Diversity’s Melting Pot Has Burned Through

Twenty-four minutes. They say any video this long, containing neither sex nor violence, won’t be watched all the way to the end.

Is that true?

Has our attention span crumbled? Are we falling soundlessly into the dark chasms of indifference that come with cultural decay?

Oh, wait. I think there is violence, it’s just that I can’t recognize it anymore.

I wish I still smoked Marlboros; or had even one of my mother’s crumbly Lucky Strikes stolen from the bottom of her purse, smelling of leather and her perfume. I could use one of something or other right now.

Or perhaps I’m merely rooting around in the cold comfort of old memories hoping to light upon a remembered certainty…

33 thoughts on “Diversity’s Melting Pot Has Burned Through

  1. I watched the whole thing. Most of it, unfortunately, I’ve been aware of for some time. Possibly not as aware of some of the details presented. also never thought about diversity being bad but maybe that’s because I’m American. However, Europe IS different, composed of countries which have their own languages and culture and even food. What I don’t get is that this was allowed, instead of prevented. Anyone who has read about history and about Islam knows they are incompatible, but apparently our political “betters” do not bother to read. Amazing to think they were stopped at the Gates of Viennna all those years ago and now they have simply walked in!
    Dymphna, I’d be happy to send you some Marlboros. . .

    • I think the cultures that still retain the ability to defend themselves will be the ones that survive. I just can’t think of a single instance in history where diversity in a country has been a strength. Not ethnic, cultural, or religious diversity has proven to be of any value, but instead is a leading cause of societal breakup, one that politicians use to full advantage. I now believe that the political left celebrates diversity as a means to cause chaos, and out of that chaos they can assume total control.

      “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act” -George Orwell

  2. A couple of facts about Islam and Shari’a that are readily apperent to me as a not very educated person:
    1) Islam is certainly the MOST violent of any modern religion. That’s not brought up much is countering the ‘Islam is a religion of peace’ cleche.
    2) Gay and openly atheistic people’s VERY LIVES are threatened in Islamic controled states.
    3) Few works of literature or film come out of the ‘Arab’ countries by comparison with other countries per year.

    I like some of the videos that come up afther thr first one. Such as “Eurabia Has Arrived”. And “The Intellegence Paradox”.

    • You missed THE most important point. Islam is NOT a religion. It is an ideology of hate for anything that moves – including itself. Some Christians and Jews are too kind when they sometimes describe Islam as an ideology of hate disguised as a religion.

      • Since Islam has sold itself as the ‘replacement religion’ for more than a thousand years, it is difficult to continue to conquer that lie…esp as it continues to be sold as such by those with the megaphone – from presidents and prime ministers on down.

      • Islam has nothing about developing a spirit centered life it is true but but then again ‘religion’ usually has connotations of organized religion something different from spirituality so it is possible to speak of Islam as being a religion. Not only possible but also helpful seeing as Islam is dualistic through and through which is why it is so insidious. In this situation it is both a religion and a political ideology. By being emphatic about Islam not being a religion one immediately blocks progress from this minor point to the major one in the minds of people who have a Western binary logic / separation of church and state view of the matter. By presenting it as both and emphasizing that duality the rejecting mind on autopilot will be presented with a paradox and have to stop and think. Likewise Islam being a religion of peace is a valid statement (albeit with peace meaning submission) but it is also a religion of violence (towards those who have not yet submitted).

        • I only call it a religion because it’s commonly called that.

          A couple of points you made: It both a peaceful and violent ideology as the Qu’ran contains both kinds of passages.
          You’re right about the western minds duality which doen’t exist in most of the ‘third’ world. For example N. Korea’s ‘Juche’, is basicly a religion in all but name. The founder though long dead is considered the ‘spiritual’ leader of the state. And people perform rituals to him when sick in hope of a cure.

          The root verb of ISLAM is ‘istlama’. which means submission but also yealds ‘al-silm’ meaning peace.
          –Lisson al-Arab Dictionary

          • re “peaceful” and “violent”. Look up “abrogation”. It’s an essential term to know when reading The Koran.

  3. I watched this all the way through! Thank you Dymphna. How do I now send it everywhere?

    • Eirene, if you start to play the video here, then click on the YouTube button, there are options to share below the image. I use the facility to email items to myself so I can save them on gmail.

    • If you’re using an Android tablet, touch the URL bar till it highlights, & you will be given the option to share it via email.

  4. Regarding the attention span thing, many of us live now in an extremely complex world, resulting in a kind of ‘triage’ of information sources. If a text or presentation cannot in some way manage to convince me within a minute or so that it will be worth spending twenty minutes of my time on it, well, I have a myriad other tasks and learning events to be engaging.

