we have liberals masquerading as Christians for their own purpose or the purpose of their father.
Even from a utilitarian point of view, liberalism has a number of problems, if every person is self-governing and self-directed, what happens when people begin to go in different directions and they then begin to disagree on whom and what should govern? The liberal answer is that a man’s freedom or self-governing ends where any others man’s freedom begins. But does this really take care of the problem or does it just raise more questions? For example who will determine where one man’s freedom ends and any other man’s begins? The state? If the state is to determine this, is the individual really free? What happens if the state defines freedom differently than the individual? Maybe we should toss a coin? No, the one with the most power wins and in the modern world that means the state. Liberalism therefore will always look to the state to determine where freedom begins and ends. The state then judges the difference between good and evil. In other word the state begins to determine morality. Could this be the source of political correctness? It surely is the beginning of a totalitarian state.
In the story, God creates man and then gives him freedom. In the liberal system it is the state that defines and gives freedom to the individual, of course, if the state gives freedom, the state can take it away. If the deity gives freedom no government would have the right to take that freedom away. This was the thinking of the founding fathers when they said that men “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” and government was created to protect those rights. It is quite obvious that the founding fathers were not liberals. This is the reason why liberals are not extremely fond of the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. They simply don’t believe them.
There is any problem with the liberal faith, which is, who has the authority to define the concept of freedom? Freedom is one of those elusive concepts that could be defined in a numbers ways. For the atheist it could be defined simply by the expression “Freedom is doing what I what to do or simply being left alone by the authorities”. For the Christian freedom would be defined “as being free from self to serve God and others.”
Now liberals, will respond by saying that the state should stay out of defining freedom or liberty. But if this true, why then do they use the public school to push their liberal faith? In fact, every time they have a change, liberals use the government and the court system to impose their liberal faith on the American people. They get away with this because the American people do not recognize liberalism for what it is, a godless religion that is against all other religions.
In the story when man sinned something happened to his nature. Before the fall his will was directed toward God, after the fall his will was directed to himself. His will was directed to satisfying his lower nature. He then began to live not for God, but rather to satisfy his lower nature’s appetites. The story therefore depicts liberalism, perfectly, for liberalism is nothing more than a high form of hedonism (living for pleasure). Even, discipline and self-restraint is practiced primarily to extend the ego.
The conclusion is this; liberalism is nothing more than an organized rebellion against the living God. It is a religion or a philosophy that denies and subverts God’s word. Therefore, it is sinful for Christians to be involved in liberalism or to support any group or politic party that supports it.
 Liberalism is not being nice or compassionate. It is a philosophy that competes and stands in contradiction to the Christian faith. The advanced liberals which often call themselves progressives are liberals who have embraced the liberal philosophy and have taken it to its end, which is anarchy.
 The symbol and the height of the liberal move is the French Revolution with its motto “No king and no God”.
 Liberals have used the methodology of higher criticism to deny the authority of scripture and to deny the Lordship of Jesus. Note Eta Linnemann Book “Historical Criticism of the Bible” with the sub-title “Methodology or Ideology? Reflections of a Bultmannian turned evangelical”. Also note Jude 8-16
Harry Blamires book “The Christian Mind” saved me from embracing a liberal view of the Bible.
 The two siblings of liberalism are atheism and libertarianism. Atheism is the ultimate distortion of the image of God in man and libertarianism is a secular counterfeit of the Christian faith which in its true state lives above the law.
 In the end for the liberal the state becomes God walking on the earth. A good example of this that the state in the abortion controversy ended up determining what is life or non-life. In this Secular liberalism is nothing more than man playing God.