    Thats just how it is.

  5. It’s a good video.

    The first thing that leaped out at me, though, was the narrator made it a point to say how flawed Trump is and what a mess he would make if elected; still, he is, according to the narrator, the best candidate.

    I have no idea why even nationalists make it a point of virtue-signalling by asserting how unqualified and unsuitable Trump is for the Presidency. They have no basis for this judgement, other than columns by the likes of George Will, Bill Kristol, and other neo-cons who don’t like the fact that Trump doesn’t agree with their policy of military adventures and open borders.

    Trump has shown himself to be extremely capable and intelligent. He is wildly successful in business, can speak credibly off the cuff without prepared texts, and has shown logical thinking on trade and foreign policy. He is not a policy wonk, so he isn’t familiar with some details, although he is perfectly capable of evaluating the recommendations of experts, which is what you want in a President.

    Also, Trump is a narcissist and a consummate salesman, sometimes overselling bad deals he should never have gotten involved in in the first place. You are not going to have a successful person in the White House (or anywhere else) who has not made gigantic mistakes. Life is a learning process.

    In sum, I think Trump is as qualified to be President as anyone else who has been a candidate in the last century, except for possibly Ronald Reagan or Richard Nixon, who had his own problems. I absolutely do not see the necessity for even Trump supporters to always make an aside about how unqualified Trump is, even though he is the best candidate right now.

    By the way, as the video made clear, Britain slid into fascist totalitarianism completely on its own, without the intervention of the European Union. It may be a pipe dream that the English will be freer on their own: but, they certainly would not be if it were going to remain in the EU.

    • G’Day Ronald. I also am puzzled by the narrators deprecating of Trump. I equate it to finding an exquisite Pork (Tender)Loin package in the meat section with a warning label – “The animal which sacrificed this Loin perambulated through sloppy living environs, daily”.

      PS – I think we used to be almost neighbours. I lived on Love Drive in Irving, while managing a Y2K remediation initiative for Quaker State Oil (Los Colinas), in 1997-98. I used to pass McArthur High School (Clock-Boy) several times/week.

  6. Excellent video, illustrates the obvious (to regular readers) in an easily digestible fashion, although I feel it is too restrained re. the realities of sharia law.

  7. In terms of biology, for example, variety is generally “good”: the offspring of mixed race parents, for instance, tend to have better disease resistance than either parent had. Mixing different genes, according to evolutionary theory, should eventually lead to overall improvements in the “talent” pool. It’s common sense, really.

    In terms of human societies, having a broad spectrum of ideas is also a positive thing, as it may generate innovations and possibilities that would not otherwise be present (though it could make the process of achieving a consensus somewhat more difficult!)

    So the problem, it seems to me, is not diversity per se, but the TYPE of diversity. Put simply, the problem is Islam. This aggressive, intolerant and poisonous ideology behaves rather like a virus (as any number of people have pointed out) in that it does not peacefully co-exist with other ideologies/organisms – except when it is in its interest to do so, behaviour which is similar to a virus lying dormant within a host until an opportune time arrives for it to become active. On the contrary, it squeezes out, violently or otherwise, all other ideologies and worldviews, and has their elimination as its stated goal. Returning to the biological analogy, it only interacts with others – other belief, political and social systems – in a parasitical manner (as opposed to one of commensalism or mutualism).

    Of course, a human society benefits from a certain degree of homogeneity – members must be able to feel certain bonds with other members of their society, in order to work effectively with them. This means according one’s fellow societal members greater value, in certain respects, than is accorded non-members. That is the whole idea of a society (even a society of two) after all: it’s an alliance between a group of individuals with the goal of benefitting the members of said group. But Islam is an exclusive social club – if one belongs to it one does not and cannot belong to any other club, in any real sense. Again, one has the scenario of a virus squeezing out all competitors.

    • I’d go even further: there are indeed other cultures that bring good values, desperately needed values to the west. I live in New Zealand, where we have many immigrants from Asia (eg. Korea and Hong Kong mainly) who are our greatest achievers in schools, universities and classical music. Heck, they are the ones mainly keeping classical music alive, when many caucasians just can’t be bothered with the hard work of it anymore. The generation now having children was brought up with the idea that you just do whatever you want, that hard, consistent work towards achievements is not important.

      Also, local Asian parents tend to keep kids off the rugby field because it’s too dangerous and our country is slowly trending towards less violent sports.

      I’m glad to have such immigrants to New Zealand (though numbers of immigrants in total are too high for our infrastucture – that’s another matter and nothing to do with race).

      Why can’t Europe get it right? If it really wants millions of immigrants (and I’m not convinced they really are needed), why not choose highly educated, hard-working people who are needed for specific jobs and who love, value and promote science, arts, music and great Asian cuisine without falling for the west’s more decrepit aspects? People who don’t follow ideologies that hate women, gays and non-believers?

      • Probably because you can’t intentionally undermine society and culture if you import people who support the society and culture.

  8. Notes taken while watching

    The rotation of the photograph of Churchill’s head is remarkable. How was it done technically? Were two photographs required, each from a slightly different angle?

    The music at 0:18 is a snippet from the Egmont Overture. Here’s the whole thing:
    https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=egmont%20overture lists multiple versions.
    Here’s a snippet, chosen almost at random:
    (with, for our Islamic friends, an off-center zebibah at 1:48).

    The narrator sometimes mispronounces words. Examples include “kufar”, “academia” (which he pronounces to rhyme with “macadamia [nuts]”, at 11:30).

    “juxtaposition to the Narrative” (at 12:40); I think the writer of this script meant “opposition”, no “standing beside the Narrative in solidarity with it”.

    “after yearly terrorist attacks” (12:50): “yearly”? Have terrorist attacks been occurring on an annual schedule?

    “human rights tribunerals” (13:28)

    “they have enjoined the West” (13:50) = “they haven’t joined the West”?
    The script would be clearer with “have not” instead of “have’nt” – for reasons similar to why Scots say “cannot” instead of “can’t”.

    “a society with a fairly homogenous culture” (14:10): did he mean to say “homogeneous”?

    “vicious ‘of’ groups” (14:55)

    Sorry, I can’t take this Canadian’s mispronunciations anymore. I give up.

    • …no “standing beside the Narrative in solidarity with it”.

      “Juxtaposition” is putting one thing next to another to highlight their differences.

  9. Using Beethoven’s music to stand for freedom is entirely appropriate.

    Minor criticism: as I understand it, Paul Weston was arrested following a complaint from a single woman, whose religious affiliation, if any, appears not to have been reported.

  10. Trump has already backed off his muslim ban. I do not believe he is the agent of change many people make him out to be. Time will tell. The criminal Clinton is the only other candidate who has negatives comparable to Trump.

    • If Trump simply reverses all the administration, non-legal initiatives to dump totally alien immigrants into the country, which can be done administratively since it is entirely without legislative sanction, we will be far, far ahead.

      If Trump doesn’t make a fight on Muslim students who pay full tuition or Muslim tourists, it will be a mistake, but not the end of the country.

      If Trump simply stops payments to the “religious” groups promoting immigration for profit, again, we’ll be way ahead.

  11. I cannot watch this any longer. The Brits have lost their way, only a few steps behind Sweden and Germany.

    Here in the US many of us have our hopes pinned on Trump. I’ve volunteered my time on weekends doing his bidding here in CA, but I’m not sure if we will be much better than the UK if he doesn’t follow thru on his promises.

  12. I want to make one point.

    We do not have separation of church and state in the US. As long as religions are given special privileges, such as zoning deferments, permission to not say the pledge, and the ability to ignore laws on gay employment, then laws and rules are being followed by the government which do establish religion.

    By the way, I’m not in favor of forcing churches to employ gays or insure abortions. I’m against singling out religions for special treatment that others don’t enjoy. This leads to abominations, such as the argument about whether Islam is a religion or not. This puts the government into defining and censoring religious teachings, which is the last thing you want.

    Our traditional religions are far better off standing on their own feet without government privileges or exemptions. If churches should not be forced to hire gays when they don’t want to, neither should anyone else. I’m not advocating exclusion of gays. I’m making the point that under our present system, there are certainly laws respecting religious establishment, and those laws are going to kill religious independence.

  13. This chap, like everyone else, wafts seamlessly from Islamisation to diversity/multiculturalism as if they’re the same thing. I won’t bore you with my take on the latter because I’m sure we all have differing and valid takes on it and we can discuss these, but New York’s melting pot just wouldn’t be the same beast without the Muslims. So whatever the neighbourhood thinks of the sihk doctor, nigerian crack dealer, vietnamese restaurant owner and mexican landscape business owner et al, we can talk about it, but they are not koran creepers or advocates for sharia.

    Many of the people of non-western backgrounds live alongside muslims and they need to be courted in the current climate since they’re on the frontlines. It’s lazy and unhelpful in the current climate and it only serves the left. Unless you really do want a clean sweep but somehow I don’t think most the writer’s/speakers do, in fact. So they need to check themselves and speak of the phenomena separately.

Comments are closed.